Why New Technology Is So Stressful at Work—and What to Do About It
Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,682,703 (+0.16%)       Melbourne $1,032,974 (+0.32%)       Brisbane $1,149,503 (-0.48%)       Adelaide $1,044,873 (+0.57%)       Perth $1,087,323 (+0.79%)       Hobart $838,358 (-0.10%)       Darwin $820,666 (-0.12%)       Canberra $979,872 (-0.24%)       National Capitals $1,138,269 (+0.14%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $797,157 (-0.14%)       Melbourne $549,523 (-0.11%)       Brisbane $755,150 (-0.64%)       Adelaide $578,247 (+0.68%)       Perth $644,099 (+3.57%)       Hobart $571,049 (+0.07%)       Darwin $463,594 (-5.35%)       Canberra $477,768 (-0.27%)       National Capitals $625,689 (+0.06%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 14,358 (+213)       Melbourne 15,978 (-7)       Brisbane 11,458 (+121)       Adelaide 3,654 (+71)       Perth 8,904 (+103)       Hobart 691 (+10)       Darwin 180 (+11)       Canberra 1,209 (+48)       National Capitals 56,432 (+570)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,553 (+66)       Melbourne 6,618 (-48)       Brisbane 2,337 (+34)       Adelaide 604 (-6)       Perth 1,701 (+90)       Hobart 150 (-5)       Darwin 217 (-4)       Canberra 1,213 (+23)       National Capitals 22,393 (+150)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $870 ($0)       Melbourne $600 ($0)       Brisbane $700 ($0)       Adelaide $660 (+$3)       Perth $750 ($0)       Hobart $628 (-$13)       Darwin $850 ($0)       Canberra $710 (+$10)       National Capitals $733 (+$)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $820 (-$5)       Melbourne $620 ($0)       Brisbane $620 (-$3)       Adelaide $550 (+$10)       Perth $700 (-$20)       Hobart $500 (-$30)       Darwin $675 ($0)       Canberra $590 (+$5)       National Capitals $648 (-$5)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 6,676 (+151)       Melbourne 6,952 (+89)       Brisbane 3,472 (+4)       Adelaide 1,309 (+41)       Perth 2,174 (+11)       Hobart 210 (-11)       Darwin 61 (+5)       Canberra 431 (+4)       National Capitals 21,285 (+294)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 10,090 (-12)       Melbourne 6,145 (+91)       Brisbane 3,338 (+49)       Adelaide 409 (+12)       Perth 701 (+21)       Hobart 75 (0)       Darwin 102 (+4)       Canberra 717 (+47)       National Capitals 21,577 (+212)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 2.69% (↓)       Melbourne 3.02% (↓)     Brisbane 3.17% (↑)        Adelaide 3.28% (↓)       Perth 3.59% (↓)       Hobart 3.89% (↓)     Darwin 5.39% (↑)      Canberra 3.77% (↑)        National Capitals 3.35% (↓)            UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 5.35% (↓)     Melbourne 5.87% (↑)      Brisbane 4.27% (↑)      Adelaide 4.95% (↑)        Perth 5.65% (↓)       Hobart 4.55% (↓)     Darwin 7.57% (↑)      Canberra 6.42% (↑)        National Capitals 5.38% (↓)            HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 1.4% (↑)      Melbourne 1.5% (↑)      Brisbane 1.2% (↑)      Adelaide 1.2% (↑)      Perth 1.0% (↑)        Hobart 0.5% (↓)       Darwin 0.7% (↓)     Canberra 1.6% (↑)      National Capitals $1.1% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 1.4% (↑)      Melbourne 2.4% (↑)      Brisbane 1.5% (↑)      Adelaide 0.8% (↑)      Perth 0.9% (↑)      Hobart 1.2% (↑)        Darwin 1.4% (↓)     Canberra 2.7% (↑)      National Capitals $1.5% (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND         Sydney 34.7 (↓)       Melbourne 33.6 (↓)     Brisbane 39.0 (↑)      Adelaide 32.0 (↑)        Perth 42.6 (↓)       Hobart 30.0 (↓)       Darwin 21.9 (↓)       Canberra 33.2 (↓)       National Capitals 33.4 (↓)            AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND         Sydney 33.6 (↓)       Melbourne 31.2 (↓)     Brisbane 40.9 (↑)      Adelaide 32.6 (↑)        Perth 41.8 (↓)     Hobart 31.3 (↑)        Darwin 43.1 (↓)     Canberra 40.5 (↑)        National Capitals 36.9 (↓)           
Share Button

