AI, once heralded as the ultimate shortcut to efficiency and innovation, is now increasingly slowing down workflows, demanding more human input and costing companies significant time and money. Overreliance on AI in the workplace has led to what Harvard Business Review calls “workslop” — AI-generated content that masquerades as quality work but requires extensive human correction. Just as companies rushed to adopt AI, many are now reconsidering the real cost of automation.

The workslop epidemic. Recent HBR research reveals the scope of this problem: 40% of full-time US employees encountered workslop just in the past month. Of all workplace content, a staggering 15.4% qualifies as workslop. This phenomenon transcends hierarchy — 18% of managers are contributing to the problem, with subpar AI content flowing both up and down organizational ladders.

Beyond wasted time: The human cost. Workslop creates more than inefficiency — it breeds workplace tension. Recipients must carefully navigate how to respond to clearly AI-generated content, especially when it comes from senior colleagues. The emotional toll is considerable: 53% of survey participants reported feeling annoyed by the subpar output, 38% felt confused, and 22% were offended by receiving it.

Eroding trust and collaboration: The relational damage runs deeper than frustration. Using AI-generated work signals a lack of effort and damages professional relationships. Colleagues who regularly send workslop are perceived as less creative, reliable, and capable. The numbers are telling: 42% of employees consider coworkers who send poor work as less trustworthy, while 37% question their intelligence. This loss of trust reduces the likelihood of future collaboration and can lead to formal complaints.

The economic impact is substantial. Cleaning up AI workslop consumes an average of two hours per workday, translating to a hidden monthly cost of USD 186 per employee. For organizations with 10k employees, this inefficiency amounts to USD 9 mn annually. Ironically, many companies now hire additional human workers specifically to review and correct AI output — often costing more than the AI tools themselves.

Although generative AI is always prone to producing imperfect work, much of the misuse can be attributed to how we implement and integrate it into our workflows. HBR recommends that leaders develop more strategic AI policies and help employees use these tools more thoughtfully. The key insight remains the same: human oversight is vital when working with evolving technologies. Instead of abandoning AI altogether, organizations must strike a balance — harnessing AI’s capabilities while maintaining the human judgment necessary to ensure quality output.

Tags: