AI disproportionately benefits top performers, who use it to amplify their output significantly. This creates a widening skills and productivity gap, leading to workplace tension as "A-players" can increasingly perform tasks previously done by their less-motivated colleagues, which could cause resentment and organizational challenges.
Related Insights
The best barometer for AI's enterprise value is not replacing the bottom 5% of workers. A better goal is empowering most employees to become 10x more productive. This reframes the AI conversation from a cost-cutting tool to a massive value-creation engine through human-AI partnership.
While AI-native, new graduates often lack the business experience and strategic context to effectively manage AI tools. Companies will instead prioritize senior leaders with high AI literacy who can achieve massive productivity gains, creating a challenging job market for recent graduates and a leaner organizational structure.
The initial experience of using a powerful AI tool is one of immense personal empowerment. This feeling is quickly tempered by the realization that this capability is now universally accessible, effectively devaluing the specialized skill and diluting the individual's competitive advantage.
While many believe AI will primarily help average performers become great, LinkedIn's experience shows the opposite. Their top talent were the first and most effective adopters of new AI tools, using them to become even more productive. This suggests AI may amplify existing talent disparities.
AI reverses the long-standing trend of professional hyper-specialization. By providing instant access to specialist knowledge (e.g., coding in an unfamiliar language), AI tools empower individuals to operate as effective generalists. This allows small, agile teams to achieve more without hiring a dedicated expert for every function.
Research highlights "work slop": AI output that appears polished but lacks human context. This forces coworkers to spend significant time fixing it, effectively offloading cognitive labor and damaging perceptions of the sender's capability and trustworthiness.
Experience alone no longer determines engineering productivity. An engineer's value is now a function of their experience plus their fluency with AI tools. Experienced coders who haven't adapted are now less valuable than AI-native recent graduates, who are in high demand.
Data on AI tool adoption among engineers is conflicting. One A/B test showed that the highest-performing senior engineers gained the biggest productivity boost. However, other companies report that opinionated senior engineers are the most resistant to using AI tools, viewing their output as subpar.
An employee using AI to do 8 hours of work in 4 benefits personally by gaining free time. The company (the principal) sees no productivity gain unless that employee produces more. This misalignment reveals the core challenge of translating individual AI efficiency into corporate-level growth.
The employees who discover clever AI shortcuts to be 'lazy' are your biggest innovation assets. Instead of letting them hide their methods, companies should find them, make them heroes, and systematically scale their bottom-up productivity hacks across the organization.