RoboChronicle Tools 2026 Edition Labor & Automation

Automation Risk Calculator

Directional estimate of automation risk and humanoid disruption horizon for a role. Start with a role baseline, then adjust task drivers to model different environments and job designs.

Inputs Scenario model (not a guarantee)

Role (type to search)

Region

Industry

Labor cost pressure

Automation readiness

Routine / repeatability 60

Higher = easier to standardize and automate.

Physical complexity 40

Higher = harder for robots (fine manipulation, irregular objects).

Social & trust requirements 55

Higher = humans remain valuable (negotiation, care, persuasion).

Safety / regulation intensity 50

Higher = slower adoption (liability, compliance, safety cases).

Environment variability 50

Higher = less structured, harder to automate reliably.

Note: This is a directional model designed for scenario exploration. Real adoption depends on cost curves, reliability, local regulation, labor supply, and how tasks are redesigned.

Results

— —

Overall automation risk (0–100)

—

Select a role to get a baseline, then adjust sliders.

Humanoid disruption likelihood

—

Physical replacement requires high reliability and safety.

Estimated disruption horizon

—

When meaningful displacement could start in the median scenario.

What to do next (defensive strategy)

—

Driver breakdown What pushed your score up or down

Higher bars indicate stronger contribution to risk. “Negative” drivers reduce risk.

How This Model Works

The calculator starts with a role baseline (a rough “default” risk profile), then adjusts the score using task-level drivers. This mirrors how automation typically happens: not by replacing a job title, but by automating specific tasks inside the role.

“Software automation” (AI copilots, workflows, back-office automation) often arrives sooner than physical automation. That’s why the tool also estimates a separate humanoid disruption likelihood and a horizon.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does “automation risk” mean here?

It is a directional estimate of how economically and technically automatable a role is, based on task drivers such as routineness, social complexity, safety/regulation, and environment variability.

Is this prediction certain?

No. This tool is a scenario model, not a guarantee. Adoption depends on costs, reliability, regulation, labor supply, and how tasks are redesigned in real operations.

Why separate “AI software automation” vs “humanoid disruption”?

Many roles are partially automated by software (workflows, copilots, back-office). Humanoid disruption refers specifically to physical task replacement, which usually requires higher reliability, safety validation, and integration.

How should I use the result?

Use it to compare scenarios and identify which task drivers push your role toward higher or lower automation risk. Then focus on defensive skills: complex problem solving, coordination, customer trust, or domain-specific safety responsibilities.

For enterprise-grade decisions, pair this tool with detailed workflow mapping, safety constraints, and a full TCO/ROI model.