Employees back AI but say leaders lack clear direction

Culture Amp has published new benchmark data showing a gap between employers encouraging staff to use artificial intelligence and leaders explaining its purpose. The survey found 85% of employees are encouraged to experiment with AI, while 58% say leadership has clearly linked it to company goals.

The findings are based on surveys conducted through the company's platform across 292 organisations, representing about 112,000 employees and 343,000 individual responses collected over the 12 months to July 2026.

The data points to a disconnect between adoption and direction in workplaces that are already relatively engaged with AI. Employees reported strong encouragement to try AI tools, but the measure covering leadership's explanation of how AI will be used to reach company goals recorded the lowest score in the benchmark.

Manager-level guidance also appeared limited. Only 60% of employees said their manager shares examples of how AI can support their goals or workflows.

Productivity claims

Culture Amp's benchmark found 71% of employees said AI tools help them feel more productive. Among the heaviest users, that figure rose to 93%.

At the same time, reported workload changed little across usage groups. Some 72% of power users said their workload was reasonable for their role, compared with 69% of non-users.

The contrast suggests that while employees may feel AI improves efficiency, that has not yet translated into noticeably lighter workloads. The data also showed a difference in motivation between workers who use AI heavily and those who do not. Seventy-two per cent of the heaviest AI users said their organisation motivates them to go beyond what they would in a similar role elsewhere, compared with 57% of non-users.

One interpretation in the findings is that businesses have yet to decide what should be removed from employees' workloads as AI takes over some tasks. That question sits alongside mounting investment in workplace AI tools and efforts by management teams to show returns from those programmes.

"Seven in ten employees say AI is making them more productive. Most executive teams would read that as a return on investment," said Amy Lavoie, Vice President of People Science at Culture Amp.

"But I'd read it as an unanswered question, because workload scores remain steady. The organisations that see a genuine return on AI over the next 12 months won't be the ones with the highest adoption rates. They'll be the ones that decided, explicitly, what they were going to stop doing with the time it gave back," Lavoie said.

Leadership gap

The research indicates that employees are not resisting AI in principle. The highest-scoring item in the benchmark was understanding of the risks associated with using AI at work, at 86% overall. That rose from 67% among non-users to 95% among power users.

Against that backdrop, Culture Amp argued that the central issue has shifted from staff acceptance of AI to the quality of guidance from leadership teams. The benchmark described a 27-point gap between employees saying they are encouraged to explore AI and those saying leaders have clearly explained where the company is headed.

"The workforce is telling us something important," said Amy Lavoie, Vice President of People Science at Culture Amp.

"Employees are telling us they understand the risks, they are using the tools, and they feel more productive. That is not a workforce resisting change. That is a workforce that has done its part and is waiting on leadership to do theirs."

Career uncertainty

The benchmark also highlighted a separate shift in how employees view career prospects inside their organisations. Awareness of internal career opportunities fell by 10 percentage points from July 2025, which Culture Amp described as the biggest single-year movement in the data.

That decline did not come with a drop in satisfaction over career development. The measure for career development remained at 66%, where it has held since 2021.

The figures suggest employees are not necessarily more dissatisfied with the development support they receive, but are less certain about the roles and progression routes available to them. In companies grappling with how AI may change jobs, that uncertainty could become a broader retention issue, particularly if staff believe organisational change is moving faster than leaders can explain it.

Culture Amp said the career opportunity and career progress data came from its broader engagement benchmark rather than solely from the AI survey sample. It added that organisations choosing to run the AI survey are likely to be ahead of the wider market in adoption, meaning the results reflect AI-engaged employers rather than all workplaces.

"Leaders are being asked to explain a future none of us can see clearly yet. We do not know with certainty which roles AI reshapes, which skills hold their value, or what a career path looks like three years out," said Amy Lavoie, Vice President of People Science at Culture Amp.

"As a result, leaders may go quiet, because saying nothing feels safer than saying something that turns out to be wrong. The most useful thing a leader can do right now is admit the plan is unfinished, and then keep talking anyway. Certainty is not what employees need right now. Candour is," Lavoie said.