A third of employees are quietly sabotaging workplace AI

Nearly one in three employees are undermining their organisation’s use of generative AI, according to a new report. A survey by Writer and Workplace Intelligence suggests that 31 percent of staff admitted to behaviour that could be classed as sabotage. of workplace AI. This includes entering sensitive company information into unapproved tools, using software not sanctioned by employers, or failing to report security breaches. Around one in ten said they had gone further, deliberately lowering the quality of their work, tampering with performance metrics, or refusing to use AI altogether.

Younger staff were more likely to resist. Forty-one percent of Millennials and Generation Z workers acknowledged undermining AI initiatives, compared with 23 percent of older employees. Analysts say some of this may reflect legitimate concerns over quality or data security, but the scale of deliberate resistance highlights the cultural challenges facing employers.

The report also points to the drivers behind the backlash. A third of respondents said AI made their work feel less creative or valuable, while 28 percent worried it could replace them. A further 28 percent criticised the quality or security of the tools being rolled out.

The findings come as more organisations integrate generative AI into daily operations. Two-thirds of executives surveyed said adoption was creating internal tension, and more than four in ten believed it was already damaging cohesion.

For employers, the study underlines that the biggest barrier to adoption may not be technical at all, but human. Building trust, addressing fears, and involving staff in implementation could prove as important as the technology itself.

A data analyst working in the retail sector said he has directly seen acts of AI pushback. “Although “outright sabotage is rare, I’ve observed more subtle forms of pushback, such as teams underutilizing AI features, reverting to manual processes, or selectively ignoring AI-generated recommendations without clear justification,” he said. “In some cases, it’s rooted in fear: Employees worry that increased automation will reduce their role or make their expertise less valued,” the data analyst says. But “what appears to be resistance is actually a cry for inclusion in the change process. People want to understand how AI supports their work, not just that it’s being imposed on them.”