<p>The integration of artificial intelligence into organizational governance has raised debate about its appropriateness in leading human employees. This research examines whether AI should assume leadership roles through the lens of Chinese paternalistic leadership and Confucian principles. Drawing on Erkal and Vandekerckhove’s (2024) framework of management evolution, we distinguish between management functions and leadership capabilities to evaluate AI’s potential role. A narrative literature review methodology synthesized research on AI capabilities and Chinese paternalistic leadership practices between 2010 and 2024, drawing exclusively from English-language scholarship. The findings indicate that while AI demonstrates remarkable capabilities in management functions such as data analysis and process optimization, it faces insurmountable limitations in replicating the complex cultural and emotional intelligence requirements inherent in Chinese paternalistic leadership. Fundamental principles such as ren 仁 (rén) (benevolence), yi 义 (yì) (righteousness), li 礼 (lǐ) (propriety), and xiao 孝 (xiào) (filial piety) demand sophisticated levels of cultural understanding and emotional intelligence that current AI systems cannot effectively replicate. The integration of these principles creates emergent leadership properties that transcend modular computational approaches. While AI can support certain management functions, its role must remain auxiliary to human leadership, particularly in contexts where relationship-based leadership traditions are influential. This study contributes by introducing a culturally grounded perspective to the AI governance debate, examining how Chinese management concepts function when interpreted through English-language scholarship, and addressing critical gaps in understanding the distinction between management and leadership in AI implementation.</p>