As you can read for a few years now, AI has been presented with the recurring phrase of “freeing workers from the most tedious tasks.” However, the statement falls apart because employees have to spend time correcting the AI. This is one of the data extracted from Workday’s latest global report, titled “Beyond productivity: measuring the real value of AI”in which it is ensured that the implementation of generic tools is generating unexpected “friction.” The problem is that the benefit obtained is diluted when professionals must correct AI on a recurring basis due to errors or lack of precision.
Correct AI in Spain
The study highlights that the phenomenon is especially acute in our country and in the countries around us where it is true that 74% of workers claim to feel more productive, saving between 1 and 3 hours per week on their tasks. However, that time is quickly reinvested in validation processes, having to dedicate at least 1 hour of that time to verify the information provided by the AI.
According to the report, this habit of correct AI It is not optional since for many workers, verifying the different artificial intelligences has become an extension of their day. When analyzing the EMEA region, it is observed that 40% of workers already assume that they must correct AI to ensure that reports or communications have the quality standard required by their companies. In Spain, that figure stands at 42%.
The burden falls on the youngest profiles
One of the most striking data of the study is the profile of the worker who assumes this task. Despite being digital natives, employees between 25 and 34 years old are those who invest the most time in correct AI. 46% of the workers who dedicate the most hours to this work belong to this age group, which shows that being an expert in technology does not exempt the need to supervise it.
Even the most optimistic users, those who use these tools daily, admit the burden they place. correct AI. In fact, 77% of these profiles confess that they review the work generated by the machine with the same attention—or even more—than that of a human colleague.
Causes of friction: isolated tools
As Adolfo Pellicer, general director of Workday, explained in a meeting with the specialized press to present the study, “many current solutions transfer the responsibility of validating each response to the user. This structure forces the professional to correct AI constantly instead of relying on an integrated workflow. The goal should be for the system to assume complexity so that the human does not have to correct AI in every interaction, because, if not, we are going to have workers who are going to act as full-time AI auditors.”
The cost of not evolving roles
The report identifies three major obstacles that chronicle the need for correct AI:
- Training gap: Only 37% of workers who spend their days trying correct AI They have received specific training to improve interaction with these tools.
- Obsolete structures: 89% of companies have not updated job functions. Employees try to use advanced technology in old processes, which forces them to correct AI so that the result fits into outdated molds.
- Extra workload: Instead of using the time saved for strategic thinking, many companies increase tasks, leaving employees alone to face the challenge of correct AI while trying to meet new goals.
Success is not in the tool, but in what is done with the freed time. The report concludes that investing in human capacity development is the fastest way to reduce the need for correct AI. Those organizations that teach their teams to use technology effectively manage to optimize results and transform that “hour of correction” into real and sustainable value for the business. And as Pellicer explained, “extracting the real value of AI requires investing in the workforce. Only through training and access to accurate tools will employees be able to lead this transition and ensure that technology performs at its highest level.”
