Society 5.0 and Industry 5.0 call for human-centric technology integration, yet the concept lacks an operational definition that can be measured, optimized, or evaluated at the firm level. This paper addresses three gaps. First, existing models of human-AI complementarity treat the augmentation function phi(D) as exogenous -- dependent only on the stock of AI deployed -- ignoring that two firms with identical technology investments achieve radically different augmentation outcomes depending on how the workplace is organized around the human-AI interaction. Second, no multi-dimensional instrument exists linking workplace design choices to augmentation productivity. Third, the Society 5.0 literature proposes human-centricity as a normative aspiration but provides no formal criterion for when it is economically optimal. We make four contributions. (1) We endogenize the augmentation function as phi(D, W), where W is a five-dimensional workplace design vector -- AI interface design, decision authority allocation, task orchestration, learning loop architecture, and psychosocial work environment -- and prove that human-centric design is profit-maximizing when the workforce's augmentable cognitive capital exceeds a critical threshold. (2) We conduct a PRISMA-guided systematic review of 120 papers (screened from 6,096 records) to map the evidence base for each dimension. (3) We provide secondary empirical evidence from Colombia's EDIT manufacturing survey (N=6,799 firms) showing that management practice quality amplifies the return to technology investment (interaction coefficient 0.304, p<0.01). (4) We propose the Workplace Augmentation Design Index (WADI), a 36-item theory-grounded instrument for diagnosing human-centricity at the firm level. Decision authority allocation emerges as the binding constraint for Society 5.0 transitions, and task orchestration as the most under-researched dimension