Why New Technology Is So Stressful at Work—and What to Do About It

Anxiety over technological change is escalating, especially thanks to AI. Researchers and therapists offer all sorts of ways to deal with it.

By SEAN CAPTAIN
Mon, Sep 11, 2023 10:13amGrey Clock 7 min

When Ben Plomion took his latest job, he learned quickly that his tech skills were behind the times.

At 46, he’s a decade or two older than most of his co-workers—and he’s used to an earlier generation of software. While he was accustomed to presentation programs like PowerPoint or Google Slides, for instance, his young colleagues were working with an app called Canva.

“I went in all reluctantly, because I had to relearn everything I’d learned for the last 10 years,” he says.

Plomion—chief marketing officer for a Los Angeles startup that works with crypto technology—is no Luddite. But he sometimes felt overwhelmed by the pace of change. Then came ChatGPT, and thousands of other artificial-intelligence apps. “Where do you start? What tool do you pick? And you’re almost frozen by uncertainty and doubt and indecision,” he says.

Anxiety over technological change on the job has long plagued workplaces—perhaps never more so than today, as AI potentially threatens to upend everything. The questions are familiar ones: Will people be able to keep their skills up-to-date? How will their jobs change as tech advances? Perhaps most stressful of all: Will new technology replace them? All of the uncertainty and stress can foster frustration, insecurity or self-blame that can affect their work and personal lives, and even their health.

Fortunately, researchers have studied this phenomenon for decades, gleaning insights into the deep psychological roots of these fears, how they affect people’s response to technology—and how both workers and companies can mitigate the stress.

To get an idea of just how high tech-induced anxiety is, consider PwC’s 2022 Global Workforce Hopes and Fears Survey, conducted before the widespread popularity of generative AI tech like ChatGPT. The report found that 30% of over 50,000 workers were concerned about technology replacing their role within three years, and 39% said they weren’t getting enough tech training at work.

In this year’s survey (released in June), 35% had some negative concerns about AI, such as fears that the technology will take their job, affect their role or require skills they might not be able to learn. They aren’t imagining the possible turmoil. A March global study by Goldman Sachs estimated that generative AI “could expose the equivalent of 300 [million] full-time jobs to automation,” although the report says that most jobs in the U.S. would be altered by AI, but not be replaced.

 

Workers who are worried about AI are more likely to report feeling tense or stressed at work, a new survey from the American Psychological Association found. “It can cause a person to be almost in a fight or flight state, where then every perceived threat to their job carries this heightened sense of urgency and concern,” says Dennis Stolle, one of the lead authors.

Lessons from psychology

The roots of the fear can go back to primal feelings—an instinctive, evolutionary apprehension of anything novel, says Ofir Turel, a professor of information systems at the University of Melbourne. “Our ancestors were threatened by new species…new animals, new tribes moving to their territories,” he says.

New technologies can cause insecurity, even from something as minor as disrupting people’s routines. “Our brains are designed to maintain the status quo,” says Nicole Lipkin, a clinical and organisational psychologist in Philadelphia. “We’re designed to get from A to Z as efficiently as possible. And that means keeping things the same.”

Sophia Xepoleas, a tech PR strategist in Oakland, recalls her reluctance to take time out to learn the project-management application Asana. “It is…a new pathway in your brain that you’re training,” she says. “And the ones that are already working are working real hard.”

