Middle managers are almost twice as likely as executive leaders to want a human involved when AI resolves IT issues that could affect security, data, or business operations, according to research commissioned by TeamViewer.
The global study found 46% of middle managers preferred human involvement in security-sensitive AI decisions, compared with 24% of executive leaders. The findings point to potential governance and risk gaps as organisations adopt more autonomous IT and security tooling, particularly if senior leadership assumes staff share the same level of comfort with automation.
Security risks and unauthorised access were among the most cited concerns about AI acting without a human in the loop, with 30% of workers flagging the issue. That concern was cited by 33% of middle and senior managers, compared with 23% of executive leaders.
In Australia, 42% of workers said strong security and privacy protections would make them more comfortable allowing AI to fix problems autonomously. The figure rose to 46% among senior managers and 43% among middle managers, compared with 34% of executive leaders.
Transparency also emerged as a factor shaping trust. TeamViewer said 74% of Australian workers were more likely to trust AI when it shows what it is doing and why, while 55% said they do not always know when to trust AI and when to verify its output.
“Security cannot be added after autonomy is introduced. The more authority an AI system has, the more important it is that its actions are transparent and that clear boundaries define when human approval is required,” said Jan Bee, CISO at TeamViewer. “Business leaders should also not assume that their own comfort with autonomy is shared across the organisation. That principle guides our AI features: actions are recorded, customers retain visibility, and system-altering actions require approval so that people remain in control.”
The research also suggested attitudes vary by industry. Almost half (49%) of workers in energy, utilities, and oil and gas said they want human involvement when AI resolves IT issues with potential security or operational impact, compared with 28% in marketing, media, and communications.
Accountability for mistakes made by autonomous systems was another area of uncertainty. Just 52% of Australian respondents said accountability is clear when autonomous AI systems make mistakes. When asked where responsibility should sit, 24% of Australian respondents placed responsibility on IT, 28% on themselves, while 13% said no one should be responsible because it is a system.
“Here in Australia, employees are not opposed to AI taking on more responsibility, but they want confidence that the right safeguards are in place,” said Tristan Ohlenrott, ANZ Country Manager at TeamViewer. “With 74% of Australian workers more likely to trust AI when it shows what it is doing and why, transparency needs to be built into how businesses introduce autonomous AI.”
“For Australian businesses, that means setting clear boundaries around what AI can access and do independently, making its actions visible, and defining when a human needs to step in. Security needs to be part of those guardrails from the outset, particularly when AI is accessing sensitive data or making decisions that could affect operations. Autonomy should not mean handing over control. Businesses need to give AI room to act, while keeping humans firmly in control of the decisions and outcomes.”
The study was conducted by Sapio Research on behalf of TeamViewer in April and May 2026 and surveyed 4,200 respondents across nine markets: the U.S., the U.K., Australia, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, and Brazil. Respondents included an even split of managers and employees across industries and company sizes.
You can read the full report here.
