Artificial Intelligence, Productivity, and the Workforce: Evidence from Corporate Executives

Paper · Source
AI at Work

Source: NBER WP 34984 (Baslandze, Graham, Meyer, Waddell et al.) · 2026-03

We use novel data from a survey of nearly 750 corporate executives to study the effects of artificial intelligence (AI) on productivity and the workforce. We document substantial heterogeneity in AI adoption across firms, with more than half having already invested, though many smaller firms are only beginning to do so. Labor productivity gains are positive, vary across sectors, and are expected to strengthen in 2026, with the largest effects concentrated in high-skill services and finance. These gains are not primarily driven by firms' capital deepening but instead reflect increases in revenue-based total factor productivity, closely associated with innovation-and demand-oriented channels. We document a productivity paradox, in which perceived productivity gains are larger than measured productivity gains, likely reflecting a delay in revenue realizations. In labor markets, we find little evidence of near-term aggregate employment declines due to AI, though larger companies anticipate AI-driven workforce reductions, while smaller firms expect modest gains. We also find evidence of compositional reallocation of labor both within and across firms, with routine clerical roles declining and a relative demand for skilled technical roles increasing. We develop an index that ranks job functions most negatively affected by AI.

Lines of inquiry this paper opens 24

Research framings built by reading the notes related to this paper — the questions it feeds into.

Can AI research automation sustain progress through accelerating feedback loops? Does AI-assisted work increase total productivity or just shift time? How do AI-exposed occupations change in employment, wages, and skills? How does AI adoption reshape collaboration patterns in knowledge work? Does AI deployment reduce or exacerbate workplace inequality and income instability? How do real-world evaluations reveal AI capabilities that benchmarks hide? How do educators verify student capability when AI can produce indistinguishable work? Does AI assistance help or harm professional skill development?