Employees Are Actively Sabotaging AI Efforts. Here’s Why
Across the U.S., a growing number of employees are pushing back against the integration of Artificial Intelligence in their jobs.
According to a new study by the generative AI platform Writer, 31% of employees—and a significantly higher 41% of Gen Z workers—admit to actively “sabotaging” their company’s AI strategy by refusing to use AI tools and applications. As a consequence, approximately two-thirds of executives report that Generative AI adoption has led to tension and division within their organizations, with 42% of executives stating it is “tearing their company apart.”
“There’s active resistance where it’s like, ‘I really don’t believe in this strategy whatsoever, and I’m either going to completely ignore it, or do my own thing,’” explains Kevin Chung, Writer’s chief strategy officer. “And the passive resistance is often, ‘I’ll give it a try, but I’m not going to put my hand up and say here’s how to improve it. I don’t want to waste my time and effort on it.’”
Shifting Concerns, Same Outcome
As AI technology matures, the primary concerns surrounding AI adoption have evolved, but the overall outcome remains the same.
“Two years ago, nine times out of 10, it was about ‘why am I training the robot that’s going to take my job away from me?’” Chung says. “Today, maybe one or two out of ten concerns I hear are about job displacement.”
Instead, he notes that workers are avoiding the technology because they’re disappointed in its results.
“Now that they’ve had a chance to play with it, [many employees] are quite disappointed in the results they’ve seen, and that’s why they are disillusioned by it.”
This observation aligns with a 2023 survey of 1,100 executives and managers. Conducted by Leadership IQ, it found that only 10% of respondents were “excited” about AI technology, and another 35% were “cautiously optimistic.” The remaining 55% were labeled “in denial,” “resistant,” “reluctant” or “indifferent.”
Mark Murphy, the founder and CEO of Leadership IQ, says the firm’s follow-up study (to be published next month) discovered similar findings.
“The numbers [of those who are “excited” or “cautiously optimistic”] are looking mildly better, but not drastically. There was still a shocking amount of denial,” he says. We haven’t made a dent in [increasing the proportion on] the intermediate and advanced side of things. We’ve just shifted a lot of people from ‘no experience’ to ‘beginner.’”
Murphy has also observed that the prevailing reasons for resistance have evolved, shifting from fear to disappointment as more American workers begin using AI tools.
“We’re still playing with it as a one-off tool—something we depart from our normal job and play with for a few minutes, have it answer a question or two, rather than fully integrating it into our work,” Murphy says. “We’re still in that early stage of AI use.”
Strained Relationships
Murphy suggests that this push for AI adoption has coincided with a period of strained relationships between workers and their employers, potentially complicating AI implementation.
“A potential wrinkle in this right now is that there is a little more of an adversarial dynamic between management and frontline employees,” he says. “You can see this with return-to-office initiatives, for example, and I think this is sort of a harbinger of things to come with AI.”
Much like some employers have taken a strong stance on the return to the office, some are also applying a similar approach to AI adoption. This could explain some of the elevated rates of disengagement and active resistance.
“There was a little bit less empathy for what employees might be going through,” Murphy says of return-to-office mandates. “My guess, based on everything else we’ve seen, is that a similar mindset will be adopted—and already is, in some cases, being adopted—when it comes to AI.”
Finding the Right Approach
Murphy advises employers looking to implement AI to emphasize the benefits for individual employees, as well as for the broader organization.
“The litmus test is, ‘what sort of training are you providing such that my AI skills are not just sufficient to implement your particular AI, but take me a level up?’”
“If it feels like a black box that’s sprung on the frontline worker, they probably won’t trust it,” adds Sarah Elk, Bain & Company’s AI, insights and solutions practice leader for the Americas. “You’ll get results far faster if you take the time up front to engage in a thoughtful process with the people who will be impacted.”
Elk says organizations often face challenges when they focus on the technology rather than the people who will use it, and ultimately determine its success.
“If I’m just unleashing [an AI tool] to my entire population without any thought as to how that is helping them or helping the company, I shouldn’t expect dramatic outcomes,” she says. “I believe in broad access. But that has to be paired with leadership and sponsorship, top-down, around areas of value that we’re driving towards.”