But the sense of threat from technology can go even deeper, by menacing people’s personal identity, says Varun Grover, a professor of information technology at the University of Arkansas.

One aspect of that identity is people’s sense of professional competence, and hard-to-learn technology can threaten that. New tech can also threaten people’s sense of identity in the professional role they fill, he says, if it changes their job duties or workplace power dynamics.

Turel found this happening with the introduction of electronic medical records to a Midwestern hospital in a 2020 study. “They threatened physicians and nurses,” he says. “They were the people who actually control the information. Now you have to spend time to go through 10 screens when you prescribe something.”

This resulted in what researchers called “unfaithful use” of the new tech. Medical personnel would skip over screens or enter random information just to get through the forms. Turel and other work-stress researchers have another term for this reaction: sabotage.

The latest artificial intelligence takes this identity threat much further, says Grover, because it promises to do the higher-level reasoning that people think of as uniquely human.

Running away

To be sure, rarely does tech stress reach a clinical level of anxiety or depression. Even so, it can lead to unhealthy behaviour.

For instance, a natural response to stress is to run away from the threatening technology. “When there’s lots of uncertainty, then it’s a little bit difficult to cope,” says Mindy Shoss, professor of industrial/organisational psychology at the University of Central Florida. “And people tend to do what we call emotion-focused coping strategies, which include things like avoidance,” she says.

In tech, this could mean refusing to learn or use a new piece of software and trying to continue with the older application you are used to.

To help work through this anxiety, say researchers, people can use tools from psychological practices such as cognitive behavioural therapy, which can help people challenge negative thought patterns.

For instance, when people face new, difficult technology, it “can be a huge trigger for negative self-talk,” a sense that we lack ability or aren’t trying hard enough, says Vaile Wright, senior director for healthcare innovation at the American Psychological Association.

Instead, people can start with understanding why they find the new technology upsetting and re-evaluating the sense of risk and threat.

Workers can also reframe a technology challenge in such a way to realise the situation isn’t so bad (for instance, you won’t get fired if you don’t master this new tech). Other times, it helps them accept genuine misfortune (you will lose your job) and strategise how to move on.

It can also help for workers to give themselves some credit for facing challenges.

“It could be a thought like, ‘It’s not that surprising that this is hard. I didn’t go to school for this. But I’ve overcome hard things before,’ ” says Wright.

These tools work best in a therapeutic setting, but they are also available in self-help workbooks, says Wright. She suggests, for instance, checking out “The Dialectical Behavior Therapy Skills Workbook” or recommendations from the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies.

Resisting or embracing

Another danger is what psychologists call catastrophising. “Examples of cognitive distortions are [saying,] ‘If I don’t learn this within a week, I’m going to get fired.’ That’s catastrophising or all-or-none thinking,” says Lipkin.

Reframing is one way Xepoleas reduces the all-or-nothing pressure surrounding tech: She doesn’t need to master every new piece of technology to get benefits from it. Plomion, meanwhile, reduces stress by telling himself he’s doing everything he needs to do to get his job done. “I am never going to be a ChatGPT expert,” he says. “There’s a lot of people who can do that. But at a minimum…I know how to use the tools.”

The two have also tried reframing new tech as an opportunity. Xepoleas admits that, after fighting the Asana app, she ultimately found it helpful. “I’ll usually take the initiative on myself,” she says, “especially if it’s something that’s important for me to learn, or if I don’t learn it, I’m going to miss out on something strategic or important.”

People can also benefit from distraction—a cognitive behavioural technique for breaking the cycle of anxious thoughts. Xepoleas enjoys visiting a park and listening to classical music, as a respite during or after the workday. Plomion goes surfing most mornings. “When I get back from the ocean and go straight to the office after that, I’m a lot more relaxed,” he says. “I’m also a lot more eager to go back to my AI tools and learn them.”

