The Australian government's latest report, " Our GenAI Transition: Implications for Work and Skills " (Jobs and Skills Australia, August 2025) offers the kind of analysis our sector has been hoping to see. While the report examines the entire labour market, its implications for aged care and community services are particularly significant given the sector's unique challenges and human-centred nature.

The report refers to aged care directly in places, but in what follows I take a closer look at its broader findings and consider what they mean for our sector.

Augmentation vs Automation

One of the most reassuring findings, and frankly one that validates what many of us in the sector have been arguing, is that aged care will see augmentation rather than automation. The core of what we do—the empathy, clinical judgement, and physical presence required for personal care and relationship-building—simply cannot be automated.

What excites me about this finding is that AI will primarily serve as what I like to think of as an intelligent assistant—reducing that mountain of admin we all complain about, improving documentation accuracy, and making compliance (and reporting) easier. If you've ever spent hours trying to decipher handwritten care notes or wrestling with roster changes, you'll understand why this feels like a lifeline rather than a threat.

The key insight here is that frontline care roles will remain fundamentally human-centred, but our workflows will evolve.

The current reality: uneven but promising

The report reveals something I've been observing firsthand—AI adoption in aged care is currently early and uneven. Larger providers are actively experimenting with technology partnerships but many smaller organisations (and the CHSP sector) are barely engaging with AI tools.

What is more concerning, however, is the widespread "shadow use" happening across the sector. The report confirms that staff are already using AI tools in daily operations, but often without formal organisational policies. And while the innovation is admirable (and unavoidable), this creates significant risks around privacy, accuracy, and regulatory compliance. At the AI Adoption in Aged Care Group we recently published a template, the Guidelines for the Responsible Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence . It’s a great starting point if you’re looking for one.

The skills revolution: why we need to think differently about training

Here's where the report gets really interesting, and where I think our sector needs to take notes. The transformation demands a dual-track approach to capability building. We absolutely must elevate digital literacy across our entire workforce so staff can use AI tools responsibly and effectively. But—as noted in the report—we simultaneously need to double down on traditionally human skills like critical thinking, communication, and ethical judgement.

Why? Because in an AI-enhanced world, workers will increasingly need to validate and oversee AI outputs. Think about it: if an AI system generates a care plan or flags a potential health risk, someone with domain expertise and critical thinking skills needs to assess whether that output makes sense in the context of Mrs. Smith's actual needs and preferences.

The report emphasises that "continuous upskilling and reskilling become critical for maintaining employability and productivity." Organisations that get this right will have a significant competitive advantage in attracting and retaining quality staff.

Workforce transformation: let's not sugarcoat this

Entry-level positions will face the most significant changes, but that doesn't necessarily mean fewer jobs—it means different jobs. Care workers and assistants may see their administrative components reduced, but they'll gain new responsibilities supervising AI outputs for care notes and rostering suggestions. This shift requires both confidence and comprehensive training, but it also represents an opportunity to elevate these roles and make them more engaging.

(I think it is important to note that women dominate the aged care sector and they could be disproportionately affected if entry-level clerical roles diminish. Additionally, older workers risk exclusion without adequate digital support.)

Making implementation work

Success hinges on what the report calls organisational adaptability, and this is where I think many aged care providers will struggle if they don't approach this strategically. Providers that thoughtfully integrate AI into their work processes will see significant gains, but this requires much more than just purchasing new software and hoping for the best.

Also, worker engagement is essential—involving staff in co-designing how AI is used builds trust, improves safety outcomes, and ensures practical applicability. And finally, the report suggests that short-form training programs and micro-credentials could provide rapid upskilling for frontline staff and managers on practical AI applications. Strategic partnerships between registered training organisations, universities, and aged care providers will be crucial to keep training content aligned with real-world practice.

A national priority

Aged care needs to be a priority sector for national AI capability development. Our sector requires dedicated resources and support to navigate this transition successfully especially as we’re dealing with people's lives, safety, and dignity. We can't afford to get this wrong.

But, to be honest, I do worry a little about the implementation timeline. The report suggests we have time to prepare, but the technology is advancing rapidly, and our sector historically hasn't been quick to adapt to change. We need to start these conversations now, not when the technology has already passed us by.

Looking ahead

The AI transformation of aged care isn't a Jetsons episode any more. It's happening right now, in ways both visible and invisible. What this report makes clear is that we have a choice in how this unfolds. We can either guide this transition thoughtfully, ensuring it enhances rather than diminishes the human elements that make quality care possible, or we can let it happen to us and deal with the consequences.

I'm cautiously optimistic, but only if we act with genuine intention and urgency. The organisations that will thrive are those that recognise this isn't just about technology—it's about people, relationships, and the fundamental values that drive good care.

I believe we can get this right. But it won't happen by accident.

Reposted with permission from this article by George Gouzounis.