Trust in Tech: AI Adoption at the Workplace and Quiet Quitting
Introduction
The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools and applications in companies has been largely presented as a groundbreaking development for enterprises. The potential for increased productivity and efficiently scaled companies eliminates repetitive tasks and builds a narrative that practically writes itself for executives. What has largely been ignored, however, is its effect on its users- the employees. Evidence from across the United States, United Kingdom, and continental Europe indicates an increase in psychological disengagement from work, along with an increase in the number of people who are actively sabotaging the very systems that companies have invested millions of dollars to implement, as a direct result of being forced to work with AI.
The Backdrop: Quiet Quitting
Quiet quitting is a form of employee disengagement wherein workers meet only the basic expectations of their job without. Gallup puts global employee engagement at just 21%. State of the Global Workplace 2026 report which analysed employee well-being across 160 countries reports that in India, employee and manager engagement has declined. Around 62% of workers describe themselves as not engaged, and another 17% are actively disengaged — not just drifting, but potentially pulling in the opposite direction. What does this mean for productivity? Gallup estimates this costs the global economy roughly $8.9 trillion in lost productivity each year, around 9% of world GDP. This is the workplace AI has entered into.
How AI Is Changing the Nature of Work
The promise was simpler work but employees report that the reality is often more of it. AI raises output expectations without necessarily reducing effort. Workers now lose the equivalent of 51 working days per year to technology friction, nearly two full months up 42% from 2025. Poorly integrated systems force employees to spend hours troubleshooting or correcting AI-generated outputs, adding cognitive load rather than removing it. Focus efficiency dropped to a three-year low of 60%, as collaboration time surged 34% and multitasking climbed 12%. AI is not eliminating work. It is transforming it into something more demanding and more fragmented. The psychological dimension is equally documented. TalentLMS research found that 54% of employees report persistent workplace unhappiness, with one in five experiencing it frequently or constantly. 29% report unmanageable workloads during this transition, and 15% do not clearly understand their role expectations in an AI-transformed workplace. When workers cannot see where they fit, withdrawal is a rational response.
Then there is the fear. IBM announced it would not replace roughly 7,800 back-office positions that could be handled by AI, framing it as natural attrition. Klarna said its AI assistant was doing the work of 700 full-time customer service agents. Dropbox laid off 16% of its workforce, with its CEO explicitly citing the need to “make room for AI.” AI was the leading cause of job cuts in March 2026 the first time that has happened since tracking began.
The Causal Link: AI Anxiety to Quiet Quitting
A peer-reviewed study published in March 2025 establishes the causal mechanism between forced AI adoption and employee disengagement. Conducted across 457 employees in Turkish SMEs, it found that AI anxiety does not directly compel people to resign. Instead, it triggers quiet quitting a form of progressive disengagement that functions as a precursor to departure. Drawing on Withdrawal Progression Theory, the study frames quiet quitting as a preliminary stage of turnover intention, where withdrawal progresses from mild detachment toward eventual exit. The integrated causal chain runs as follows: forced AI adoption creates work intensification and job anxiety, which produce burnout and loss of autonomy, which trigger psychological withdrawal, which precedes turnover. DHR Global’s Workforce Trends Report for 2026 found that overall employee engagement dropped from 88% to 64% in a single year. Crucially, 69% of C-suite leaders say their company has communicated clearly about AI’s impact on jobs but only 12% of entry-level staff agree. When the people most exposed to displacement are also the least informed about what is happening to their roles, disengagement is not a mystery. It is a response to a vacuum of information.
From Disengagement to Active Withdrawal
Quiet quitting is then a natural response. But what has emerged alongside it is something more active, and it is where the disengagement crisis tips into something organisations are unprepared for. The Writer and Workplace Intelligence survey of 2,400 knowledge workers found that 29% of employees admit to willfully withdrawing from their company’s AI strategy. Among Gen Z workers, that figure jumps to 44%. Active withdrawal takes several forms: entering proprietary data into public AI chatbots, using unapproved tools, outright refusing to engage with mandated platforms, and in some cases deliberately generating low-quality outputs to make the technology look ineffective. For Gen Z, the resistance has a structural logic. Junior roles in finance, law, and tech the traditional “learning by doing” rungs of the career ladder have declined by 32% since 2022. For a 22-year-old, AI is not a tool; it is a competitor that has already taken their first job. Workers who resist AI out of fear for their jobs are making themselves more vulnerable to the outcome they dread. 77% of executives say employees who refuse to become proficient in AI will not be considered for promotions or leadership roles, and 60% are considering cutting those who refuse to adopt it entirely.
