Social Evaluation of GenAI Use in the Workplace: Colleagues’ Perceptions of Competence, Diligence and Innovativeness

Topic

This master's thesis examines how the use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in the workplace influences colleagues' perceptions of employees. In particular, it focuses on three key perceptions: competence, diligence and innovativeness. The study explores how colleagues interpret AI-assisted work during everyday interactions and which factors shape these evaluations, including task type, visible human contribution, disclosure and the organizational context in which AI use takes place.

Relevance 

GenAI is increasingly becoming part of everyday work, but its social consequences in organizations are still not fully understood. For practitioners, this is important because successful AI adoption depends not only on technical performance, but also on how AI use is perceived by colleagues and teams. If AI-assisted work is interpreted negatively, employees may hesitate to use or disclose GenAI. Understanding these perceptions can help organizations reduce uncertainty, encourage responsible use and develop guidelines that promote both effective GenAI adoption and social acceptance.

Results

The results show that colleagues interpreted GenAI use differently depending on the situation. AI use was viewed more critically when it seemed to replace independent thinking, personal effort or critical review, leading to more negative perceptions of competence and diligence. However, when employees remained visibly involved by reviewing, adapting and taking responsibility for AI-assisted outputs, GenAI use was more likely to be seen as responsible, legitimate, competent and diligent. Innovativeness showed the most positive pattern, as AI users were often perceived as open to change, technologically curious and willing to experiment with new ways of working.

Implications for practitioners

• Encourage employees to critically review, adapt and contextualize AI-generated outputs rather than using them without reflection. 
• Establish clear guidelines on appropriate GenAI use, especially regarding data protection and sensitive information.
• Create a safe context for disclosure so that employees can communicate AI-assisted work without fear of automatic negative judgment.
• Include ethical awareness, critical thinking and accountability in AI training, not only technical skills.
• Support managers in setting team norms that promote legitimate, transparent and responsible GenAI use.

Methods

The study used an exploratory qualitative research design based on 12 semi-structured interviews with employees from insurance, banking, public administration and higher education. Participants included both employees who actively used GenAI tools such as ChatGPT and those with limited or no direct experience. The interviews examined how GenAI use influenced perceptions of competence, diligence and innovativeness, including the role of visibility, disclosure, organizational context and future expectations. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s framework, supported by Taguette. The analysis generated eight overarching themes that structured the findings.