Plomion is also an ardent skateboarder and considers mastering new tricks as akin to figuring out technology. This is known as “building mastery” in dialectical behavioural therapy, a cousin of cognitive behavioural therapy, says Wright. Achievements in one activity build confidence for taking on other challenges.

It might seem daunting to be constructively positive about new tech—but it is certainly possible. While about a third of the PwC survey respondents expressed fear over new tech, about half expected positive scenarios, such as AI making them more productive or creating new job opportunities. (The Goldman Sachs AI report, meanwhile, anticipates a boost to the global economy and sees AI taking a complementary role in many jobs, not replacing people.)

Reframing disappointment

Reframing is also crucial when the worst is true. While people often exaggerate threats, they are not always wrong. They might lose their jobs because of technology, after all. And even if they keep them, technology may change their roles in ways they don’t like—fears that are accelerating because of AI.

It can be healthy to acknowledge feelings of loss—for a time. That is the thrust of acceptance and commitment therapy, or ACT. Instead of trying to debunk the problem underlying their anxiety, “ACT therapy would have a person accept the experience,” says David Blustein, a professor of counselling psychology at Boston College.

A related concept, from dialectical behavioural therapy, is radical acceptance. People don’t have to approve of a situation that causes grief and pain, but fighting reality instead of accepting it leads to more grief and pain. “Sometimes I just have to give in, and I have to say, OK, this is going to be a part of my life now,” says Grover. “So how do I reconceptualise my role identity with this technology in my life?”

How employers can help

During times of anxiety, companies can foster a sense of agency among employees by bringing them early into the conversation about new technologies—finding out what they need and if the tools on offer will do the trick.

It is all right if these conversations include some complaining, says Lipkin, the Philadelphia psychologist. “When I hear you gripe, I’m getting what you’re afraid of,” she says. But raising concerns is only the beginning of the process. Employees should be encouraged to spend most of the discussion finding solutions to the problems, she says.

Workers can also help each other cope with disruptive tech by discussing their frustrations, says Shoss, as it provides validation of their feelings, reassurance and a sense of camaraderie. On a practical level, co-workers can help each other figure out new technologies. “Most younger people, at least in my company, and probably many others, are very willing to share their expertise in a specific tool,” says Plomion.

That’s no substitute for formal employee training, though, because employers should articulate an overall plan for how the technology is meant to be used. Employers also have to recognise different types of learning that work for each employee, says Wright, and provide multiple options, such as written tutorials, videos and one-on-one sessions.

“Employers really need to prioritise their employees’ mental health,” she says. “We know that when our mental health and our emotional well-being [are] more stable, we’re actually better employees. We’re more committed to the organisation.”



MOST POPULAR

For Central Element, the start of work at Pearl represents another step in the company’s growing eastern suburbs pipeline.

All three vehicles will form part of a broader charitable initiative benefiting Big Brothers Big Sisters of America, the American Red Cross and Starlight Children’s Foundation

Related Stories
Money
ASX Reporting Season 2026: 5 Biggest Winners and Losers So Far
By Ruba Jaajaa 10/09/2026
Money
The Stock Market’s Breezy Summer Is Over. Investors Beware.
By Hannah Erin Lang 08/09/2026
Prestige
Girard-Perregaux Gives The 39mm Laureato Fifty A Tourbillon
By Ruba Jaajaa 07/09/2026
ASX Reporting Season 2026: 5 Biggest Winners and Losers So Far

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations

By Ruba Jaajaa
Thu, Sep 10, 2026 5 min

Reporting season has once again reminded investors that a strong profit does not guarantee a rising share price, and a large loss does not always trigger a sell-off. What matters most is how each result compares with expectations and, increasingly, what management says about the year ahead. During the August 2026 season, companies offering credible turnarounds or unexpectedly strong guidance were rewarded handsomely, while those flagging weaker margins, slowing demand or greater uncertainty were punished.

