---
id: "prereq-zero-sum-environment"
type: "prereq"
source_timestamps: ["§ When Empathy Goes"]
tags: ["behavioral-economics", "workplace-dynamics"]
related: ["claim-unempathetic-rollouts-sabotage"]
reason: "Leaders must recognize that if AI is framed as a replacement, employees will logically act to protect themselves, making sabotage an expected outcome rather than an anomaly."
sources: ["adoption"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-adoption"
originDay: 9
articleStem: "hbr-edu-42-empathetic-leadership-ai-adoption"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2026/04/empathetic-leadership-can-make-or-break-ai-adoption"
sourceTitle: "Empathetic Leadership Can Make or Break AI Adoption"
---
# Understanding Zero-Sum Dynamics

**Prerequisite:** Leaders must understand *zero-sum dynamics* — a situation where one party's gain is perceived as another's loss.

**Why it's required:** When AI is introduced purely as a cost-cutting or efficiency measure, employees perceive a zero-sum game where the AI's success equals their obsolescence ([[concept-fobo]]). Recognizing this dynamic is required to understand why employees might *logically* choose to sabotage corporate AI initiatives ([[claim-unempathetic-rollouts-sabotage]]) — reframing sabotage from an anomaly into an expected, rational response. The antidote is to convert the game from zero-sum to positive-sum via [[concept-augmentation-vs-automation]] and [[concept-ai-for-interdependence]].

**Enrichment:** Aligns with organizational research on counterproductive work behavior: perceived injustice, threat, and disrespect predict deliberate efforts to harm the organization.