The emergence of agents in the company is not limited to productivity gains. It requires a deep organizational transformation, namely to govern digital entities as we govern people.
For several months, the discourse on AI in the company has been polarized around two axes: the promise of an accelerated return on investment, and the fear of a replacement of humans. But another reality, more operational, takes shape and companies must now learn to integrate “AI agents” in their workforcewith everything that supposes in matters of governance, infrastructure and organizational models. A form of “two -headed” business emerges, made up of both humans and digital collaborators.
A change of nature, not just scale
The concept of agent AI differs from simple virtual assistants or occasional automation. These are digital entities capable of performing autonomous tasks, often contextualized to a specific role (eg recruiter, accountant, payable administrator). These agents interact with business systems, make supervised decisions, and participate in workflows.
The transition to this logic is not linear. It is no longer simply a question of automating a task, but of Manage a productive entity as an employee. This change calls for a new form of governance, the company must know “Onboarder”, affect, monitor and audit Digital agents as she does for new employees.
The system of truth extended to agents
If an agent AI has a defined role, interacts with critical processes, and produces value, it must be attached to a unit, supervised by access rights, followed in its performance. The idea of a “Agent System of Record”in the same way that you manage its employees, becomes a structuring brick. It makes it possible to orchestrate the rise of agents while ensuring a security and compliance framework.
Govern agents as collaborators
This approach requires the implementation of new control infrastructure. And implies equipping a solution to manage the integration of agents into the organization, to manage their identity, to control access to sensitive data and to audit their activity.
But this integration cannot be limited to the technique. She asks larger questions:
-
- Who is responsible for the behavior of an agent?
- How to measure your performance, reliability, impact?
- Should it be associated with a human manager, a team?
To these questions is added an imperative of readability: to avoid “shadow agent” syndrome, as there was a “shadow it”, the company must formalize the presence of agents, and make it a HR and operational piloting object.
A new internal social contract
Beyond the tools, this transition changes HR balances in the company. By integrating an agent into a team, we implicitly re -question roles, skills and the place of human work. It is not an immediate substitution, but a progressive reconfiguration of the company.
In terms of internal narration, It is not only a question of optimizing costs, but of identifying room for maneuver to invest in skills rise, internal mobility, or relational functions. A two -headed company supposes bridges between humans and agents and not partitions.
A managerial architecture to rethink
The emergence of a company populated by both human collaborators and AI agents is a structural turning point. It obliges general departments, CIOs and HRDs to think of a new Hybrid managerial architecturewhere the management of productivity, the governance of identities and the dynamics of the teams are redefined. A mutation that requires putting all the managers of the company around the table, DSI, RSSI, legal direction and above all do not forget the HR which will have a key role in operational management.
