Yesterday I commented on a post that made me uncomfortable, because it’s part of a pattern I’m increasingly seeing, particularly from some companies promoting virtual assistant models.
The post opened with this claim:
“My client just saved $250,000 a year.
Fired his HR Manager, Operations Lead, and Project Manager.
Replaced all three with 2 Executive Assistants.”
It went on to celebrate the fact that those EAs were costing around USD $1,500 a month, positioning this as a smart, efficient business decision.
I want to add some nuance to this conversation, because it’s important.
Our new Global Skills Matrix research, based on data from thousands of assistants across more than 65 countries, shows something very clearly:
The role has already become hybrid.
EA + operations
EA + project management
EA + HR administration
EA + systems, data, vendors, process
This is not a future trend.
It is the current reality in many organisations, particularly SMEs.
So yes, assistants are already doing work that used to sit across multiple roles. That part is true.
More on that in future posts.
But this is where the conversation needs slowing down.
Hybrid does not mean limitless.
Capable does not mean cheap.
And trust does not remove legal, financial, or people risk.
If an Executive Assistant is touching HR, contracts, finance, data, or compliance:
• there are legal implications
• training is not optional
• scope must be clearly defined
• escalation paths must exist
And pay matters.
To put this into context, in Singapore, where this company is based, the average EA salary typically sits closer to SGD 3,500–5,000 per month, which is roughly USD $2,700–$3,900 per month, with senior EAs earning more. So when posts celebrate assistants costing USD $1,500 a month while replacing three senior roles, that is not efficiency. It is a misalignment between responsibility and reward.
Our research shows assistants are already absorbing complexity because organisations increasingly need coordination rather than silos. That insight is important.
But the answer is not to collapse roles and offload risk onto one or two under-resourced individuals, especially under the banner of efficiency.
The real lesson here is this:
Organisations need fewer fragmented roles and better-designed hybrid ones.
That means:
• realistic scope
• proper training for risk, not just tasks
• pay aligned to responsibility
• recognition that modern EAs are enterprise operators, not admin catch-alls
This is not about protecting turf.
It is about protecting people and the business.
The role is evolving.
The structure around it needs to evolve too.
