Neue Gallup-Daten von mehr als 23.700 US-Arbeitnehmern zeichnen ein kompliziertes Bild.
50 % nutzen mittlerweile KI bei der Arbeit. Vor drei Jahren waren es 21 %.
Aber hier ist die Spannung:
- 65 % sagen, dass KI sie individuell produktiver gemacht hat
- Nur 10 % sagen, dass es die Arbeitsweise ihrer Organisation grundlegend verändert hat
- 18 % befürchten, dass ihre Arbeit innerhalb von fünf Jahren automatisiert wird
- Bei Unternehmen, die bereits KI eingeführt haben, steigt diese Zahl auf 23 %
Wir befinden uns also in dieser seltsamen mittleren Phase – breite Akzeptanz, echte individuelle Gewinne, aber noch keine Beweise für die systemische Transformation, die alle vorhergesagt haben.
Die Produktivitätsdaten auf Unternehmensebene (aus einer separaten NBER-Studie, die im Gallup-Bericht zitiert wird) zeigen, dass CEOs in den letzten drei Jahren nur minimale Auswirkungen auf die unternehmensweite Produktivität meldeten.
Einzelsiege. Flatline auf Unternehmensebene. Darunter wächst die Angst.
Quelle: https://www.gallup.com/workplace/704225/rising-adoption-spurs-workforce-changes.aspx
Wo befinden wir uns Ihrer Meinung nach in der tatsächlichen Akzeptanzkurve – in den frühen Innings oder in der Nähe des tatsächlichen Wendepunkts?
Half of America now uses AI at work – but only 1 in 10 says it's actually changed how work gets done
byu/MaJoR_-_007 inFuturology
14 Kommentare
If you’re using it at work, then literally, it changed how work gets done. That’s like a tautology.
Fundamentally this is how every sweeping technological change has occured in the workplace, from steam power and electrification to computerization.
There’s scattershot, inconsistent adoption across industries, firms, divisions of firms, and individual workers as everyone tries to figure out how this actually applies to their workflow, their project goals, their division, their industry, etc.
The vast majority of individual actions and systems won’t work out and will fall to the wayside, but the best and most effective systems will scale up and become the standard across numerous areas.
The first computers didn’t fundamentally transform how work was done, they replaced specific tasks in specific industries, then scaled, then spread, then scaled again.
Because most of them just use it to edit their email or summarize stuff. Not the core work of most people. Programming is the exception.
I’ve seen people use AI then edit 10% of it and say AI didn’t help at all.
# only 1 in 10 ADMIT it’s actually changed how work gets done
AI has greatly assisted me in my work but there’s still very much a human element needed in at least 90% if what I do
I highly doubt 50% use AI in the way you’re thinking. Polls are not very nuanced. Using grammerly is „using ai.“ Clicking copilot and asking a question is „using ai.“ There is probably <5% of America using AI how you think they are, in a maximally thoughtful way.
What I’m finding is that people had a baseline of „work“ from years ago that is being met but not exceeded. Maybe it was before covid, maybe longer. And for *those* people ai isn’t magically making less work but getting people back to that manageable baseline. Productivity didn’t increase in all cases it was just shuffled around due to layoffs or a refusal to hire over the years so it doesn’t feel like a gain or a win. Though it will be interesting to see what happens with the *“I automated myself out of a job“* crowd, many of whom were the first adopters who were *super* excited about generating prompts and now things like *“context engineering“* where they create repositories of prompts and tools to do their job. Eventually even a senior engineer isn’t seen as „necessary“ if the job only requires tweaking prompts and context files.
Half? Almost everyone at work uses it. Noticing how well everything is written now. Copilot in everyone’s Outlook is making emails and team meetings tedious LLM recaps now. Another deck made with Canva AI… cool.
No one wants to admit it either even with company policy being cool with it… What are the best use cases honestly I feel coding is the key area.
We’re right at the peak of one of the biggest tech bubbles of all time, with business idiots drinking the Flavor Aid of some of the worst flogs in history due to a total desperation on their behalf to prevent it from bursting.
You only have to see their reaction to the inevitable finding out part of their fucking around (the attacks on Altman last week) to see just how out of touch with reality they all are – nobody wants it, nobody likes it, and the more they try and force something they’re repeatedly claiming is going to end the world onto people the more events like that there will be.
We’re limited to using MS copilot which doesn’t hold a candle to Claude, Gemini, etc…I tried copilot to do some basic data manipulation in Excel and it failed terribly.
This is how most technological adoption works.
Slowly and then all at once.
First it’s copilot to edit your emails then it’s a full stack that you work with that’s plugged into internal corporate documentation (similar to Confluence Rovo)
I was able to get some pretty esoteric domain knowledge from a buried piece of documentation from 7 years ago using ai (we have one of the top 10 largest Confluence in the world) that I never would’ve found otherwise
Its just a glorified search engine for me at work. If I try to have it do anything too complicated it will sometimes just straight up lie
Some of it is just too early – my work for example, released a major update in January that impacts how folks are scheduled for engagements around the world. But two-three months worth of data is hardly enough time to say if it transforms how we work.
A lot of us are individually pursuing it because companies pushed out the requirement to use it without a strategy for how to use it to transform business. So charitably we could argue it helps individual employees save time with routine tasks like writing emails or managing calendars, but it’s hardly earth shattering work.
The one thing I think it has done is make a good quality substitute for voiceovers in the education we produce. We still write the entire script, but we have a reliable way to read it, without having to worry of employees leave, record badly, or having vocal tics that learners can be rude about in recording. Would I use it to narrate a book? No. But for micro learning under 30 minutes? Sure.
I think personally much of the hype around LLMs has overstated what they can do, unless you’re in certain fields. If pushed, I would say my most common use of it is de-angering email tone for office politics. And analyzing my ridiculous inbox to try and figure out what is urgent, what is five minute fixes, and what needs to be folderized for larger tasks.