Meanwhile, 75% of executives admit their company’s AI strategy is “more for show” than a meaningful guide to outcomes. Only 29% report significant ROI from generative AI, despite 97% claiming to have already deployed agents across their organisation. 39% of business leaders admit they made employees redundant as a result of deploying AI of whom 55% concede they made the wrong decisions about those redundancies. Organisations are moving fast, getting it wrong, and the cost is being absorbed by the workforce.
Conclusion
AI is not directly causing quiet quitting. However, AI is changing how we view working relationships; it will continue to result in predictable outcomes of poor execution of AI (i.e. passive to active disengagement) and radically change the way that we work, primarily by creating an increase in job demands, reducing autonomy, and raising worker anxiety without providing any transparency about future AI technology use. If AI continues to create a challenging work environment, it may lead to increased psychological detachment from work and ultimately result in productivity losses, possibly canceling out the very gains expected from AI integration. This globally rising disengagement from AI tools begets the question: is technology being deployed responsibly?
References
- https://www.gallup.com/workplace/349484/state-of-the-global-workplace.aspx
- https://www.walkme.com/news-releases/enterprises-lose-51-workdays-per-employee-to-technology-friction-annually-despite-record-ai-investment-walkme-global-study-of-3750-finds/.
- https://www.activtrak.com/resources/state-of-the-workplace/
- https://peoplemanagingpeople.com/employee-retention/quiet-cracking/
- https://www.webpronews.com/the-quiet-revolt-gen-z-workers-are-deliberately-undermining-ai-deployments-from-the-inside/
- https://www.uctoday.com/productivity-automation/44-of-gen-z-workers-are-sabotaging-your-enterprise-ai-rollout-the-problem-isnt-gen-z/
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11939379/
- https://huntscanlon.com/workforce-trends-2026-leaders-confront-burnout-disengagement-and-ai-driven-change/
- https://fortune.com/2026/04/08/gen-z-workers-sabotage-ai-rollout-backlash/
- https://peoplemanagingpeople.com/employee-retention/quiet-cracking/
- https://www.hrgrapevine.com/us/content/article/2026-04-09-ai-adoption-is-tearing-companies-apart-says-new-report
- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/new-updates/india-leads-in-workplace-disengagement-as-quiet-quitting-trend-rises-why-are-indians-mentally-checking-out-at-jobs/articleshow/130104773.cms?from=mdr
Related Blogs
Introduction
As the calendar pages turn inexorably towards 2024, a question looms large on the horizon of our collective consciousness: Are we cyber-resilient? This is not a rhetorical flourish but a pragmatic inquiry, as the digital landscape we navigate is fraught with cyberattacks and disruptions that threaten to capsize our virtual vessels.
What, then, is Cyber Resilience? It is the capacity to prepare for, respond to, and recover from these cyber squalls. Picture, if you will, a venerable oak amid a howling gale. The roots, those unseen sinews, delve deep into the earth, anchoring the tree – this is preparation. The robust trunk and flexible branches, swaying yet unbroken, embody response. And the new growth that follows the storm's rage is recovery. Cyber resilience is the digital echo of this natural strength and flexibility.
The Need for Resilience
Why, you might ask, is Cyber Resilience of such paramount importance as we approach 2024? The answer lies in the stark reality of our times:
- A staggering half of businesses have been breached by cyberattacks in the past three years.
- The financial haemorrhage from these incursions is projected to exceed a mind-numbing $10 trillion by the end of 2024.
- The relentless march of technology has not only brought innovation but also escalated the arms race against cyber threats.
- Cyber resilience transcends mere cybersecurity; it is a holistic approach that weaves recovery and continuity into the fabric of digital defenses.
- The adaptability of organisations, often through measures such as remote working protocols, is a testament to the evolving strategies of cyber resilience.
