From Budget to jobs: how employers can shape Singapore’s AI transition

SINGAPORE’S 2026 Budget will likely be remembered as a defining moment in the country’s artificial intelligence (AI) journey.

It paired ambitious incentives to accelerate AI adoption with substantial investments in skills, worker assurance and lifelong learning – signalling the Republic’s intent to shape how AI is deployed, responsibly and at speed.

Even as policy moves decisively, effects of disruption in the labour market are starting to be felt. A 2025 Ipsos survey found that half of Singaporeans believe their roles could be replaced by AI. These fears are likely being shaped by visible, high-profile restructuring decisions across the global economy.

Initially concentrated in global tech firms, which laid off 246,000 workers in 2025, this pattern is now accelerating and spreading across industries. In labour markets undergoing rapid transition, many workers may not simply “find another job”.

But public policy alone cannot carry the full weight of this transition.

Singapore has invested heavily in skills and incentives. What remains under-designed in the AI conversation is the organisational layer – the decisions made inside firms about how work is redesigned, how automation is implemented, and how people move when roles change or disappear.

MORE ON BUDGET 2026

Visit our Budget 2026 site for more stories and analyses.

Explore Now

Employers stand at the front line of the AI transition. They decide whether workers experience change as a cliff – an abrupt, severing of ties, or as a ramp – a structured transition that preserves dignity, trust and future contribution.

This distinction matters more than is acknowledged. Layoffs are frequently treated as a financial or operational lever, a means of managing short-term economics during transformation. But research shows that repeated or poorly managed job cuts erode morale, reduce productivity, and increase voluntary turnover among those who remain.

More subtly, they also undermine automation itself.

SEE ALSO

Singapore’s new AI-upskilling push seen as shield against job displacement amid global layoffs

Budget 2026: Why Singapore’s white-collar AI training drive is starting with law and accounting

To pursue responsible AI for growth, business leaders must address labour displacement

When workers feel discarded, they are less likely to share institutional knowledge, weakening the very systems AI is meant to enhance. Paradoxically, in an era where firms are leaner and each employee does more, each worker becomes more important, not less.

Talent ramps as strategic infrastructure

A different approach is possible – and increasingly necessary. Rather than managing exits as end points, organisations can design intentional transition pathways that support workers’ journeys into new roles, ventures or modes of contribution, both inside and beyond the firm.

These talent ramps help workers pivot with support, while allowing organisations to maintain enduring relationships with employees, alumni and ecosystem talent.

Done well, ramps are not acts of charity but strategic infrastructure.

Leading organisations are beginning to treat workforce transition funding as part of transformation capital expenditure and not human resources operating expenditure, recognising that how people move through change is as critical as the technology itself.

Ramps allow firms to redesign work faster, automate with greater confidence, and access capability and capacity beyond the limits of headcount.

In practice, this can take many forms. Experienced technical and operational specialists can be engaged through alumni marketplaces and preferred vendor pools, returning on fractional or project-based contracts to add capacity as needed.

Policy-oriented professionals can be integrated into formal alumni networks that catalyse their shift into governance and advisory roles, extending a firm’s influence beyond its balance sheet.

Product innovators can be given structured access to internal labs, prototyping facilities and enterprise tools, allowing organisations to license or scale successful concepts.

Budding entrepreneurs can be supported through venture funds, fellowships or micro-grants that provide seed capital in exchange for equity or strategic partnership.

Purpose-driven leaders can be backed in community-centric initiatives that strengthen trust and brand legitimacy.

Seen together, these mechanisms institutionalise exits as governed transitions, not events – keeping knowledge connected, relationships intact and optionality alive.

This is where the idea of a “social licence to automate” becomes critical. In Singapore’s context, the ability to automate at speed will increasingly depend on how responsibly transitions are managed.

Employers who invest in structured ramps will find it easier to secure employee buy-in, attract talent and sustain momentum through change. Those who rely solely on layoffs may find automation slowed by resistance, attrition and reputational drag.

Seen this way, Singapore’s AI transition is more than technology adoption. It is a structural shift in how work is organised, how value is created and how careers unfold.

Budget 2026 lays the foundation for AI adoption by aligning incentives, skills and assurance. But its success will ultimately be determined in workplaces – in how employers redesign jobs, reallocate tasks and support people through change.

A whole-of-society approach is needed. The government can provide direction, incentives and safety nets. Unions can safeguard fairness and voice worker concerns.

Employers, however, must build the practical pathways that translate policy into lived experience – pathways that allow workers to move confidently into new roles, ventures and contributions as AI reshapes work.

If Singapore gets this balance right, it can do more than manage disruption. It can expand opportunity, empowering workers to step into the future of work with agency, while enabling firms to automate, innovate and compete globally.

The challenge now is to move from the Budget to jobs, and from intention to execution.

The writer is innovation leader at Deloitte Asia Pacific. The views expressed here are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Deloitte.