Jensen Huang said something important in his CNA interview this week. He called CEOs who blame AI for layoffs lazy. He said scaring people about AI is irresponsible. He urged a balanced narrative.

I want to translate that for the room you just finished deploying.

The Problem Lands in Your Hardware

You can specify the right room system. You can integrate the right conferencing platform. You can design a space that meets every brief the client gave you. And six months after go-live, utilisation is at thirty percent.

Integrators often look for a technical explanation. Firmware issues. User interface friction. Booking system complexity. Sometimes those are real. But increasingly, the explanation is sitting one floor up from the AV rack. The workforce has decided, quietly, that leaning into the technology in that room is not in their interest.

When leadership has spent months associating AI with headcount reduction, employees do not suddenly become enthusiastic adopters of AI-enabled meeting rooms, smart workspaces, and automated workflow tools. They use the minimum. They find workarounds. They default to what feels safe.

Your deployment did not fail. The workforce architecture around it was never built.

The Dimension Most Clients Skip

I work with organisations on the 4W Workplace Framework: Workforce, Workflow, Workspace, WorkTech. In the AV and UC industry, most of the conversation happens at the Workspace and WorkTech layers. That is where the integrator operates. That is where the specification lives.

But the Workforce dimension determines whether everything else returns value.

When the human side of a deployment has not been designed, when there is no clear message about what the technology is for and what it means for the people using it, adoption stalls. It does not matter how well the system performs technically. If users do not believe the technology is there to help them, they will not use it to its potential.

This is not a training problem. Training addresses skill gaps. This is a narrative problem. It addresses trust gaps. And trust gaps require a different conversation with the client entirely.

What This Means for How You Advise

Huang's broader point is that organisations with leadership imagination will do more with more. The ones that have run out of ideas shrink and call it transformation. The same pattern plays out at the room level.

When an enterprise client is investing in a significant workplace technology deployment, the question worth asking before you finalise the specification is this: what is the narrative inside this organisation about what AI means for the workforce?

If the answer is unclear, or if the signals you are picking up suggest a fear-based culture, the technology architecture is only half the job. The client needs to understand that deployment success depends on what their people believe about the environment they are walking into.

Integrators who surface this conversation early are not stepping outside their scope. They are protecting the outcome the client hired them to deliver.

The Operational Implication

The Human-AI Intelligence Charter I work from sets one governing principle: AI amplifies human capability. It does not replace human judgment.

That principle needs to be visible to the workforce before they walk into a smart room for the first time. Not in a policy document. In the way leadership has spoken about technology, consistently, over time.

When that foundation exists, the room performs. When it does not, you are deploying into resistance, and no amount of integration quality changes that outcome.

Jensen Huang said the fear narrative is irresponsible. For the AV and UC industry, irresponsible has a utilisation figure attached to it.

Source: Jensen Huang interview with Channel NewsAsia, May 25, 2026. Watch the full interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj8717xBZ_M