Bosses only need you to spend 60% of your workday on work, says CEO of employee-monitoring company

Even more dystopian, machine learning has made workplace productivity tracking easy, efficient, ‘round-the-clock and creepily detailed — with programs able to measure effective working hours and how staff are hitting specific KPIs. They can even confidently dish out punishments and praise for a job poorly or well done.

But, as stressful as this oversight may be, the baseline for a decent day’s work may be lower than you’d think: As low as 60%, one expert suggests.

AI productivity tracking now the norm

Yes, if you’re not being replaced by AI at your desk job, you’re likely being asked to work it into your daily workflow, monitored for how much you use it or having your workday analyzed by some sort of smart system.

The vast majority of employers in the US — 74%, according to one 2025 survey — use artificial intelligence specifically to keep tabs on staff to ensure they are using their time effectively on the job. (As effectively as a robot worker would? Who knows.)

Modern software on work devices can check your whereabouts, which apps or documents you’ve opened, how you’re using your mouse and keyboard, and even the tone of your emails, potentially without any warning that you’re being watched. Algorithms can also measure performance specific to your role, whether that be regarding sales targets or project timelines.

But as stressful as it may be to wonder if your firm is surveilling your day-to-day, the leader of a company that provides such tech says that bosses aren’t expecting inhuman levels of productivity around 100%.

In speaking with the Wall Street Journal on the subject, Insightful CEO Ivan Petrovic said that, in his experience, “companies are aiming for 60% to 80% of your time being utilized for work during the day, on average.” Something higher, like 90%, could actually seem suspicious, raising flags that someone is trying to dupe the technology (which WSJ gives some Orwellian tips on how to do more effectively).

Negative effects

Understandably, the practice of such close observation hasn’t been received well by everyone. While some employees can understand the benefits of such programs — even to them (such as documenting overtime) — according to studies, most have concerns about the impacts to privacy, trust in the workplace and more, and research says that workers are generally opposed to the idea.

In one survey from earlier in 2026, a whopping 72% of respondents failed to see the positive results of AI supervision whatsoever, while 56% said they were “anxious” about being watched. Another 54% said they would go so far as quitting if surveillance was ramped up.

The concept can actually drive some to work less hard as morale deteriorates and stress levels increase. Research indicates that employees feel alienated by, and resentful of, perceived over-monitoring, especially when it gets as thorough as logging when staff are at their desks and keeping an eye on their exact computer movements.