From the wave-0 evidence ledger
Recorded claims
Each claim states what the inspected source says, at the recorded location—bounded by its scope and graded by its confidence. Nothing here is a synthesis across works.
In a pre-registered experiment with 776 P&G professionals, individuals with AI produced work whose performance matched that of human teams without AI, indicating that an AI complement can substitute for some coordination capacity on the studied product-development tasks.
Scope: P&G product-development professionals and bounded innovation tasks; not full-team or firm-performance equivalence.
AI access reduced performance gaps between commercial and technical specialists and was associated with more positive self-reported emotional responses, supporting a boundary-crossing mechanism while not eliminating the need to test team and task fit.
Scope: Studied cross-functional innovation tasks and participants; affect outcome is self-reported.
Boundaries
Limitations & independence
Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.
Recorded limitations
- Single consumer-goods company and selected innovation tasks
- Working-paper status
- Some affect and collaboration measures are self-reported
- AI/model capability is time-specific
Source independence
Academic field experiment conducted with P&G professionals; one focal firm supplies the setting but treatment was pre-registered.