As robotics continues to grow as a sector, here at ATP, we’ve been thinking a lot about how the public feels about it. When I looked at the data, I found an undercurrent of discussion that caught my eye.

While it’s tempting to assume public skepticism about robotics comes from science fiction, the conversation online tells a different story. People are reacting to something far more ordinary: their firsthand experiences with automation, and the bad taste those experiences left in their mouths.

The Automation People Have Already Met

Most public debate these days centers on themes we’re all familiar with: fears about job loss and physical safety around robots. These are real concerns, but they’re ones the industry understands and is taking strides to quell.

There’s another conversation, however, that’s been brewing steadily underneath: it’s less about what robots can do and more about who they’re doing it for.

The sharpest frustration isn’t with humanoids or warehouse bots at all. It’s with customer service automation: chatbots that loop, tickets that close themselves, systems that refuse to hand you to a person. This is the automation most people have actually lived with, and it taught them that when a company puts a machine between itself and you, the machine works for the company.

The same complaint shows up wherever robots meet the public. Sidewalk delivery units get blocked, kicked and tipped over, and people talk as much about companies dodging wages as about the clutter. One woman in Philadelphia was arrested for repeatedly blocking a delivery bot. Others describe face scanning and LiDAR mapping of their streets as a side effect nobody agreed to.

Regardless of whether it’s chatbots or physical AI, it’s the same frustration in a different font -  regular people are annoyed that automation they didn’t opt into is being imposed on them for someone else’s benefit.

The Industry’s Response: Hiring That Looks Like Listening

At first glance, it appears the industry is taking note of this changing tide. Companies are spending real money on marketing and hiring a lot of folks with “trust” in their titles.

But look closely at who’s actually being hired. Across tech, the most sought-after marketing leaders right now are growth specialists: performance, demand generation, lifecycle, hired to prove a return on spend. In robotics, well-funded humanoid companies are bringing in marketers from streaming and consumer tech to build launch moments. While both are reasonable hires, neither is designed to understand the person on the sidewalk.

The chief trust officer is the more interesting case. The role is spreading, particularly across B2B software, but it has largely grown out of security and compliance. In most companies, the trust function sits somewhere across compliance, customer success and audit, and its job is to help win complex deals by answering security questionnaires, maintaining a trust center, and getting through procurement.

These roles matter for enterprise companies, but they put trust in the hands of sales, a team whose client is the buyer, not the public.

The Public Might Be an Overlooked Stakeholder

In order for an industry to truly transform how our society functions, it needs to bring along its constituents. At Across the Pond we believe for technology to break through, it must break through with people. Innovation needs to become part of daily life; otherwise, it risks becoming a novelty remembered for its 15 minutes.

One company that seems to understand this is Anthropic. In October 2026, it announced its Public Benefit Fund, pledging at least 5% of its shares to nonprofits or directly to people affected by AI. It sits alongside $200 million the company had already committed to studying and addressing AI’s impact on workers.

What’s notable is who it’s aimed at: not buyers or procurement teams, but the general public. The aim is to build a relationship with the people who live with the consequences of AI, whether or not they ever use it. It’s a recognition that for transformational technology, public opinion is part of the license to operate.

Robotics belongs in that category too. It just isn’t acting like it yet.

The Question Worth Asking

While it’s clear that robotics companies are finally investing in trust, what remains to be seen is whether they’ll notice that the people deciding the industry’s future may not be on the procurement call.

Right now, the hiring suggests they haven’t. The question isn’t how to get buyers to trust you; it’s who you’re asking to live alongside your product. If there’s one thing I would ask you, if I was sitting in front of you, is: do you have anyone on your team that has been hired to think about what those people need to hear before they’ll come along for the ride?