AI has quickly become the defining productivity narrative of modern business. It promises near-instant document generation and the automation of repetitive tasks, freeing employees to focus on more strategic work. The proposition is do more, faster, with less effort.
This narrative has been reinforced by a steady stream of headlines about AI transforming industries, from legal firms using generative AI to draft contracts in seconds, to global organizations rolling out copilots across their workforce.
The expectation is productivity at scale. But the reality inside organizations is more complex.
Our latest research into the State of Document Intelligence reveals a growing disconnect between perception and practice.
While 89% of executives believe AI is boosting productivity, once the time required to verify and correct outputs is factored in, the net gain falls to just 16 minutes per week. For end users, the picture is even more stark. They are, on average, losing 14 minutes each week.
This gap highlights the emergence of a new dynamic in the workplace; what we call the verification economy.
Uneven gains and shifting workloads
AI is undoubtedly accelerating content creation. Executives report saving 4.6 hours per week, while end users estimate 3.6 hours through AI tools.
However, these gains are offset by the time required to review outputs. Executives spend an average of 4 hours and 20 minutes per week validating AI-generated content, while end users spend 3 hours and 50 minutes doing the same.
Rather than eliminating work, AI is redistributing it. What appears as efficiency at the start of a workflow often reappears as friction at the end.
This is already visible in practice. Lawyers using AI tools to draft case summaries report spending as much time checking citations as they once did writing them. Developers using code assistants often need to debug or rework outputs before they can be deployed.
The hidden cost is trust
Trust sits at the center of this shift. AI systems can produce fluent, convincing outputs, but not always accurate ones. As a result, organizations cannot rely on them without human oversight, particularly in document-heavy environments where precision and accountability are critical.
High-profile examples of “hallucinations” - from fabricated legal citations to incorrect financial summaries - have reinforced this risk. In environments where accuracy matters, even small errors can carry significant consequences.
Confidence in AI outputs also varies sharply. While 60% of executives say they are highly confident in AI-generated content, only a third of end users feel the same.
This imbalance creates a structural risk. Leadership confidence in AI may outpace the safeguards and governance required to scale it responsibly.
The human factor
AI is changing how work is experienced.
Across organizations, both executives and employees report concern about over-reliance on AI and its potential impact on critical thinking. As AI takes on more cognitive tasks, there is a risk that human problem-solving skills may weaken over time.
At the same time, there is a clear awareness of AI’s limitations. Even frequent users recognize the importance of maintaining human judgement within AI-driven workflows.
In many organizations, employees are becoming editors rather than creators - reviewing AI-generated drafts, refining outputs, and making judgment calls about what can and cannot be trusted.
Rethinking productivity
Traditional return-on-investment (ROI) metrics are no longer sufficient to measure AI’s impact. Focusing only on time saved or cost reduction overlooks the full picture, especially when verification time is increasing. As a result, organizations are turning to Return on Employee (ROE) as a more meaningful framework.
ROE captures not just productivity, but also employee confidence, capability, work quality, and overall experience. Today, 93% of organizations track some form of ROE, reflecting a shift toward more human-centric measures of value.
Designing for the verification economy
If verification is now a core part of work, workflows must evolve to support it.
This means embedding validation directly into processes, rather than treating it as an afterthought. It also requires better systems and tools that provide visibility into outputs and make it easier for humans to review and intervene where needed.
Organizations also need to move beyond generic AI deployments and focus on domain-specific use cases where accuracy and control are built in from the start.
In document-centric workflows, this means ensuring outputs are traceable and easy to validate, reducing friction without compromising trust.
What’s next?
AI is maturing. The first phase of adoption focused on speed and automation. The next phase will be defined by trust and how well AI fits into real-world workflows.
As organizations move beyond experimentation and into scaled deployment, the limitations of AI are becoming clearer. The focus is shifting from what AI can generate to how reliably it can be used in day-to-day work.
Leaders expect AI use to continue rising rapidly. But its long-term value will depend on how effectively it reduces validation time and supports human decision-making.
The organizations that recognize the rise of the verification economy will be best positioned to unlock AI’s true value.
Because in the end, productivity is not just about doing things faster. It’s about doing them right and knowing when you can trust the result without having to check it twice.
We've featured the best business plan software.
This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.
The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit
