According to Financial Times News, a major new report highlights a massive disconnect in the corporate rush to adopt AI. A survey of 10,000 desk workers found that executive urgency to incorporate AI has skyrocketed, increasing seven times over just the last six months. However, two-thirds of the desk worker population are still not using the technology at all. The research, led by Slack’s Workforce Lab, identified five distinct employee “personas” regarding AI, from excited “maximalists” to guilty “underground” users who hide their usage. Furthermore, 43% of workers say they’ve received zero guidance from their leaders on how to use AI tools at work, even as CEOs invest in what one expert calls “Ferrari” AI systems.
The Trust Gap Is Everything
Here’s the thing that jumped out at me: only 7% of workers worldwide fully trust AI. That’s a stunningly low number for a technology being shoved into every business plan. But it makes sense. We’re being told to hand over work to a black box that sometimes hallucinates confidently. Would you trust a new, unpredictable colleague with your most important tasks? Probably not. The FT piece nails it by linking this directly to management culture. Employees who feel trusted by their manager are twice as likely to try AI. So this isn’t just a tech problem. It’s a leadership and psychological safety problem. If your staff is scared of looking stupid or getting in trouble for “cheating,” they’ll either avoid AI or use it in secret—which is arguably worse.
The Five Personas of Workplace AI
The persona breakdown from Slack is genuinely insightful because it moves beyond the simple “for or against” narrative. You’ve got the Maximalist and the Underground user—both using AI actively, but one is proud and the other feels guilty. Then there’s the Rebel (sees it as a threat), the Superfan (excited but doesn’t know how to start), and the Observer (wait-and-see). This spread exists in every company right now. And if leadership is just broadcasting generic “embrace AI” memos, they’re speaking only to the maximalists. The rebels are tuning out, the underground users are staying hidden, and the observers are… observing. No wonder adoption is stuck.
The Seniority Paradox and Cost-Cutting Temptation
The interview with Azeem Azhar points out a crucial, counterintuitive wrinkle: AI might actually widen the gap between junior and senior staff, at least initially. He says senior execs get more out of AI because using it is like delegating—and they’re expert delegators. A junior employee might not even know what to ask for or how to judge the output. So the promise of a “skills equalizer” has a big asterisk. It requires training and context. The other huge risk he flags is the temptation for companies to use AI first and foremost as a blunt cost-cutting tool. That’s a short-term play that could backfire spectacularly. If you fire people based on today’s AI capabilities, you might be utterly stranded when the tech evolves next month and you lack the human expertise to steer it.
So What Now? Guardrails and Transparency
Look, the cat’s out of the bag. The FT’s conclusion, and it’s hard to argue with, is that it’s not too late for companies to set clear policies. The data shows that when businesses have defined, safe usage guidelines, employees are nearly six times more likely to use AI tools. That’s a massive lever to pull. The key word is transparency. Tell people what’s allowed, what isn’t, and where the guardrails are. Admit the tech is imperfect. Create sandboxes for experimentation. Basically, stop buying the Ferrari and leaving it locked in the garage with the keys hidden. Give people the driving lessons. Otherwise, you’re just wasting a colossal investment and creating a culture of fear and secrecy around the very tool that’s supposed to propel you forward.