The following ranking draws on Morningstar’s review of 164 ASX-listed companies and measures each company’s share-price movement on the day it reported. This captures the market’s immediate response to the earnings announcement, before subsequent economic developments, dividends and company-specific news cloud the picture. Here are the five biggest winners, and the five hardest-hit losers, of the season so far.

The five winners

1. Bapcor (ASX:BAP): +41.0%

Bapcor delivered reporting season’s largest relief rally after presenting early evidence that its troubled automotive-parts business was stabilising. Although underlying revenue fell 1.8% to $1.92 billion and underlying NPAT collapsed 85% to $10.8 million, underlying EBITDA of $152.5 million exceeded guidance.

More importantly, working-capital initiatives released $68.5 million in the second half, lifting cash conversion to 109.4% and reducing net debt by 63% to $135 million. The statutory loss was $431.6 million, largely because of non-cash impairments. Investors focused on improving operational momentum, stronger liquidity and management’s expectation of modest FY27 revenue growth.

2. Zip Co (ASX:ZIP): +18.2%

Zip comfortably surpassed its FY26 targets, sending the buy-now-pay-later provider’s shares sharply higher. Transaction volume rose 23% to $16.7 billion, while cash earnings before tax, depreciation and amortisation jumped 58% to a record $268.9 million. Statutory profit climbed 46% to $116.4 million, and the cash operating margin expanded by 4.2 percentage points to 20%.

The strongest signal was guidance for FY27 cash earnings of $340 million—around 26% growth and above analysts’ forecasts. US transaction volume increased 42.5% and now represents three-quarters of group volume, offsetting weaker customer activity in Australia.

3. CSL (ASX:CSL): +17.3%

CSL’s result was hardly spectacular in isolation, but it cleared a market bar that had fallen dramatically following earlier downgrades and restructuring announcements. Underlying NPATA was US$3.1 billion, down 2% in constant-currency terms, while operating cash flow reached US$3.51 billion.

CSL maintained its full-year dividend at US$2.92 per share and completed a A$1 billion buyback. The real catalyst was FY27 guidance for approximately 5% underlying profit growth, compared with market expectations closer to 2%. After an extended period of earnings disappointments, investors interpreted the outlook as evidence that CSL’s core plasma business was approaching a sustainable recovery.

4. Judo Capital (ASX:JDO): +16.9%

Judo Capital demonstrated strong operating leverage as its specialist business-lending franchise expanded. Full-year profit before tax rose 34% to $168.1 million, while pre-provision profit increased 42%. Gross loans and advances grew 18% to $14.7 billion, reaching the top of the bank’s guidance range and comfortably exceeding broader system growth.

Deposits increased 24% to $12.2 billion, return on equity improved by 1.1 percentage points to 6.4%, and earnings per share rose 29% to 9.9 cents. Reaffirmation of the FY27 outlook gave investors confidence that loan growth could continue without sacrificing margins or credit quality.

5. Super Retail Group (ASX:SUL): +15.8%

The owner of Supercheap Auto, rebel, BCF and Macpac reported record sales of $4.2 billion, up 3.2%, despite cautious discretionary spending. Profitability went backwards: normalised profit before tax fell 7% to $306 million and normalised NPAT declined 2.8% to $226 million as transformation spending weighed on margins. Nevertheless, the result exceeded subdued expectations, online sales grew 5.3% and membership across the group’s loyalty programs reached 13.1 million. Investors were also encouraged by positive early FY27 trading, stable gross margins and continued market-share gains. A fully franked 33-cent final dividend added to the appeal.

The five losers

1. Hansen Technologies (ASX:HSN): –21.2%

Hansen’s historic result met expectations, but investors recoiled from its outlook. The utility and communications software provider achieved an underlying EBITDA margin of 31%, exceeding its 30% target, while generating strong cash flow. However, management designated FY27 an “investment and transition year”, signalling a roughly five-percentage-point margin contraction as spending on products, sales capabilities and organisational changes increased.

