The use of generative AI tools in the workplace implies that previously studied human phenomena, such as workplace bullshit, may take on different forms. In this comment to Kiazad et al. (2025), we first discuss how the functional properties of generative AI tools guarantees that such tools will generate workplace bullshit, and then, we discuss the consequences of using generative AI's bullshit at work with respect to the development and connection workers might otherwise foster in the workplace. Our comment offers two propositions to summarize our discussions.
AggarwalP.MurahariV.RajpurohitT.KalyanA.NarasimhanK.DeshpandeA. (2024). GEO: Generative engine optimization. In: Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 5–16). https://doi.org/10.1145/3637528.3671900
2.
AndiappanM.DufourL. (2020). Jealousy at work: A tripartite model. Academy of Management Review, 45(1), 205–229. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0299
BenderE. M.GebruT.McMillan-MajorA.ShmitchellS. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 610–623). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
7.
CarroM. V. (2024). Flattering to deceive: The impact of sycophantic behavior on user trust in large language model (no. arXiv:2412.02802). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2412.02802
8.
ChenR.ArditiA.SleightH.EvansO.LindseyJ. (2025). Persona vectors: Monitoring and controlling character traits in language models (no. arXiv:2507.21509). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.21509
9.
DunningD.HeathC.SulsJ. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest: A Journal of the American Psychological Society, 5(3), 69–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x
10.
GarousiV. (2025). Why you shouldn’t fully trust ChatGPT: A synthesis of this AI tool’s error rates across disciplines and the software engineering lifecycle. No. (arXiv:2504.18858) arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.18858
11.
GrodniewiczJ. P.HoholM. (2023). Waiting for a digital therapist: Three challenges on the path to psychotherapy delivered by artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14(3), Article 1190084. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1190084
12.
HaiS.LongT.HonoraA.JaputraA.GuoT. (2025). The dark side of employee-generative AI collaboration in the workplace: An investigation on work alienation and employee expediency. International Journal of Information Management, 83(25), Article 102905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2025.102905
13.
HanniganT. R.McCarthyI. P.SpicerA. (2024). Beware of botshit: How to manage the epistemic risks of generative chatbots. Business Horizons, 67(5), 471–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2024.03.001
14.
HaoK. (2025). Empire of AI: Dreams and nightmares in sam Altman’s OpenAI: Penguin Press.
15.
HarariY. N. (2024). Nexus: A brief history of information networks from the stone age to AI: Penguin Press.
KiazadK.ChenF. X.RestubogS. L. D. (2025). Workplace bullshitting: A multidimensional analysis of motives. Group & Organization Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011251348757
18.
KumaranD.FlemingS. M.MarkeevaL.HeywardJ.BaninoA.MathurM.PascanuR.OsinderoS.MartinoB. DEVelickovicP.PatrauceanV. (2025). How overconfidence in initial choices and underconfidence under criticism modulate change of mind in large language models (no. arXiv:2507.03120). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.03120
19.
LarsonB. Z.MoserC.CazaA.MuehlfeldK.ColomboL. A. (2024). Critical thinking in the age of generative AI. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 23(3), 373–378. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2024.0338
LindebaumD.FlemingP. (2024). ChatGPT undermines human reflexivity, scientific responsibility and responsible management research. British Journal of Management, 35(2), 566–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12781
22.
MazzolaJ. J.DisselhorstR. (2019). Should we be “challenging” employees?: A critical review and meta-analysis of the challenge-hindrance model of stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(8), 949–961. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2412
23.
MelisaR.AshadiA.TriastutiA.HidayatiS.SalidoA.EroP. E. L.MarliniC.ZefrinZ.Al FuadZ. (2025). Critical thinking in the age of AI: A systematic review of aI’s effects on higher education. Educational Process International Journal, 14(1), Article e2025031. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.14.31
24.
OpenAI (2025). ChatGPT (Sep. 6 version) [Large Language Model]. https://chatgpt.com
25.
SharmaM.TongM.KorbakT.DuvenaudD.AskellA.BowmanS. R.ChengN.DurmusE.Hatfield-DoddsZ.JohnstonS. R.KravecS.MaxwellT.McCandlishS.NdousseK.RauschO.SchieferN.YanD.ZhangM.PerezE. (2025). Towards understanding sycophancy in language models (no. arXiv:2310.13548). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.13548
