Sonia Jaffe

Brendan Lucier, Nicole Immorlica, Markus Mobius et al.

Motivated by agentic markets -- two-sided markets in which consumers and businesses are assisted by AI tools that facilitate consumers' search -- we study the impact of improved search technology on learning and welfare in markets. We put forth a model where consumers engage in costly search to acquire signals of product fit prior to purchase. The market tracks indications of fit for searched products and indications of quality for chosen products, thereby guiding searches. We characterize the long-run steady-state of the resulting dynamics as well as the impact of improving search technology. We find cheaper search improves learning and consumer surplus, whereas more informative search can degrade both unless the market learns as much as consumers about the products by, for example, ``reading the transcripts'' of agentic conversations. Finally, we consider the impact of search improvements on how businesses set prices. At equilibrium prices in symmetric markets, consumer surplus is improved by cheaper search but may be decreased by more informative search, due to weakened inter-business competition.

Scott Counts, Yan Chen, Jing Dong et al.

M365 Copilot is used every week by millions of people across more than a million companies around the world as part of their workflows. Uniquely positioned in the AI landscape given its near-exclusive use for work purposes, M365 Copilot can offer a clear picture of how people use AI for work and where that usage may expand next. This paper characterizes that usage through direct classification of user interactions with M365 Copilot Chat. Based on an anonymized and privacy-preserving analysis of a sample of approximately 5.5 million sessions, we combine a learned classification of user intent with a classification of O*NET work activities done with M365 Copilot Chat. We find that M365 Copilot is emerging as an everyday assistant for knowledge work: writing dominates, but users also rely on it for information retrieval, analysis, decision making and strategizing, and evaluating and diagnosing programs and systems, among others. Information seeking tasks remain common, but time trends suggest a relative shift away from ``chat as search'' and toward content and communication-related work. Comparisons across occupational groupings and to work done in the labor market further show that usage is broad but uneven, where the relative share of work done with M365 Copilot Chat cuts across jobs in some cases and is occupation-specific in others. Areas of relative underrepresentation in the labor market suggest the next frontier for enterprise AI adoption.

Eleanor Wiske Dillon, Sonia Jaffe, Nicole Immorlica et al.

We present evidence from a field experiment across 66 firms and 7,137 knowledge workers. Workers were randomly selected to access a generative AI tool integrated into applications they already used at work for email, meetings, and writing. In the second half of the 6-month experiment, the 80% of treated workers who used this tool spent two fewer hours on email each week and reduced their time working outside of regular hours. Apart from these individual time savings, we do not detect shifts in the quantity or composition of workers' tasks resulting from individual-level AI provision.

Kiran Tomlinson, Sonia Jaffe, Will Wang et al.

Given the rapid adoption of generative AI and its potential to impact a wide range of tasks, understanding the effects of AI on the economy is one of society's most important questions. In this work, we take a step toward that goal by analyzing the work activities people do with AI, how successfully and broadly those activities are done, and combine that with data on what occupations do those activities. We analyze a dataset of 200k anonymized and privacy-scrubbed conversations between users and Microsoft Bing Copilot, a publicly available generative AI system. We find the most common work activities people seek AI assistance for involve gathering information and writing, while the most common activities that AI itself is performing are providing information and assistance, writing, teaching, and advising. Combining these activity classifications with measurements of task success and scope of impact, we compute an AI applicability score for each occupation. We find the highest AI applicability scores for knowledge work occupation groups such as computer and mathematical, and office and administrative support, as well as occupations such as sales whose work activities involve providing and communicating information. Additionally, we characterize the types of work activities performed most successfully, how wage and education correlate with AI applicability, and how real-world usage compares to predictions of occupational AI impact.

Eleanor Wiske Dillon, Sonia Jaffe, Sida Peng et al.

Advances in generative AI have rapidly expanded the potential of computers to perform or assist in a wide array of tasks traditionally performed by humans. We analyze a large, real-world randomized experiment of over 6,000 workers at 56 firms to present some of the earliest evidence on how these technologies are changing the way knowledge workers do their jobs. We find substantial time savings on common core tasks across a wide range of industries and occupations: workers who make use of this technology spent half an hour less reading email each week and completed documents 12% faster. Despite the newness of the technology, nearly 40% of workers who were given access to the tool used it regularly in their work throughout the 6-month study.

Jenna Butler, Mary Czerwinski, Shamsi Iqbal et al.

We now turn to understanding the impact that COVID-19 had on the personal productivity and well-being of information workers as their work practices were impacted by remote work. This chapter overviews people's productivity, satisfaction, and work patterns, and shows that the challenges and benefits of remote work are closely linked. Looking forward, the infrastructure surrounding work will need to evolve to help people adapt to the challenges of remote and hybrid work.

Denae Ford, Margaret-Anne Storey, Thomas Zimmermann et al.

The COVID-19 pandemic has shaken the world to its core and has provoked an overnight exodus of developers that normally worked in an office setting to working from home. The magnitude of this shift and the factors that have accompanied this new unplanned work setting go beyond what the software engineering community has previously understood to be remote work. To find out how developers and their productivity were affected, we distributed two surveys (with a combined total of 3,634 responses that answered all required questions) -- weeks apart to understand the presence and prevalence of the benefits, challenges, and opportunities to improve this special circumstance of remote work. From our thematic qualitative analysis and statistical quantitative analysis, we find that there is a dichotomy of developer experiences influenced by many different factors (that for some are a benefit, while for others a challenge). For example, a benefit for some was being close to family members but for others having family members share their working space and interrupting their focus, was a challenge. Our surveys led to powerful narratives from respondents and revealed the scale at which these experiences exist to provide insights as to how the future of (pandemic) remote work can evolve.

Longqi Yang, Sonia Jaffe, David Holtz et al.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a wide-ranging impact on information workers such as higher stress levels, increased workloads, new workstreams, and more caregiving responsibilities during lockdown. COVID-19 also caused the overwhelming majority of information workers to rapidly shift to working from home (WFH). The central question this work addresses is: can we isolate the effects of WFH on information workers' collaboration activities from all other factors, especially the other effects of COVID-19? This is important because in the future, WFH will likely to be more common than it was prior to the pandemic. We use difference-in-differences (DiD), a causal identification strategy commonly used in the social sciences, to control for unobserved confounding factors and estimate the causal effect of WFH. Our analysis relies on measuring the difference in changes between those who WFH prior to COVID-19 and those who did not. Our preliminary results suggest that on average, people spent more time on collaboration in April (Post WFH mandate) than in February (Pre WFH mandate), but this is primarily due to factors other than WFH, such as lockdowns during the pandemic. The change attributable to WFH specifically is in the opposite direction: less time on collaboration and more focus time. This reversal shows the importance of using causal inference: a simple analysis would have resulted in the wrong conclusion. We further find that the effect of WFH is moderated by individual remote collaboration experience prior to WFH. Meanwhile, the medium for collaboration has also shifted due to WFH: instant messages were used more, whereas scheduled meetings were used less. We discuss design implications -- how future WFH may affect focused work, collaborative work, and creative work.