 |
|
|
|||||
AI was supposed to make our lives easier: automating tedious tasks, streamlining communication, and freeing up time for creative thinking. But what if the very tool meant to increase efficiency is fueling cognitive decline and burnout instead? The Workflation Effect Since AI entered the workplace, managers expect teams to produce more work in less time. They see tasks completed in two hours instead of two weeks, without understanding the process behind it. Yet, AI still makes too many mistakes for high-quality output, forcing workers to adjust, edit, and review everything it producescreating workflation, which adds more work to already overloaded plates. AI has accelerated expectations because managers know that teams using it can work faster, but quality work still requires time, focus, and expertise. “We are seeing that it can lead to a lot of churn and work sloppoor quality output, in particular when it’s being used by junior team members,” says Carey Bentley, CEO of Lifehack Method, a productivity coaching company. When team members lack the expertise to audit AI output, they take it at face value, which can lead to multimillion-dollar errors. The percentage of companies using AI in at least one business function is rising every year, and one of the most popular uses is in marketing. However, many brands flood social media with formulaic, off-putting content that prioritizes speed over emotional connection, sacrificing creativity and differentiation. The consequences of using AI without proper quality review aren’t just about brand reputation or lost dealsthey also add stress while eroding workers’ creativity, problem-solving abilities, and critical thinking. Cognitive Decline and Burnout with AI Research from MIT shows that relying on AI tools to think for us, rather than with us, leads to cognitive offloadingoutsourcing mental effort in ways that gradually weaken memory, problem-solving, and critical thinking. The study found that participants using GPT-based tools showed measurable declines in these areas compared to control groups. Just as GPS impairs spatial memory, relying on AI for thinking may weaken our capacity for original thought, because the brain needs practice to maintain cognitive functions. When we layer that cognitive debt on top of the relentless pace that AI enables, we aren’t just doing more work; we’re doing it with diminished mental capacity. Workers are reviewing AI outputs without having the time to thoroughly evaluate the quality, making decisions without space for reflection, and producing content without engaging the creative processes that generate real insight. In the long term, the overwhelm leads to small mistakes, such as forgetting to add a document, not finishing an edit, or missing a deadline; these are the first signs of burnout. It really starts small, and that’s why it gets missed so often,” explains Naomi Carmen, a business consultant specializing in leadership and company culture. These minor errors arent signs of laziness, distraction, or disengagement, and when managers respond with performance reviews instead of support, the cycle only accelerates. The Training Gap Most people using AI haven’t been adequately trained, confusing its confidence for truth. Neuroscientist David Eagleman refers to this as the “intelligence echo illusion”the perception that AI is intelligent because it responds with apparent insight, when in reality it merely reflects stored human knowledge. Without understanding how AI works, leadership develops unrealistic expectations that cascade through organizations, requiring faster and higher-quality work that’s nearly impossible to sustain. “Expecting your team to use AI without proper training is like handing them a Ferrari and expecting them to win races right away,” Bentley explains. Carmen adds, “The input is going to directly affect the output.” Warning Signs AI Is Fueling Burnout According to a 2024 study by The Upwork Research Institute, 77% of employees believe their workload has increased since they started using AI. Key warning signs include: Errors and delays: mistakes slip through because workers rush to meet unrealistic deadlines. Not feeling time savings: employees work harder than ever despite using “time-saving” tools. Always-on culture: leadership sets expectations at AI-speed, resulting in an always-on culture that multiplies workload and stress. How to Use AI Without Burning People Out The solution isn’t abandoning AI, but implementing it thoughtfully. Here are four ways to do it: Proper training: hire experts to audit existing workflows and provide recommendations, then show team members how to produce high-quality output. Clear goals: connect AI use to specific KPIs instead of chasing trends. Companies should remain rooted in their core mission and values, rather than adopting every new AI tool. Treat AI as a low-level assistant: use it for research, initial drafts, and data organization, but keep creative problem-solving and critical thinking in the hands of humans. Support your team: life events, stress, and fatigue mean employees cant deliver at a constant, AI-driven pace. Leadership should keep the human element at the center of decisions, recognizing that policies and expectations must account for the complexity of real lives, not just the output. Moving Forward with AI In an era defined by AI, sustainable performance comes from empathy, connection, and space for creativity. A healthy workplacewhere employees can rest, express themselves, and even have unboosts engagement, problem-solving, innovation, and efficiency. AI can support this, but only when implemented thoughtfully, with the human element at its core.
