Because they’re not smart enough to realize it’s pro-AI propaganda put out by AI companies…
A new report published Tuesday from enterprise AI agent firm Writer and research firm Workplace Intelligence finds a significant share of employees are actively trying to sabotage their company’s AI rollout. The report—a survey of 2,400 knowledge workers across the U.S., the U.K., and Europe, including 1,200 C-suite executives—found 29% of employees admit to sabotaging their company’s AI strategy. That number jumps to 44% among Gen Z workers
They need an excuse for why it’s not working, so they’re blaming jr workers, knowing ceos will come to the conclusion “just fire more people”.
Even the way they’re phrasing this, makes it sound like the only reason an employee doesn’t like AI, is they’re a “hater” scared of losing their job.
Do people legitimately not understand any of this? It seems incredibly obvious but this is like the 20th article I’ve and I don’t why people keep spreading this shit
It’s not about looking for a scapegoat yet. Its about CEOs actually not understanding why it’s not working.
I have such a situation at my work. All the top management know ai only at a level where it seems everything is possible. It’s a beautiful level, I remember being at that level, so nice.
For a while I tried to explain where the limits are, but I was dismissed as a naysayer every time.
So I adapted and decided to kind of get back on that train officially, but route most of my work to where it makes sense.
currently going through this at my small company. the owners seem to think it’s great - one of them has been playing around with it creating various tools for the past couple years. to be fair, the last thing he’s been working on has actually been rather impressive. the other guy only just started using it and I think he’s in the honeymoon phase. still, it’s a bit worrying.
I’ve asked when I can get access to the same tools, and it hasn’t been rolled out to the teams yet. but from what I’ve seen, the actual use cases for us (consolidating standards documents, pulling out information from standards documents, creating spec sheets and requirements documents etc) it is not really worth it, since everything has to be validated anyways
from my perspective of not being able to use the same tools myself, it still seems like just a search engine to me. a better ctrl+f. which isn’t to say it’s a bad tool, though definitely an inefficient one.
I would be curious how they phrased the questionnaire and how it is being interpreted. Surely they didn’t have a question, “Are you trying to sabotage AI?” Must have been something more benign that was modified in meaning by the marketers.
People keep spreading this…
Because they’re not smart enough to realize it’s pro-AI propaganda put out by AI companies…
They need an excuse for why it’s not working, so they’re blaming jr workers, knowing ceos will come to the conclusion “just fire more people”.
Even the way they’re phrasing this, makes it sound like the only reason an employee doesn’t like AI, is they’re a “hater” scared of losing their job.
Do people legitimately not understand any of this? It seems incredibly obvious but this is like the 20th article I’ve and I don’t why people keep spreading this shit
Yes, this tendency is really dangerous in my opinion.
It’s not about looking for a scapegoat yet. Its about CEOs actually not understanding why it’s not working.
I have such a situation at my work. All the top management know ai only at a level where it seems everything is possible. It’s a beautiful level, I remember being at that level, so nice. For a while I tried to explain where the limits are, but I was dismissed as a naysayer every time. So I adapted and decided to kind of get back on that train officially, but route most of my work to where it makes sense.
Half the respondents are from the c-suite…
And the question asked wasn’t “are you doing this” it’s “do you believe people are doing this”.
I literally quoted it because I knew people still wouldn’t read the source, but here we are.
I didn’t read the article and am grateful for the context :D <3
currently going through this at my small company. the owners seem to think it’s great - one of them has been playing around with it creating various tools for the past couple years. to be fair, the last thing he’s been working on has actually been rather impressive. the other guy only just started using it and I think he’s in the honeymoon phase. still, it’s a bit worrying.
I’ve asked when I can get access to the same tools, and it hasn’t been rolled out to the teams yet. but from what I’ve seen, the actual use cases for us (consolidating standards documents, pulling out information from standards documents, creating spec sheets and requirements documents etc) it is not really worth it, since everything has to be validated anyways
from my perspective of not being able to use the same tools myself, it still seems like just a search engine to me. a better ctrl+f. which isn’t to say it’s a bad tool, though definitely an inefficient one.
I would be curious how they phrased the questionnaire and how it is being interpreted. Surely they didn’t have a question, “Are you trying to sabotage AI?” Must have been something more benign that was modified in meaning by the marketers.
Really?
Most people would have then follow the bread rumbs and checked?
Why did you care enough to type that out, when clicking two links to find the answer was so easy and you could have found out immediately?
When I click the link, I see one sentence, a video that doesn’t load, an ad, and a demand to subscribe.
Probably something like “Have you used AI tools to help develop efficiency at your job?”
And people say no, because they have no use for it, so it gets interperated as “sabotage”.
deleted by creator