AI has been hailed as a transformative tool for the social sector, promising to enhance efficiency, lighten workloads, and streamline operations. From fundraising to donor management, communication, predictive analytics, and content development, AI is seen as a valuable ally. However, while many in the sector embrace AI as a friendly partner, we might be overlooking a critical issue: the potential for significant job losses and the erosion of livelihoods due to AI advancements.

As a nonprofit management consultant, I’ve seen firsthand the benefits AI brings to the table. I regularly use AI tools like ChatGPT and specialized fundraising platforms to craft and refine grant proposals, significantly reducing the time required for these tasks. In some cases, what once took days now takes mere hours. My clients are also beginning to adopt these tools, a trend that could diminish the demand for my grant-writing services.

But what happens when AI evolves from a supportive role to one of full replacement? The potential arrival of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) puts that question into a stark light. AGI, an AI system capable of performing tasks with human-like cognitive abilities, could fundamentally reshape our work landscape.

While many experts believe AGI is still decades away, prominent voices like Google DeepMind’s co-founder Shane Legg and Elon Musk suggest it could be realized as early as 2028 or even 2026. Even without AGI, the automation of routine tasks – data collection, summaries, and basic writing – is already leading to job losses in sectors as diverse as media, retail, and education. In a recent ResumeBuilder report from a survey of 750 business leaders using AI, 37 per cent said the technology replaced workers in 2023 and 44 per cent reported that there will be layoffs in 2024 resulting from AI efficiencies. According to a 2023 McKinsey report, AI will likely replace 2.4 million US jobs by 2030, with an additional 12 million occupational shifts.

In the realm of nonprofit strategic planning, my process typically involves gathering organisational data, conducting interviews, facilitating planning retreats, and assisting in formulating strategic visions. Yet, with the rise of AI’s data-gathering and predictive capabilities, even these complex tasks could soon be automated. The human element in strategic retreats might be the last stronghold, but even this could be at risk if AI systems evolve to include highly interactive bots and robots capable of organizing and conducting meetings more effectively than humans.

Based on expert predictions in sectors like banking and insurance, current jobs on the chopping block are mostly clerical and secretarial, but any jobs in areas such marketing, administration, human resources, and finance are in jeopardy. In marketing, for example, AI can already analyse audience data, optimise outreach, and personalise content distribution. Advocates of AI argue that by offloading these mundane tasks, workers can focus on more creative and human-oriented endeavors. In nonprofit fund development, this might mean more direct donor engagement. But what if AI eventually matches or even surpasses our ability to build personal connections and cultivate relationships with donors? In fact, a company called Givzy is experimenting with an autonomous fundraising avatar designed to conduct outreach to individual donors. Even if AI doesn’t entirely replace human creativity and interpersonal skills, it could still reduce full-time positions to part-time roles, and the demand for contractors could diminish.

Consider the possibility of AI replacing even the highest levels of nonprofit leadership. In the private sector, we’ve already seen this: China-based NetDragon Websoft appointed an AI program named Tang Yu as its CEO, responsible for making critical decisions about the company’s operations. Similarly, IHC, a major corporation in the United Arab Emirates, has introduced an AI observer, Aiden Insight, to its board. If this trend continues, Executive Directors and Board members in nonprofits could also find their roles supplanted by AI-driven decision-makers.

To be fair, AI also holds the potential to significantly enhance the social sector workforce. As organizations and philanthropies increasingly adopt AI, both employees and beneficiaries could benefit from more personalized services. For instance, AI could analyze data to provide tailored interventions, such as customized financial assistance or distribution based on the unique needs of an organization or its programs. However, there are challenges. AI systems might introduce bias in decision-making, potentially disadvantaging vulnerable populations. Additionally, the human element, which is crucial in areas like counseling and community engagement, may diminish as automation takes over. While grantees and beneficiaries might experience faster service, they could also face a loss of human connection or unequal access if AI isn’t deployed equitably.

Overall, some factors may slow AI’s disruption of nonprofit jobs. Nonprofits are typically slow to adopt cutting-edge technologies, and the sector places a high value on human relationships. Yet, in areas like grant writing and strategic planning, the clock is ticking. Time is working against me for sure.

While I am not fully convinced that AI will lead to the wholesale replacement and degradation of non-profit jobs, and AI will also create new types of jobs for the sector, I do believe that significant disruptions are inevitable in the medium to long term. The specifics of these disruptions remain unclear, but viewing AI merely as a tool for efficiency is dangerously shortsighted. We need to start contemplating now what AI-driven skill replacement will mean for the sector and for those of us who work within it. The ultimate question is: How can we ensure workers remain employable before AI answers this question for us?

Paul Lamb is the Principal of Man on A Mission Consulting, a firm specializing in nonprofit strategy, fundraising, technology, and social innovation. Paul is also a writer and speaker on nonprofit management, social entrepreneurship, and the intersection of technology and social change. He currently serves as an advisor to the California Emerging Technology Fund and the AI for Good Foundation.