AI was supposed to take work off your plate. Somehow, the plate got bigger.
A September 15 Journal of Accountancy report summarized a Korn Ferry survey of more than 16,000 workers across 11 markets. Sixty-three percent said AI had increased their efficiency. Fifty-two percent also said AI had increased the number of tasks expected in their role.
So yes, the tool may save time. The harder question is what we do with the time it saves.
That is where a lot of AI rollouts get sideways. A tool helps someone create a first draft much faster. That matters. Getting to the first draft 90% faster can be a real gift.
But the first draft is not the work. Not really.
The work is what happens next. You review it. You correct it. You reshape it so it actually sounds like you, or your team, or the story you are trying to tell. You make judgment calls. You add context. You decide what belongs, what does not, and what would be irresponsible to send into the world just because a machine made it sound polished.
That last 10% is where the human part lives.
The danger is that organizations see the faster first draft and immediately fill the space with more tasks. More reports. More updates. More decks. More messages. More “quick” requests, which are rarely quick for the person responsible for making them useful.
The survey cannot prove AI caused the heavier workloads. It is self-reported research from a consulting firm, and 62% of respondents said their workloads had risen significantly over the past two years. Restructuring, reduced staffing, and other changes matter too.
Still, the gap is worth paying attention to. Korn Ferry reported that 79% of CEOs saw improved efficiency from AI, compared with 51% of individual contributors. That makes sense. From the top, the output may look faster. From the desk where the work actually happens, it may feel like a new layer of review, explanation, updating, and maintenance.
I used to think the answer was a stop-doing list. I still think something has to stop. But the sharper question is this: how do we better allocate our time between tactics, strategy, and thinking?
Not on day one. People need to use the tool before they can honestly redesign the work around it. After 90 days, ask the team what changed. Where did AI speed up the tactical work? Where did it create new maintenance work? Where did people feel pressure to move faster instead of think better?
Then make the list.
What will we keep doing? What will we stop doing? What work needs a human because judgment matters? What time are we protecting for strategy, reflection, and better decisions?
If AI only helps people produce more without giving them room to think, we have not improved work. We have just made the hamster wheel more efficient. And nobody needed a smarter hamster wheel.
Dr. James Kelley is an AI strategist at Glean, author of The Crucible’s Gift, and creator of the AI Fluency Instrument. He writes about the human side of AI, work, and leadership.
Check your AI fluency: www.checkaifluency.com
Sources
Driving efficiency or driving workers toward burnout? How AI is being used
https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2026/sep/driving-efficiency-or-driving-workers-toward-burnout-how-ai-is-being-used/
Korn Ferry Workforce 2026 Report: Unlocking Growth Requires Rethinking How Work Gets Done
https://www.kornferry.com/about-us/press/korn-ferry-workforce-2026-report-unlocking-growth-requires-rethinking-how-work-gets-done