Revenue had already been broadly flat, leaving investors concerned that the investment program would depress earnings before new growth appeared. Leadership changes, including the chief executive’s departure, added uncertainty. Management expects revenue growth and margins above 30% to return in FY28, but the market was unwilling to wait.

2. Life360 (ASX:360): –19.4%

Life360’s headline growth was impressive: quarterly revenue rose 38% to US$159 million, subscription revenue increased 31%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed 53% to US$31.1 million. Monthly active users reached 102.4 million and paying circles grew 27% to 3.2 million. The sell-off reflected expectations rather than a collapsing business.

Net income fell 18%, the net margin contracted from 6% to 3%, hardware shipments dropped 18%, and full-year EBITDA guidance was merely maintained. After a strong valuation run, investors wanted a larger upgrade and clearer evidence that heavy investment in advertising, international expansion and artificial intelligence would generate additional earnings.

3. PEXA Group (ASX:PXA): –17.0%

PEXA reported a 7% increase in continuing-operations revenue and 12% EBITDA growth to $152 million, accompanied by a two-percentage-point margin expansion. Free cash flow increased 39%, suggesting the core Australian electronic-conveyancing platform remained highly profitable. Investors instead concentrated on management’s warning that property-transfer volumes could decline, alongside regulatory uncertainty surrounding the fees PEXA can charge.

The company is also continuing to invest heavily in its loss-making international expansion. Morningstar considered the market reaction excessive, arguing that structural transfer-volume assumptions had not materially changed, but the combination of softer near-term activity and regulatory risk overwhelmed the respectable headline numbers.

4. SEEK (ASX:SEK): –14.3%

SEEK produced solid FY26 figures, including 10% revenue growth to $1.20 billion, a 15% rise in EBITDA and 28% growth in adjusted earnings per share. It also lifted its fully franked annual dividend by 13% to a record 52 cents. Those achievements were overshadowed by falling paid job-ad volumes and cautious FY27 assumptions.

The statutory accounts included a $201 million loss from the SEEK Growth Fund and $377 million of significant items, making the headline result considerably less attractive. Investors were particularly concerned that economic weakness could limit volumes while the company continued investing in platform integration and artificial-intelligence products.

5. JB Hi-Fi (ASX:JBH): –12.3%

JB Hi-Fi’s full-year result was broadly respectable, with group sales rising 5% to $11.1 billion and underlying earnings per share increasing 6% to $4.48. The damage came from its current-trading update. Australian sales were almost flat during the June quarter and deteriorated further in July, while earnings in the core Australian electronics business fell 3.6%.

Housing-related categories were particularly weak as higher living costs and interest rates constrained household budgets. With JB Hi-Fi entering the season on a demanding valuation, an in-line historic result was not sufficient: the loss of sales momentum prompted investors to rapidly reduce their expectations for FY27.

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations. Bapcor was rewarded for being less troubled than feared, while several fundamentally profitable companies were punished because their outlooks failed to justify elevated valuations.

MOST POPULAR

In the remote waters of Indonesia’s Anambas Islands, Bawah Reserve is redefining what it means to blend barefoot luxury with environmental stewardship.

All three vehicles will form part of a broader charitable initiative benefiting Big Brothers Big Sisters of America, the American Red Cross and Starlight Children’s Foundation

Related Stories
Travel
Aman Unveils Major Wellness Upgrades at Two Bhutan Lodges
By Jeni O'Dowd 24/06/2026
Property
PADDINGTON HOUSE RECORD SET WITH $12M SALE OF LANDMARK ‘GOVERNESS’ HOME
By Staff Writer 19/05/2026
Lifestyle
Melbourne Office Market Turns a Corner as Tenant Demand Strengthens and Future Supply Dries Up
By Jeni O'Dowd 14/07/2026
0
Your Cart
Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop