Bosses say AI boosts productivity – workers say they’re drowning in ‘workslop’
Ken, a copywriter for a large, Miami-based cybersecurity firm, used to enjoy his job.But then the “workslop” started piling up.Workslop is an unintended consequence of the AI boom.It’s what happens when employees use AI to quickly generate work that seems polished – at least superficially – but is in fact so flawed or inaccurate that it needs to be heavily corrected, cleaned upor even completely redone after it’s passed on to colleagues.For Ken, the problem started after his company’s CEO laid off several of his colleagues and mandated that remaining workers use AI chatbots, saying it would boost their productivity.
While initial drafts were a breeze to create, Ken and his co-workers had to spend more time rewriting, correcting errors and resolving disagreements between each other’s chatbots than if they had never used AI at all.“Quality decreased significantly, time to produce a piece of content increased significantly and, most importantly, morale decreased,” said the copywriter, who spoke under a pseudonym for fear of losing his job.“Everything got a whole lot worse once they rolled out AI.” Ken said the company’s executives shifted the blame to staff when they pushed back about AI-fueled productivity decreases.Ken’s experience reflects an emerging divide between employees and their leaders when it comes to AI: a recent survey of 5,000 white-collar US workers found that 40% of non-managers say AI saves them no time at all at work, while 92% of high-level executives say it makes them more productive.
So what’s causing this workslop deluge? The answer is more complex than being simply a case of workers cutting corners,The real driving force connects back to the C-suite,Companies have spent billions on enterprise investment in generative AI,Some of them, like Block, Amazon, Dow, UPS, Pinterest and Target, have laid off human workers at the same time, attributing the cuts to AI’s potential productivity,Workers who remain feel pressured by their employers to use AI to produce more work, often with little guidance or training.
A disconnect separates executives giddy about generative AI from workers – who are finding that AI merely makes their jobs harder.“People are being told to use AI, often without direction or support,” said Jeff Hancock, a co-author of the study that coined the term “workslop”, and a Stanford researcher and BetterUp scientific adviser.While Hancock believes that generative AI could eventually power tools that help workers improve efficiency, in many cases, the incorporation of AI is having the opposite effect.Hancock’s study, which is not yet peer-reviewed, surveyed 1,150 US desk workers, a subset within the total 5,000.The researchers found that 40% of workers had encountered workslop within a month, and then spent an average of 3.
4 hours a month dealing with it – which the study estimates adds up to $8.1m in lost productivity for a 10,000-person organization.Kelly Cashin, a freelance product designer, told the Guardian she encounters workslop often.“It seems to be common to just copy and paste a bot’s message directly into chats or emails,” she said.At times, when she’s confused by work a colleague sent her, they’ll respond, saying: “Yeah, I’m not sure what AI meant by that” – meaning they’re effectively outsourcing judgment to the chatbot.
“Although it is personally frustrating, I understand why people do this,There’s a lot of pressure to increase productivity compounded by serious uncertainty in the job market,” Cashin said,Philip Barrison, a University of Michigan MD-PhD student who surveyed staff while embedded in primary care clinics, found a similar workslop issue cropping up for medical staff who had been encouraged to use AI to generate email replies to patient questions,That approach was meant to save clinicians’ time,“Based on reporting and my own observations, it doesn’t,” Barrison said.
Instead, many of the workers he spoke to described a lot of editing labor, frustration and concerns about data security and patients receiving AI-assisted emails with errors.Because the AI tools are optional, “once they get past the novelty [of the AI], they start ignoring it”, Barrison said.One reason employers are pushing generative AI in workplaces is because many companies are aiming to reduce their labor costs after investing in the tech, says Aiha Nguyen, who leads the Labor Futures program at the Data & Society non-profit research institute.But those investments haven’t paid off, or at least not yet.One of the conclusions of an often-cited MIT report found that 95% of firms aren’t seeing returns on their investments in AI.
Other recent assessments from the software giant SAP and the professional services and consultant firm Deloitte report a larger fraction of businesses generating returns on investment, but they are still the minority,Businesses expect – or hope – better returns will materialize after two to four years, which is rather slow for technology investments, according to the Deloitte report,“The problem is, generative AI is often being presented as a general-use tool that can do anything, but the reality doesn’t work that way,So what could be creating part of the workslop is [AI’s] unclear mandate or use case,” Nguyen said,AI has become a sticking point as unionized workers negotiate the terms of new contracts, Dan Reynolds, research economist of the Communications Workers of America, said.
