Imagine a world where customer service disappears. Not because it’s bad, but because it’s perfect – perfect at knowing who you are and what you want.  

This article is the first in a series exploring the future of experiences. How do we balance efficiency with humanity, speed with reflection and automation with autonomy?

As part of a qualitative study for ‘The future we want’, participants were introduced to a speculative idea: “In the 2030s, instead of you serving yourself through clunky interfaces, AI systems serve you automatically. Your devices, apps, and environments form a connected ecosystem that anticipates needs, removes friction, and handles admin tasks without you noticing. These best-in-class customer experiences require no conscious interaction – they simply happen around you.”  

This is the logical endpoint of the self-service revolution; systems serving you automatically. Removing friction is progress, but removing agency is the problem.  

Once the stuff of science fiction, we’re now edging closer – blinds open with sunrise, coffee pours itself, clothes ironed. It’s easy to see the appeal. Take that idea further – border controls auto-scanning you on entry, and homes managing their own shopping lists, so you never run out of milk, and healthcare wearables adjusting our premiums in real-time.

And while people believe this future is likely, it’s also one we fear.

Unpacking the data:

Across New Zealand and Australia, the evolution of self-service into full automation is seen as a very likely future scenario. In fact, 69% of Australians expect this to happen in the 2030s.

While people recognise the efficiency and convenience automation could bring, it also ranks among the most feared futures, with 61% worried about this future and 70% feel the need to be cautious about this outcome. The idea of a world that runs perfectly, without effort, triggers discomfort to most.

The paradox: Ease doesn’t equal enjoyment.

We all crave ease, but too much of it blurs the edges of living. When effort disappears, so can control, agency, and the satisfaction of choice. Organisations have been focused on engineering effort out of experiences. In fact, it’s often how many organisations assess the effectiveness of an experience. But when everything just happens to us, we lose not only control, but also the satisfaction of participating in the process.

“It’s kind of like, why are you letting technology dictate how you feel?”  
– Industry expert

“For me, I don’t track anything ’cause I think – I’m gonna feel what I feel.”  
– Industry expert

We can lose the ability to feel, the ability to experience.

One of the strongest psychological needs is the sense of control; the belief that our actions influence outcomes. When we feel in control, we feel less anxiety and stress.  

But even in the small acts of choice – like selecting a seat, adjusting a setting, confirming a step or, simply knowing your progress – helps us feel calmer and more capable.

Of course, there’s a limit. Too many large or complex decisions can leave us paralysed, not empowered. What people really crave is meaningful control – the ability to intervene when it matters, and to trust the system when it doesn’t.

And there lies the problem with automation. As experiences become more effortless, they also become less meaningful, less ours. What we really want isn’t an easier life, but a lighter one. We crave experiences that make us feel more capable, and enabled, not controlled.

How creepy is too creepy?

Automation lives on a fine line between helpful and haunting. The same data that powers convenience can, when used carelessly, trigger discomfort – that subtle feeling of “How did it know that?”

The line between magic and manipulation is psychological, ever shifting, and deeply personal. What feels seamless to one person can feel invasive to another. Context, timing, and tone decide whether automation feels like service or surveillance.

Transparency is the ultimate disarm. When people don’t understand how something works, their imagination fills in the gaps – usually with worst-case scenarios. Transparency and clear communication build understanding and preserves agency. It empowers us to decide, “Is this right for me?”

The uncommon truth:

The more effortless the experience becomes, the less ownership we feel. People don’t want technology to replace them; they want it to support them. The real insight isn’t that people resist automation, it’s that we want to remain participants in it. We want technology to lighten the load, not take over the steering wheel.  

“I want tech to support me but not replace me.”  
– Australian parent

This tension between efficiency and agency is the balance that brands will need to navigate as they explore the future of their experiences.

The future of customer experience won’t be defined by how much effort we remove, but by how much ownership we preserve.

Consider: How do you balance automation with control?

The challenge for brands isn’t whether to automate (this is a given), but how far to go, where to automate, and how to ensure the feelings of humanity still exist.  

The opportunity lies in designing for felt control. Building systems that allow intervention, boundaries, participation. Think: Are you designing experiences that think for people or ones that think with them?

1. Ease the burden of decision, not remove it
2. Make the invisible decisions visible as trust erodes when automation is opaque
3. Anchor narratives in benefits to customers
4. Create boundaries and allow customers to set their own preferences
5. Build participatory experiences that help define the guardrails of what is acceptable.  

Automation will keep advancing, that’s inevitable. The real question is how to make it feel human – balancing automation with control is the secret to creating human experiences.