Here’s a number that should change how companies measure their automation. More than four in 10 customers say AI has made it harder to reach a real person, and they’d pay to fix it.
According to Alchemer’s 2026 AI & Customer Expectations Report, 44% of consumers name difficulty reaching a person as AI’s top negative effect, and 43% say they would pay more for a product or service that guarantees access to human support. What customers want hasn’t changed. They still want a person available when they need one.
TL;DR — key takeaways
- 44% of consumers say AI made it hard to reach a person, the top complaint in Alchemer’s 2026 AI & Customer Expectations Report.
- 43% would pay more for a product or service that guarantees human support.
- Daily AI users are more than 2.5 times as likely as infrequent users to say they’d pay extra (27% vs. 10%).
- Containment-first metrics can reward systems for keeping customers away from people.
- Only 17.9% list easier access to a person as the improvement they most want from AI. Customers want AI that works, with a person in reserve.
What is the human access gap?
The human access gap is the distance between how often customers need a person and how easy a company makes it to reach one. When the gap is wide, customers feel trapped in automation. When it’s narrow, AI feels like a faster front door.
| Human access signal | % of consumers |
|---|---|
| Say AI made it difficult to reach a person | 44.0% |
| Would pay more for guaranteed human support | 43% |
| Daily AI users who would pay extra | 27% |
| Infrequent AI users who would pay extra | 10% |
| Want easier access to a person as a top AI improvement | 17.9% |
Why do automated systems make it harder to reach a person?
Because many are built to. Containment, the share of interactions resolved without a human agent, is a common success metric. It’s easy to measure and it lowers cost per contact. It also treats escalation as failure.
That framing breaks down fast. A customer with a sensitive, complex or repeated issue needs a person, and a system rewarded for containment has every incentive to keep them away. The chatbot session looks successful because it ended without an escalation. Then the customer calls two days later about the same problem.
How much is human access worth to customers?
A premium. 43% of consumers say they would pay more for a product or service that guarantees access to human customer support, per Alchemer’s research.
Willingness climbs sharply with AI exposure. Daily AI users are more than 2.5 times as likely as infrequent users to say they’d pay extra, at 27% compared with 10%. Only 13% of daily users rule out paying, against 31% of infrequent users. Among consumers willing to pay a steep premium of 20% or more, nearly half are daily AI users.
The people who know AI best are the ones who value a human fallback most. As AI use grows, that group grows with it.
You decide what AI touches. Alchemer Iris gives teams controls, approvals and guardrails to automate where speed helps and keep a person where judgment matters. Join the Alchemer Iris waitlist →
What should trigger a handoff to a person?
Customers shouldn’t have to outsmart an automated system to find a human. The study points to four triggers worth building in:
- Sensitive issues, where empathy and judgment matter.
- Complex issues, where the answer takes more than a lookup.
- Low-confidence responses, where the system isn’t sure it understood.
- Repeated issues, where the customer has already tried and come back.
Add high-risk situations to that list, and make the path to a person easy to find and use.
How should teams measure AI success instead?
Balance efficiency with outcomes. Alongside containment, track resolution, repeat-contact rate, customer effort and satisfaction. These show whether AI reduced the work or moved it somewhere else.
The good news is that customers aren’t asking companies to abandon automation. When asked what they’d most like AI to improve, 38% say faster issue resolution and 34% say faster responses. Easier access to a person comes in at 17.9%. Customers want a better division of labor: AI for the volume work, people for the moments that need empathy, judgment or accountability.
A useful first step is an escalation audit. Pull the most common reasons customers ask for a person and check whether your system recognizes them early enough to offer the handoff, instead of after the customer has asked three times.
Want the full report? Read the complete 2026 AI & Customer Expectations Report for every breakdown, the full list of improvements customers want and five practical priorities for CX leaders.
Methodology: Alchemer’s Research Solutions team surveyed 2,009 U.S. consumers for the 2026 AI & Customer Expectations Study.
FAQ
Q: How many customers say AI makes it harder to reach a person?
A: 44% of consumers, the top negative effect of company AI in Alchemer’s 2026 AI & Customer Expectations Report.
Q: Would customers pay more for guaranteed human support?
A: Yes. 43% say they would pay more for a product or service that guarantees access to human customer support, and willingness is highest among daily AI users.
Q: What is containment in customer service?
A: Containment is the share of customer interactions an automated system resolves without escalating to a human agent. When it’s the only success metric, escalation can look like failure.
Q: When should AI escalate to a human agent?
A: For sensitive, complex, low-confidence or repeated issues, and for high-risk situations, according to Alchemer’s 2026 research.