Unions are demanding clearer mandates for the tech, and more worker input and control over how it’s used,“Firms are pretty open about using AI to streamline operations, and so a natural response is to interrogate what those tools can actually do and the power dynamics that surround their use,” said Sarah Fox, director of Tech Solidarity Lab at Carnegie Mellon University,Fox said she was skeptical when firms say they are deploying AI within their companies to improve productivity and efficiency and to help workers be better at their jobs,“Actually that obscures larger changes to labor dynamics,” and reduces workers’ autonomy rather than empowering them, she said,
Reeves arrives at IMF with little leeway to prove its UK downgrade wrong
The Iran war is bad news for the global economy. But for some countries, the unfolding conflict is having a bigger impact than for others. The International Monetary Fund’s verdict is that Britain is the G7’s biggest loser.Amid the rising damage from the Middle East war, the Washington-based fund warned UK economic growth rate would be 0.5 percentage points lower this year than it had predicted back in January – the biggest downgrade among the club of wealthy nations
BP’s new boss to overhaul structure after retreat from green strategy
BP’s new boss has set out plans to reinstate the company structure the fossil fuel supermajor ditched six years ago as part of its failed attempt to reorganise the business to pursue a green agenda.Meg O’Neill told staff that the 117-year-old company would return to a “simpler, stronger” two-business arrangement including an upstream oil and gas production unit and a downstream business focused on refining and distributing fuels and retail activities.“In service of becoming a simpler, stronger, more valuable BP, we intend to build an organisation with a clear upstream and downstream,” O’Neill said.The planned overhaul is the latest step in dismantling the legacy of former chief executive Bernard Looney who in 2020 restructured BP to include a gas and low-carbon energy division as part of a wide-ranging mission to “reimagine” BP as a green energy company.The green agenda raised concerns among BP’s investor base, and made the company a target of activist investor Elliott Management, which called for BP to return its focus to fossil fuels and simplify its structure
AI companies make powerful tech – but they’re also savvy marketers
Hello, and welcome to TechScape. I’m your host, Blake Montgomery, the Guardian’s US tech editor, writing to you from my happy village in Pokopia.Artificial intelligence companies make powerful products. They also make outlandish claims.Last week, Anthropic released Claude Mythos, an AI model focused on cybersecurity, which has inspired widespread thrill and panic over how capable it is said to be
Don’t make Marshal Foch’s mistake on AI | Letters
Emma Brockes’ article struck a chord (It’s finally happened: I’m now worried about AI. And consulting ChatGPT did nothing to allay my fears, 8 April). I am reading Marc Bloch’s Strange Defeat, in which the eminent French historian and soon-to-be-executed resistance worker gives a first-hand account of the collapse of the French army in 1940. He attributes the debacle at least in part to a failure of imagination on the part of the French general staff, who were incapable of grasping that technology, and war, had fundamentally changed since 1918.Brockes’ article suggests that we, and our leaders, are suffering from the same inability to understand that a technology which is currently amusingly alarming will develop in less amusing ways – the future Marshal Ferdinand Foch had, according to Bloch, earlier dismissed aircraft as being a toy for hobbyists and not of any military interest
Nicky Henderson on Constitution Hill and the yips: ‘The best jumper you’ll ever see and he lost it’
The venerated trainer could not find a guru in the world to cure one of the greatest hurdlers in history but a surprise switch to the Flat promises a career swansongNicky Henderson is 75 years old and, after almost half a century of training horses, he has seen everything in the strange and compelling world of racing. But the extraordinary and still evolving story of his great old horse Constitution Hill makes even Henderson pause in his study. It’s a sunlit afternoon in Lambourn and we’ve just left the mighty but complex horse in his stable.Standing next to Henderson for a photoshoot, Constitution Hill had been typically calm. He then took a slow walk outside before, having waited patiently for lunch, the horse ambled inside for a good feed
The Breakdown | Will Bath or anyone else stop the Bordeaux Bègles juggernaut in Europe?
Last week Northampton’s director of rugby, Phil Dowson, made an interesting comparison between boxing and rugby. He suggested there was a decent chance his side’s Champions Cup quarter-final against Bath would prove good viewing because of the clubs’ contrasting philosophies around how best to play the game. “Styles make fights” is a familiar ring mantra and the same is increasingly true in top-level rugby.On the one hand you had Northampton, all razor-sharp angles and dextrous hands. On the other was Bath, renowned for their knack of wearing their rivals down and then picking them off in the closing stages
Ben Stokes plays down talk of McCullum disagreement but plans ‘different’ path to success
Boss of the Bronx: the turbulent reign of George Steinbrenner, baseball’s ultimate showman
The Masters, the Premier League run-in, the National: is there a better sporting month than April? | Sean Ingle
Azzi Fudd taken first in WNBA draft by Dallas Wings in UConn reunion with Paige Bueckers
WNBA draft: Azzi Fudd goes No 1, UCLA smash record and Flau’jae Johnson traded – as it happened
‘Carelessly squandered’: Wisden scolds England’s tumultuous Ashes tour