Blog - Tag: botsitting

AI ‘Botsitting’ Is Costing Employees Hours

Artificial intelligence is supposed to save employees time by taking mundane tasks off their plates and helping them work more efficiently. But a new study suggests workers are spending nearly as much time supervising AI as they spend getting useful work out of it.

A report from workplace AI company Glean found that employees spend 37% of their AI-related time “botsitting” — checking AI’s output, correcting errors, rerunning prompts and providing missing context. That compares with 36% of their AI time spent using the technology to produce work.

In practical terms, for every hour employees spend getting usable work from AI, they spend roughly another hour dealing with its shortcomings, the study concludes. For employers investing heavily in AI, that hidden labor may complicate the technology’s promised return on investment.

Employers may need to reconsider how extensively they integrate AI into their operations if employees spend an inordinate amount of time achieving results similar to those they produced without it.

The human cost of AI

Glean defines botsitting as the work required to make AI usable, including supplying missing context, reviewing its output, debugging mistakes, rerunning prompts and cleaning up answers that sound convincing but are wrong.

The company surveyed 6,000 digital workers and found that 87% use AI at work. About three-quarters said the technology makes them more productive, estimating that they save about 11 hours a week.

However, just 13% said AI has improved their organization’s overall performance. One possible reason for this disconnect is the amount of human oversight the technology requires. According to the report:

• Workers spend an average of 6.4 hours a week botsitting.
• Employees spend more than a quarter of their AI-related time learning how to use the technology and building AI agents.

Employers should therefore be cautious about counting every hour theoretically saved through AI as a genuine productivity gain. If an employee uses AI to complete a task faster but then has to verify facts, correct errors and repeatedly refine the output, some of the time saved is lost.

An invisible workload

Botsitting can also create an HR challenge because much of the work may go unnoticed.

Employees are often expected to incorporate AI into their jobs without having other responsibilities reduced. As a result, reviewing AI-generated output can become an added responsibility rather than a replacement for other work.

Glean found that employees who spend more time refining AI output are more likely to report feeling exhausted by the process. Workers who spend the most time botsitting are also significantly more likely to be looking for another job.

For managers and HR departments, these findings raise questions about workload, burnout and whether employees are receiving enough training and support.

Making AI work for employees

Employers should consider the human labor required when calculating the costs and benefits of AI. Simply purchasing AI tools and encouraging employees to use them may not deliver the expected productivity gains.

Organizations can start by identifying which tasks AI handles reliably and which require substantial human review. Managers should also track how much time employees spend correcting AI output rather than assume it is saving time.

Training is just as important. Employees need guidance on which tools to use, how to write effective prompts, what information can safely be entered into AI systems and when AI output requires additional verification.

Most importantly, businesses may want to view AI as a tool that supports employees rather than one that operates independently. Human judgment remains essential.