Quantitative analysis examines GenAI’s impact on productivity and anxiety in employees, suggesting a dual effect.
The rapid advancement of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has accelerated its adoption in workplaces worldwide. While prior research highlights its productivity enhancing potential, growing concerns remain regarding its impact on employee well-being, particularly job disruption and anxiety. This study examines the mechanisms through which GenAI influences both work productivity and employees’ intention to use such technologies, addressing a critical gap in individual level adoption. Drawing on Technological Determinism Theory, Disruptive Innovation Theory, Innovation Resistance Theory and Digital Divide Theory, a multi-dimensional research model was developed. Using a quantitative cross-sectional survey, data were collected between December 2025 and February 2026 from 368 employees working in AI-enabled organizations in Somalia and analyzed using a hybrid Structural Equation Modeling–Artificial Neural Network (SEM–ANN) approach. The findings reveal that perceived GenAI intensity significantly enhances work productivity and directly increases employees’ intention to use GenAI. Work productivity also partially mediates this relationship. Conversely, perceived job disruption significantly increases employee anxiety, highlighting the psychological challenges associated with GenAI adoption. Furthermore, training support positively influences intention to use GenAI but negatively moderates the relationship between GenAI intensity and productivity. These results demonstrate the dual nature of GenAI as both a driver of productivity and a source of psychological strain. The study offers practical implications for organizations to balance performance gains with employee support mechanisms. Limitations include reliance on self-reported data and a single country context, suggesting opportunities for future research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeilani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: