Artificial intelligence is no longer a futuristic concept—it’s part of many organizations’ daily workflows. From scheduling meetings to drafting agendas to summarizing conversations, AI is rapidly becoming a co-facilitator in how we gather and collaborate.
At first glance, the benefits seem obvious. Meetings run more efficiently, notes get captured with minimal effort, and accessibility tools are more widely available—dreamy! But in reality, something more complex is happening. When AI becomes part of how we meet, it can subtly reshape communication, trust, and participation. The very tools that promise progress can, if left unchecked, reinforce inequity or erode connection.
The Rise of AI in Workplace Meetings
AI-powered meeting tools are everywhere. You’ve probably seen or used tools that:
- Autogenerate agendas based on email chains or shared docs
- Transcribe meetings in real time
- Send out post-meeting summaries with key takeaways and action items
- Analyze sentiment, participation, or tone across a conversation
- Attend meetings on your behalf via bots or “AI note-takers”
This can be helpful in some important ways. A transcribed meeting can make content more accessible, and autogenerated summaries can support those who process information differently. For busy teams, these tools can reduce the burden of admin work and keep projects moving.
But meetings aren’t just transactional. They’re relational. And the more we automate, the easier it is to overlook the human dynamics that make inclusion possible.
What’s at Risk?
Inclusion relies on more than information-sharing. It requires psychological safety, mutual respect, and the sense that each person’s voice matters.
When AI becomes a silent presence in the room, it can introduce new risks:
- People may censor themselves, unsure of who will read the transcript or how their words will be interpreted later.
- Cultural nuances may get flattened by tools not trained on different communication styles.
- Assumptions of objectivity may lead to overreliance on AI summaries, even when they miss context or mischaracterize tone.
- Consent becomes murky, especially when AI tools quietly record, analyze, and document the flow of a conversation without full transparency.
The result may be less candor, fewer contributions from those already at the margins, and a culture that prioritizes efficiency over inclusion.
A Quick Look: Pros and Cons of AI in Meetings
Here’s a high-level breakdown to help teams evaluate the impact of these tools:
| Potential Benefits | Potential Risks |
| Real-time transcription increases accessibility for deaf or hard-of-hearing participants | Transcripts may be inaccurate, leading to misunderstandings or misquotes |
| Automated summaries save time and boost clarity | AI may oversimplify or miss nuance, especially for complex or emotionally charged topics |
| AI notetakers allow people to participate more fully without multitasking | Participants may speak less candidly if they know AI is “listening” |
| Tools like live captioning or translation support language inclusion | Features may struggle with accents or cultural phrasing, creating confusion |
| Participation tracking and analytics can surface power dynamics | Metrics may reinforce bias if not interpreted carefully or with context |
When used thoughtfully, these tools can support equity, but when used passively, they can reinforce existing disparities.
What Inclusive Leaders Can Do
The answer isn’t to reject AI outright, but rather to use it with care. Inclusion doesn’t happen by default—it requires design, consent, and ongoing attention. Here are some ways to make your meetings more inclusive with AI, not despite it:
1. Be transparent and proactive. Always let people know when AI tools are being used, what’s being captured, and how that data will be stored or shared. Offer alternatives or opt-outs when possible.
2. Pair AI tools with human facilitation. No algorithm can replace the nuance of a skilled facilitator. Use AI to lighten the administrative load, but stay present to group dynamics, power imbalances, and moments when voices are being overlooked.
3. Center consent. Don’t assume everyone is comfortable with AI transcription or summarization, especially if they didn’t agree to it beforehand. Set norms around tool use and invite feedback.
4. Audit for bias. AI is only as good as the data it’s trained on. Watch for patterns where certain voices are consistently misrepresented, de-emphasized, or flattened in summaries.
5. Use AI to support—not monitor—your team. Avoid turning meetings into surveillance. Choose tools that help people feel included, not scrutinized.
Looking Ahead
The future of work isn’t human or AI—it’s both. But if we want workplaces that reflect our values, we can’t afford to let technology dictate the terms. As leaders, facilitators, and teammates, we need to bring the same curiosity, courage, and care to our AI choices as we do to any inclusion initiative.
Before your next meeting, take a moment to ask:
- Are we using AI to amplify equity?
- Are we protecting the dignity and autonomy of our team?
- Are we making it easier or harder for everyone to show up fully?
Because ultimately, a meeting that runs smoothly but shuts people down isn’t progress; it’s a missed opportunity for greater connection.
P.S. Want to explore this more deeply? Join us for our next free webinar: AI at Work: Building Inclusion with Intention Register here!