3w ago

31% of employees are ‘sabotaging’ your corporate AI strategy!

pivot-to-ai.com 31% of employees are ‘sabotaging’ your corporate AI strategy!

Here’s a CIO Magazine headline: “31% of employees are ‘sabotaging’ your gen AI strategy”! [CIO] This claim comes from a Writer AI survey. Writer surveyed 800 C-level executives and 800 employees in…

not enough AI? right to jail. too much AI? believe it or not, also jail

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Abx6iekuN18&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20250831-31-of-employees-sabotaging-corporate-ai-strategy - podcast

You're viewing a single thread.

20 comments

Refusing to use AI tools or output. Sabotage!
Definitely guilty of this. Refused to use AI generated output when it was clearly hallucinated BS from start to finish (repeatedly!).
I work in the field of law/accounting/compliance, btw.
- Maybe it's also considered sabotage if people (like me) try prompting the AI with about 5 to 10 different questions they are knowledgeable about, get wrong (but smart-sounding) answers every time (despite clearly worded prompts) and then refuse to continue trying. I guess it's expected to try and try again with different questions until one correct answer comes out and then use that one to "evangelize" about the virtues of AI.
  
  This is how I tested too. It failed. Why would I believe it on anything else?
- Even better to do the correspondence in written.
  That way you can show others (and hope that someone cares) what you rejected and what they were trying to push.
  
  This may only be a problem if the people in charge don't understand why it's wrong. "But it sounds correct!" etc.
  
  Not a problem.
  If it manages to stay in history, hopefully someone after the next dark ages will read it and give you vindication.
- You can definately ask ai for more jargon and add information about irrelevant details to make it practically unreadable. Pass this through the llm to add more vocabulary, deep fry it and sent it to management.

20 comments