- The advent of AI and Machine Learning heralds a new era of automated cyber defense, necessitating an integrated framework that marries security with continuity protocols.
- Societal awareness, particularly of social engineering tactics, and maintaining public relations during crises are now recognised as critical elements of resilience strategies.
- Cyber threats have evolved in sophistication, paralleling the intense competition to develop new AI-driven solutions.
- As we gaze towards the future, cyber resilience is expected to be a prominent trend in both business and consumer technology sectors throughout 2024.
The Virtues
The benefits of cyber resilience for organisations are manifold, offering a bulwark against the digital onslaught:
- A reduction in the risk of data breaches, safeguarding sensitive information and customer data.
- Business continuity, ensuring operations persist with minimal disruption.
- Protection of reputation, as companies that demonstrate effective cyber resilience engender trust.
- Compliance with data protection and privacy regulations, thus avoiding fines and legal entanglements.
- Financial stability, as the costs associated with breaches can be mitigated or even prevented.
- Enhanced customer trust, as clients feel more secure with companies that take cybersecurity seriously.
- A competitive advantage in a market rife with cyber threats.
- Innovation and agility, as cyber-resilient companies can pivot and adapt without fear of digital disruptions.
- Employee confidence, leading to improved morale and productivity.
- Long-term savings by sidestepping the expenses of frequent or major cyber incidents.
As the year wanes, it is a propitious moment to evaluate your organisation's cyber resilience. In this edition, we will guide you through the labyrinth of cyber investment buy-in, tailored discussions with stakeholders, and the quintessential security tools for your 2024 cybersecurity strategy.
How to be more Resilient
Cyber resilience is more than a shield; it is the preparedness to withstand and recover from a cyber onslaught. Let us explore the key steps to fortify your digital defenses:
- Know your risks: Map the terrain where you are most vulnerable, identify the treasures that could be plundered, and fortify accordingly.
- Get the technology right: Invest in solutions that not only detect threats with alacrity but also facilitate rapid recovery, all the while staying one step ahead of the cyber brigands.
- Involve your people: Embed cybersecurity awareness into the fabric of every role. Train your crew in the art of recognising and repelling digital dangers.
- Test your strategies: Regularly simulate incidents to stress-test your policies and procedures, honing your ability to contain and neutralise threats.
- Plan for the worst: Develop a playbook so that everyone knows their part in the grand scheme of damage control and communication in the event of a breach.
- Continually review: The digital seas are ever-changing; adjust your sails accordingly. Cyber resilience is not a one-time endeavour but a perpetual commitment.
Conclusion
As we stand on the precipice of 2024, let us not be daunted by the digital storms that rage on the horizon. Instead, let us embrace the imperative of cyber resilience, for it is our steadfast companion in navigating the treacherous waters of the cyber world. Civil Society Organizations such as ‘CyberPeace Foundation’ playing a crucial role in promoting cyber resilience by bridging the gap between the public and cybersecurity complexities, conducting awareness campaigns, and advocating for robust policies to safeguard collective digital interests. Their active role is imperative in fostering a culture of cyber hygiene and vigilance.
References
- https://www.loginradius.com/blog/identity/cybersecurity-trends-2024/
- https://ciso.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/ciso-strategies/cisos-guide-to-2024-top-10-cybersecurity-trends/106293196
Introduction
An age of unprecedented problems has been brought about by the constantly changing technological world, and misuse of deepfake technology has become a reason for concern which has also been discussed by the Indian Judiciary. Supreme Court has expressed concerns about the consequences of this quickly developing technology, citing a variety of issues from security hazards to privacy violations to the spread of disinformation. In general, misuse of deepfake technology is particularly dangerous since it may fool even the sharpest eye because they are almost identical to the actual thing.
SC judge expressed Concerns: A Complex Issue
During a recent speech, Supreme Court Justice Hima Kohli emphasized the various issues that deepfakes present. She conveyed grave concerns about the possibility of invasions of privacy, the dissemination of false information, and the emergence of security threats. The ability of deepfakes to be created so convincingly that they seem to come from reliable sources is especially concerning as it increases the potential harm that may be done by misleading information.
