The new global study, in partnership with The Upwork Research Institute, interviewed 2,500 global C-suite executives, full-time employees and freelancers. Results show that the optimistic expectations about AI’s impact are not aligning with the reality faced by many employees. The study identifies a disconnect between the high expectations of managers and the actual experiences of employees using AI.

Despite 96% of C-suite executives expecting AI to boost productivity, the study reveals that, 77% of employees using AI say it has added to their workload and created challenges in achieving the expected productivity gains. Not only is AI increasing the workloads of full-time employees, it’s hampering productivity and contributing to employee burnout.

  • themurphy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    Same, I’ve automated alot of my tasks with AI. No way 77% is “hampered” by it.

    • Hackworth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I dunno, mishandling of AI can be worse than avoiding it entirely. There’s a middle manager here that runs everything her direct-report copywriter sends through ChatGPT, then sends the response back as a revision. She doesn’t add any context to the prompt, say who the audience is, or use the custom GPT that I made and shared. That copywriter is definitely hampered, but it’s not by AI, really, just run-of-the-mill manager PEBKAC.

      • Hackworth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Voiceover recording, noise reduction, rotoscoping, motion tracking, matte painting, transcription - and there’s a clear path forward to automate rough cuts and integrate all that with digital asset management. I used to do all of those things manually/practically.

        e: I imagine the downvotes coming from the same people that 20 years ago told me digital video would never match the artistry of film.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          imagine the downvotes coming from the same people that 20 years ago told me digital video would never match the artistry of film.

          They’re right IMO. Practical effects still look and age better than (IMO very obvious) digital effects. Oh and digital deaging IMO looks like crap.

          But, this will always remain an opinion battle anyway, because quantifying “artistry” is in and of itself a fool’s errand.

          • Hackworth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Digital video, not digital effects - I mean the guys I went to film school with that refused to touch digital videography.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      A lot of people are keen to hear that AI is bad, though, so the clicks go through on articles like this anyway.