Insecure, under appreciated, treated as an insignificant spec in a large company - Mitarbeiter (anonym) bei Infor: Mitarbeiterbewertung

Good pay for area compared to other companies

Some coworkers were low quality / low tier talent

I like working at Infor. I’ve been here for roughly five years. I enjoy the work, believe in the product, and genuinely like the people I work with and for.

There has recently been a very strong “AI-first” push across the company. To be clear, I understand the value. AI absolutely can streamline operations and free people up to focus on higher-value work. Used correctly, it’s useful. The problem is that there does not appear to be a clear or consistently enforced policy around what constitutes appropriate use versus misuse or outright abuse. There should be better guidance around where AI helps productivity, where it introduces risk (especially around company information being entered into public tools), and where the line is between use and replacement of basic job responsibilities. For example, I recently had a coworker explain that they created AI automation to read and manage their emails so they rarely have to review or respond themselves, while acknowledging things are likely missed. The same person records meetings for transcripts, leaves their laptop during the call, then relies on AI afterward to summarize what happened. At a certain point, it raises a legitimate question: are we using AI to improve productivity, or are we using it to avoid participating in the job altogether? Right now, reactions internally seem split. Some employees view this as a serious abuse of the technology, while others appear fully on board with it. That disconnect alone suggests the company needs clearer expectations and policy guidance. AI should support human judgment and critical thinking. Not eliminate the need for employees to engage in their work entirely. And how does the company determine when that is being done?