Gender-Based Harassment Enhanced
In this internet era, there is a concerning chance that harassment based on gender will become more severe, as Justice Kohli noted. She pointed out that internet platforms may develop into epicentres for the quick spread of false information by anonymous offenders who act worrisomely and freely. The fact that virtual harassment is invisible may make it difficult to lessen the negative effects of toxic online postings. In response, It is advocated that we can develop a comprehensive policy framework that modifies current legal frameworks—such as laws prohibiting sexual harassment online —to adequately handle the issues brought on by technology breakthroughs.
Judicial Stance on Regulating Deepfake Content
In a different move, the Delhi High Court voiced concerns about the misuse of deepfake and exercised judicial intervention to limit the use of artificial intelligence (AI)-generated deepfake content. The intricacy of the matter was highlighted by a division bench. The bench proposed that the government, with its wider outlook, could be more qualified to handle the situation and come up with a fair resolution. This position highlights the necessity for an all-encompassing strategy by reflecting the court's acknowledgement of the technology's global and borderless character.
PIL on Deepfake
In light of these worries, an Advocate from Delhi has taken it upon himself to address the unchecked use of AI, with a particular emphasis on deepfake material. In the event that regulatory measures are not taken, his Public Interest Litigation (PIL), which is filed at the Delhi High Court, emphasises the necessity of either strict limits on AI or an outright prohibition. The necessity to discern between real and fake information is at the center of this case. Advocate suggests using distinguishable indicators, such as watermarks, to identify AI-generated work, reiterating the demand for openness and responsibility in the digital sphere.
The Way Ahead:
Finding a Balance
- The authorities must strike a careful balance between protecting privacy, promoting innovation, and safeguarding individual rights as they negotiate the complex world of deepfakes. The Delhi High Court's cautious stance and Justice Kohli's concerns highlight the necessity for a nuanced response that takes into account the complexity of deepfake technology.
- Because of the increased complexity with which the information may be manipulated in this digital era, the court plays a critical role in preserving the integrity of the truth and shielding people from the possible dangers of misleading technology. The legal actions will surely influence how the Indian judiciary and legislature respond to deepfakes and establish guidelines for the regulation of AI in the nation. The legal environment needs to change as technology does in order to allow innovation and accountability to live together.
Collaborative Frameworks:
- Misuse of deepfake technology poses an international problem that cuts beyond national boundaries. International collaborative frameworks might make it easier to share technical innovations, legal insights, and best practices. A coordinated response to this digital threat may be ensured by starting a worldwide conversation on deepfake regulation.
Legislative Flexibility:
- Given the speed at which technology is advancing, the legislative system must continue to adapt. It will be required to introduce new legislation expressly addressing developing technology and to regularly evaluate and update current laws. This guarantees that the judicial system can adapt to the changing difficulties brought forth by the misuse of deepfakes.
AI Development Ethics:
- Promoting moral behaviour in AI development is crucial. Tech businesses should abide by moral or ethical standards that place a premium on user privacy, responsibility, and openness. As a preventive strategy, ethical AI practices can lessen the possibility that AI technology will be misused for malevolent purposes.
Government-Industry Cooperation:
- It is essential that the public and commercial sectors work closely together. Governments and IT corporations should collaborate to develop and implement legislation. A thorough and equitable approach to the regulation of deepfakes may be ensured by establishing regulatory organizations with representation from both sectors.
Conclusion
A comprehensive strategy integrating technical, legal, and social interventions is necessary to navigate the path ahead. Governments, IT corporations, the courts, and the general public must all actively participate in the collective effort to combat the misuse of deepfakes, which goes beyond only legal measures. We can create a future where the digital ecosystem is safe and inventive by encouraging a shared commitment to tackling the issues raised by deepfakes. The Government is on its way to come up with dedicated legislation to tackle the issue of deepfakes. Followed by the recently issued government advisory on misinformation and deepfake.
References:
Introduction
The advent of Electronic Vehicles (EVs) represents a transformative leap towards a more sustainable and environmentally conscious transportation future by nations. However, as these vehicles become increasingly connected and reliant on advanced technological systems, a parallel concern emerges—data privacy. Integrating sophisticated technologies in EVs, such as GPS tracking, biometric authentication, and in-car connectivity, raises substantial questions about the collection, storage, and potential misuse of sensitive personal information. This intersection of automotive innovation and data privacy underscores the need for comprehensive solutions and regulatory frameworks to ensure that the benefits of electric vehicles are realised without compromising the privacy and security of their users.
