This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Countless employees across the country are experimenting with artificial intelligence (AI) to streamline workflows and increase productivity. Yet many are keeping these solutions to themselves.
According to a study by two researchers at the USC Marshall School of Business, many workers are reluctant to disclose how they've incorporated AI into their work. Eric Anicich, associate professor of management and organization, and Jeslyn Brouwers, a Marshall Ph.D. student, surveyed 604 U.S.-based employees who reported using AI at work daily or multiple times per day. While four out of five respondents believe sharing their techniques would benefit their team, nearly one out of three withheld "AI-related knowledge, workflows, or techniques from coworkers or employers." Some employees' concerns centered on job loss and internal competition, but much of their hesitation stemmed from mistrust of their organization.
"What separated the sharers from the hoarders was trust in the organization," Anicich explained. "People in the bottom quarter on trust were about four times as likely to have withheld something as people in the top quarter. It boils down to psychological safety, which is about whether you feel comfortable sharing what you know without worrying you'll be ridiculed or punished for it." Although some companies have taken steps to encourage knowledge sharing, employees remain skeptical of how leadership would react to full disclosure.
The study points to three factors that contributed to this lack of trust. First, employees were concerned their reputations would be tarnished if they admitted to using the technology. Anicich says other research has validated their anxiety.
"Absent a clear signal that their organization values AI experimentation, withholding is the rational move—and a growing body of research suggests employees are right to worry," Anicich explained. "Indeed, research shows that learning that a person used AI can lead observers to attribute less competence, motivation, effort, creativity, authenticity, or trustworthiness to that person and, in some contexts, to discount the value of the resulting work." Second, respondents worried their supervisors would view their improved efficiency as an excuse to give them more work or even to make them a "spokesperson" for AI within the company. In interviews, Brouwers and Anicich heard from multiple CEOs who sought to ease these concerns while still rewarding transparency.
"In some of the CEO interviews, they highlighted that something really important for them was to validate the hesitation of [being the] spokesperson for AI from now on," Brouwers explained. "[They try to communicate:] We're not changing your whole job title." Finally, employees were anxious that demonstrating AI's ability to perform their job duties could show that the technology might eventually replace them. Discover the latest in science, tech, and space with over 100,000 subscribers who rely on Phys.org for daily insights. d research that matter—daily or weekly.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
