The recent posts by @girlboss.capital on the Bluesky network provide a stark case study in the emerging phenomenon of AI-generated performance reviews. The user initiated a discussion on the "ChatGPT-written performance review crisis," and then provided a specific, troubling example: a teammate's performance review was not only generated by an AI, but was also "unfathomably divorced from the work they actually did" and even "copy/pasted a line from my own peer feedback." The user's sarcastic replies of "extraordinary" and "✨ efficiency at work ✨" highlight the absurdity of the situation.
This incident is a perfect illustration of the "efficiency trap" of AI in the workplace. The allure of saving time by automating tasks like writing performance reviews is strong, but it comes at a significant cost. The goal of a performance review is not simply to generate a document, but to provide meaningful, accurate, and actionable feedback that can help an employee grow and develop. When this process is outsourced to an AI, the human element is lost, and the review becomes a hollow, meaningless exercise.
The negative impacts of this practice are numerous. For the employee who receives an AI-generated review, it is a demoralizing and invalidating experience. It sends a clear message that their work and contributions are not valued enough to warrant the time and attention of a human manager. This can lead to a significant decline in morale, engagement, and productivity.
For the organization, the consequences are equally severe. Inaccurate performance data, based on AI-generated reviews that are "divorced from the work actually did," can lead to poor decision-making in areas such as promotions, compensation, and talent development. Furthermore, the erosion of trust between employees and management can have a corrosive effect on the entire organizational culture.
The proper role of AI in the workplace is as a tool to augment human capabilities, not to replace them. AI can be a powerful assistant, helping to gather data, identify patterns, and even draft initial versions of documents. However, the final judgment, the nuanced feedback, and the human connection that are so critical to effective performance management must remain in the hands of human beings. The case of the "extraordinary" and "efficient" performance review serves as a cautionary tale: in the pursuit of efficiency, we must not lose sight of our humanity.