Electronic vehicles primarily record three types of data;
- Driving behaviour and patterns: The e-vehicle records braking and driving patterns, including acceleration, speed, and swerve. Some vehicles even track air conditioning usage and airbag deployment to determine the point of failure in the event of a crash.
- Location data: The e-vehicles also track GPS systems to gauge the speed and direction of the vehicle.
- EV functions and use of telematic services: Monitoring of EV functions includes battery use management, battery charging history, battery deterioration, electrical system functions and software version information.
Data Privacy requirements of companies
Companies manufacturing e-vehicles are saddled with several data privacy requirements as concerns about consumer safety. Data collected by e-vehicles may be sensitive in nature. Location tracking is a key issue that has garnered attention. The constant recording of a driver's whereabouts can lead to the creation of detailed profiles, raising questions about the potential misuse or unauthorised access to this sensitive information. The risk of surveillance, stalking, or even theft of valuable personal data is a genuine concern for EV owners.
Moreover, integrating smart features, such as voice recognition, biometric authentication, and in-car personal assistants, adds another layer of complexity. These features require the collection and processing of personal data. If not handled securely, they may become vulnerable to hacking or unauthorised access, leading to identity theft or other malicious activities. Additionally, Smart charging systems offer convenience by allowing remote monitoring and control of charging, but they also gather extensive data. The geographical data collected during charging may raise concerns about location privacy.
Striking a delicate balance between leveraging this data for enhancing vehicle performance and user experience while safeguarding the privacy of EV owners is paramount. Transparent privacy policies, secure data storage practices, and stringent encryption protocols are essential components of a comprehensive approach to data protection. If a company is eyeing the international market or utilising cloud-based software with decentralised global data storage, it must also navigate international privacy and data protection laws. A prime example is the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), a globally recognised and stringent data protection law applicable to both European-based companies and international entities providing goods, services, or monitoring activities of residents within Europe.
Manufacturers of these vehicles are subjected to compliance with this comprehensive legal framework. Obligations on companies are levied by them being data fiduciaries; dual liability may also emanate since some data fiduciaries may also qualify as data processors. Special care must be taken when data is being transferred to third parties.
Further, compliance with consumer safety laws is also an important consideration. In India, the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 safeguards the rights of consumers, holding manufacturers, sellers, and service providers responsible for any harm resulting from faulty or defective products. This extends the Act's coverage to include manufacturers and sellers of internet and technology-based products. When read with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023 (DPDP Act), the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 takes on additional significance. The DPDP Act, focusing on the security of an individual's digital personal data, introduces provisions such as mandatory consent, purpose limitation, data minimisation, obligatory security measures by organisations, data localisation, and enforcing accountability and compliance. These provisions apply to information generated by and for consumers, offering a comprehensive framework for protecting digital personal data.
Conclusion
The intersection of e-vehicles and data privacy necessitates a careful and comprehensive approach to ensure the coexistence of automotive innovation and user security. As electric vehicles record intricate data related to driving behaviour, location, and telematic services, companies manufacturing these vehicles must navigate a complex landscape of data privacy requirements. The potential risks associated with location tracking, smart features, and the extensive data collected during charging underscore the importance of transparent privacy policies, secure data storage practices, and stringent encryption protocols. Moreover, as companies expand globally, compliance with international privacy laws like the GDPR becomes imperative. Balancing the enhancement of vehicle performance and user experience with the safeguarding of privacy is paramount. Manufacturers, deemed as data fiduciaries, must exercise diligence, especially when transferring data to third parties. Additionally, adherence to consumer safety laws, such as the Consumer Protection Act of 2019, further emphasises the need for a holistic and vigilant approach to ensure the responsible use of data in the evolving landscape of e-vehicles.
References
- https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1556&context=chtlj
- https://cyberswitching.com/electric-car-charging-and-data-privacy/#:~:text=Smart%20charging%20systems%20provide%20convenience,in%20safeguarding%20EV%20user%20privacy
