Skip to content

Claims Library Entry

AI isn't making you faster

A METR controlled trial found experienced developers were 19% slower with AI tools despite believing they were 24% faster, revealing a wide gap between perceived and actual productivity. Kamil Banc argues the 5% who see real gains succeed by fully delegating complete tasks to AI and measuring results, rather than treating AI as a button to press.

Published March 21, 2026 by Kamil Banc

ROI & MeasurementImplementationAI Strategy

Lead claim

Developers predicted AI would speed them up 24% — measurement showed they were actually 19% slower.

Atomic Claims

What this article supports

Claim 1 · Source summary

METR Trial: Slower, Not Faster

In a METR controlled trial, experienced developers predicted a 24% speedup but were actually 19% slower.

Claim 2 · Source summary

Perceived vs. Measured Savings

Ninety percent of AI users say it saves time, but measured savings are 2.8% of work hours.

Claim 3 · Source summary

ROI Remains Elusive

Ninety-five percent of organizations see no measurable ROI from AI, and only 21% replaced a single task.

Claim 4 · Source summary

Training Drives Productivity Gains

Workers with over 81 hours of deliberate AI training reported 75% higher productivity than peers.

Claim 5 · Kamil's interpretation

Full Delegation Separates the 5%

The 5% who see real gains pick one task and hand it to AI completely.

Evidence

Context behind the claims

Quote

"Fast.ai calls this dark flow, a state where AI tools generate the feeling of productivity without the output."

Key statistics

24% predicted speedup vs. 19% measured slowdown

METR's controlled trial gave 16 experienced developers the best AI tools for 246 real tasks; their predictions diverged sharply from measured outcomes.

2.8% measured savings

While 90% of AI users claim the technology saves them time, measured savings amount to only 2.8% of work hours.

95% no measurable ROI

Despite widespread AI adoption, 95% of organizations report no measurable return on investment, and only 21% have replaced a single task with AI.

75% higher productivity

EY found workers who invested 81+ hours in deliberate AI training reported 75% higher productivity than colleagues using the same tools without training.

Supporting context

The article synthesizes findings from multiple controlled studies and surveys, including METR's randomized trial of experienced developers and large-scale workforce surveys from Tech Policy Press, HBR, and Verasight. The consistent pattern across sources is a wide gap between perceived productivity gains and measured outcomes, which Fast.ai terms 'dark flow.' For practitioners, Kamil Banc's recommendation is a low-risk experiment: select one repetitive task, delegate it entirely to AI for five days, and measure both time saved and whether the output survives without human intervention. This approach treats AI as a skill requiring deliberate investment, consistent with EY's finding that extensive training correlates with substantially higher productivity.

How to Cite

Use the claim-level citation when you need a precise statement. Use the article or claims-collection citation when you want the wider argument and source context.

Recommended

Individual Claim

Best when you need to cite one atomic claim directly inside a memo, deck, research note, or AI output.

"[claim text]" (Banc, Kamil, 2026, https://kbanc.com/claims-library/ai-isnt-making-you-faster)
Full Context

Original Article

Use this when you want to cite the full newsletter article at AI Adopters Club rather than the structured claims page.

Banc, Kamil (2026, March 21, 2026). AI isn't making you faster. AI Adopters Club. https://aiadopters.club/p/ai-isnt-making-you-faster
Research

Claims Collection

Use this when you want to reference the full structured claims collection on this page.

Banc, Kamil (2026). AI isn't making you faster [Structured Claims]. Retrieved from https://kbanc.com/claims-library/ai-isnt-making-you-faster

Attribution Requirements

  • Include the author name: Kamil Banc.
  • Include the source: AI Adopters Club or the structured claims page.
  • Link to the original article or the claims page you used.
  • Indicate any edits or transformations if you changed the wording.

Related Reading

More from the library

Hilton Deployed 41 AI Use Cases. Three Paid Back in Six Months.
AI StrategyImplementationROI & Measurement

Hilton operates 41 live AI use cases across 7,500 properties in 138 countries. Three systems—marketing automation, AI kitchen scales, and chatbots—delivered rapid returns by solving specific high-cost problems. The company modernized data infrastructure first, then matched proven tools to operational pain points.

5 claims

Sports stadiums spent billions testing AI so you don't have to
AI StrategyImplementationROI & MeasurementBusiness Applications

Sports stadiums are pioneering large-scale AI implementation across complex operational environments. By solving critical challenges in crowd management, revenue optimization, and efficiency, they've created a replicable playbook for AI adoption across industries.

5 claims

JPMorgan Spent $18 Billion on AI. The Best ROI Came From Contract Review.
AI StrategyImplementationROI & Measurement

JPMorgan invested heavily in AI technology, generating significant value through strategic implementation. The most impactful use case was contract review automation, which saved hundreds of thousands of work hours. Other productivity gains came from coding assistants and document processing tools.

5 claims