Category:
E-Commerce
Every year, American taxpayers are eligible to put a certain amount of money into their retirement accounts, including 401(k)s and IRAs. But each year, the upper allowable threshold for these accounts tends to rise. This is done in order for the limits to keep up with the rate of inflation. And now, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has announced its new limits for 2026. Heres what you need to know. What is the IRS 2026 401(k) limit? According to a notice published by the IRS on November 13, the limit on individual contributions to various retirement accounts in 2026 is rising. If you have a 401(k), 403(b), governmental 457 plan, or the federal governments Thrift Savings Plan, youll now be able to contribute up to $24,500 for the 2026 year. This represents an increase of $1,000 from the $23,500 limit in place for the 2025 year. But the IRS has also announced new catch-up contribution limits for 401(k), 403(b), governmental 457 plans, and the federal governments Thrift Savings Plan for 2026. The agency says that if you are 50 or older, your catch-up contribution limit will increase by $500 in 2026 to a total of $8,000. Therefore, participants in most 401(k), 403(b), governmental 457 plans and the federal governments Thrift Savings Plan who are 50 and older generally can contribute up to $32,500 each year, starting in 2026, the agency noted. Catch-up contribution limits for employees aged 60 to 63 will remain at $11,250, the same level they were in 2025. What is the IRS 2026 IRA limit? If you have an individual retirement account (IRA), the IRS has announced that the limit for that type of account is rising in 2026, too. In 2026, the new IRA contribution limit will be $7,500. Thats a rise of $500 over the 2025 limit. Additionally, the IRA catchup contribution limit for those aged 50 or over is also rising in 2026. In 2025, that limit was $1,000. But in 2026, that limit is rising by $100 to $1,100. In addition to the 401(k) and IRA contribution limits for 2026, the IRS announced additional changes for Roth IRAs, the Savers Credit, and SIMPLE retirement accounts for 2026. You can find details of all the changes in the IRSs notice here.
Category:
E-Commerce
A London judge ruled Friday that global mining company BHP Group is liable in Brazil’s worst environmental disaster when a dam collapse a decade ago unleashed tons of toxic waste into a major river, killing 19 people and devastating villages downstream.High Court Justice Finola O’Farrell said that Australia-based BHP was responsible, despite not owning the dam at the time, finding its negligence, carelessness or lack of skill led to the collapse.Anglo-Australian BHP owns 50% of Samarco, the Brazilian company that operates the iron ore mine where the tailings dam ruptured on Nov. 5, 2015.Sludge from the burst dam destroyed the once-bustling village of Bento Rodrigues in Minas Gerais state and badly damaged other towns. Enough mine waste to fill 13,000 Olympic-size swimming pools poured into the Doce River in southeastern Brazil, damaging 600 kilometers (370 miles) of the waterway and killing 14 tons of freshwater fish, according to a study by the University of Ulster in the U.K. The river, which the Krenak Indigenous people revere as a deity, has yet to recover.A decade later, legal disputes have prolonged reconstruction and reparations and the river is still contaminated with heavy metals. Even as Brazil tries to define itself as a global environmental leader while hosting the U.N. COP30 climate summit, advocacy groups say the dam collapse is a reminder of industry-friendly policies that have ecological protection.Victims of the disaster called the ruling a historic victory in seeking justice.“We had to cross the Atlantic Ocean and go to England to finally see a mining company held to account,” said Mônica dos Santos of the Commission for Those Affected by the Fundo Dam.Gelvana Rodrigues, whose 7-year-old son, Thiago, was killed in a mudslide, celebrated the step forward and said she wouldn’t rest until those responsible are punished.“The judge’s decision shows what we have been saying for the last 10 years: it was not an accident, and BHP must take responsibility for its actions,” Rodrigues said.The judge agreed with lawyers representing 600,000 Brazilians and 31 communities in the class-action case who argued that BHP was heavily involved in the Samarco operation and could have prevented the disaster, but instead encouraged raising the dam to allow more production.“The risk of collapse of the dam was foreseeable,” O’Farrell wrote in the 222-page decision. “It is inconceivable that a decision would have been taken to continue raising the height of the dam in those circumstances and the collapse could have been averted.”BHP said that it plans to appeal.The claimants are seeking 36 billion pounds ($47 billion) in compensation, though the ruling only addressed liability. A second phase of the trial will determine damages.The case was filed in Britain because one of BHP’s two main legal entities was based in London at the time.The trial began in October 2024, just days before the federal government in the South American country reached a multibillion-dollar settlement with the mining companies.Under the agreement, Samarco which is also half owned by Brazilian mining giant Vale agreed to pay 132 billion reais ($23 billion) over 20 years. The payments were meant to compensate for human, environmental and infrastructure damage.BHP had said the U.K. legal action was unnecessary, because it duplicated matters covered by legal proceedings in Brazil.The judge ruled that those who were compensated in the settlement in Brazil could still bring claims, though they might be limited by any waivers they signed.Brandon Craig, BHP’s president of Minerals Americas, said that nearly half of the claimants could be eliminated from the group because of settlement agreements they signed in Brazil.BHP shares fell more than 2% on the London market after the ruling and the company said that it would update its financial provisions. Brian Melley, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||