AI prompts rethink of work’s role in American identity

Artificial intelligence is pushing a broader debate about work beyond job losses, according to a Fortune commentary by Keith Ferrazzi and Wendy Smith. The authors argue that if AI reduces the central role of paid labor, the United States will have to find new ways to recognize usefulness, purpose and belonging.

Ferrazzi, chair and founder of Ferrazzi Greenlight, and Smith, head of research and thought leadership at the firm, frame the issue as a cultural problem as well as an economic one. They say American institutions have long treated work as the main way adults earn status, income and a place in civic life.

The authors trace that view to older strands of U.S. history, including the Puritan work ethic and Thomas Jefferson’s ideal of the independent yeoman farmer. In their account, those traditions helped turn labor into a marker of character rather than only a means of earning money.

That belief shaped schools, adulthood and public measures of economic health, Ferrazzi and Smith write. They argue that Americans still tend to identify people by occupation and often connect dignity and social standing to jobs.

AI raises a meaning problem

The commentary says debates over AI often focus on how many jobs will be created or eliminated and how workers can be retrained. Ferrazzi and Smith say those questions remain urgent because displacement and social unrest are risks, but they argue the deeper issue is what happens when work can no longer carry so much social meaning.

They cite writer Derek Thompson’s term “workism,” described in the commentary as the belief that work sits at the center of identity and purpose. They also cite Pew findings that 39% of workers view their job or career as extremely or very important to their overall identity, while another 34% call it somewhat important.

According to the authors, paid work has often given people structure, peers, milestones and a recognized way to contribute. They acknowledge that many jobs have been unstable, exhausting or dehumanizing, and that many people have found purpose outside employment, but they say work still became the main framework for adulthood.

The proposed “Contribution Economy”

Ferrazzi and Smith say research at Ferrazzi Greenlight and the Greenlight Research Institute has examined how organizations change and, more recently, how agentic AI is altering work. They argue that companies still measure people by outputs that software can increasingly produce faster and at lower cost, while other human contributions remain harder to count.

The authors propose what they call a “Contribution Economy,” in which dignity would come more from usefulness to others than from job title. They distinguish the idea from universal basic income and from gig work, saying it would treat contributions to families, neighborhoods, civic groups and creative communities as socially valuable.

Examples in the commentary include caregiving, mentoring, volunteering, community leadership and civic participation. Ferrazzi and Smith say some forms of contribution could be recognized, supported or compensated through community-based work, service networks or new economic models tied to participation.

They also warn that such a system would need credible ways to show that contributions have been seen and valued. In their view, money has served as a visible signal of recognition, and any broader model would need other legible forms of acknowledgment to hold together.

The authors say schools, communities and civic institutions would need to adapt if work loses some of its organizing role. They argue that AI could either replace human connection or help match people with communities and tasks where their skills are needed, depending on how the technology is designed.

This story draws on original reporting from Fortune.