AIORG-W015 Working papers

Artificial Intelligence and the Modern Productivity Paradox: A Clash of Expectations and Statistics

NBER w24001 · Brynjolfsson-Rock-Syverson productivity paradox

working paper full text

Recorded claims
2
coded from the inspected source
Evidence classes
1
survey-or-synthesis
Recorded limitations
3
stated, never hidden

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.

The paper explains why general-purpose technologies can coexist with weak measured productivity during a period of complementary invention, process redesign, diffusion, and learning, producing a J-curve between investment and measured return.

confidence: medium-high as conceptual mechanism survey-or-synthesis

Scope: General-purpose AI and historical analogies as of 2017; mechanism boundary for current claims.

The productivity-paradox mechanism predicts that purchasing a technology without complementary organizational capital may yield little measured return during the transition, so tool adoption is not an adequate proxy for becoming AI-native.

confidence: medium survey-or-synthesis

Scope: Mechanism-level implication; it does not quantify a current firm's lag or guarantee later gains.

Boundaries

Limitations & independence

Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.

Recorded limitations

  • Published before modern generative AI
  • Conceptual/historical rather than a current field experiment
  • Macro measurement and lag mechanisms cannot identify one firm's outcome

Source independence

Academic economic synthesis predating current generative AI; not vendor evidence.