AIORG-W007 Peer-reviewed research

Navigating the Jagged Technological Frontier: Field Experimental Evidence of the Effects of AI on Knowledge Worker Productivity and Quality

HBS Working Paper 24-013 · Organization Science DOI 10.1287/orsc.2025.21838

peer reviewed journal article

Recorded claims
2
coded from the inspected source
Evidence classes
2
scholarly-full-text, adverse-or-corrective
Recorded limitations
4
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.

For tasks inside the model's capability frontier, AI-assisted consultants completed work more than 25% faster, produced outputs rated more than 40% higher in quality, and completed over 12% more tasks than controls.

confidence: high within study scholarly-full-text

Scope: Consultants and the experiment's within-frontier tasks; no direct firm-outcome estimate.

On the task intentionally placed outside the model frontier, AI access made participants less likely to reach the correct answer, demonstrating that average gains reverse when workers misapply the system beyond its reliable task boundary.

confidence: high within study adverse-or-corrective

Scope: One designed outside-frontier consulting task and one model era.

Boundaries

Limitations & independence

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

Recorded limitations

  • 758 consultants and selected consulting tasks
  • Artificially classified inside/outside-frontier tasks
  • One model generation
  • Task quality is not firm financial performance

Source independence

Academic field experiment with BCG consultants; focal professional-services setting and a time-specific model.