{"id":"AIBD-0671","title":"Procter & Gamble field experiment: professionals working alone with a GPT-4 tool match two-person teams on product innovation tasks","summary":"In a field experiment with 776 P&G professionals, individuals using a GPT-4-based tool raised solution quality by 0.37 SD and spent 16.4% less time, matching teams without AI.","date_observed":"2024-07-01","date_basis":"source information","date_precision":"month","benefit_status":"reported","source_collection":null,"source_entry":null,"account":"Between May and July 2024, researchers from Harvard Business School, Wharton and ESSEC, with Procter & Gamble staff, ran a preregistered field experiment with experienced P&G professionals working on real product innovation challenges in the company's new product development process. The working paper analyzes 776 of 811 participants, and the version that Organization Science published in 2026 reports 791. Professionals were randomly assigned to work alone or in two-person teams of one R&D and one commercial professional, with or without a generative AI tool built on GPT-4 and accessed through Microsoft Azure; July participants had GPT-4o, and those with AI received one hour of training. Expert evaluators who did not know the conditions scored the solutions. In the working paper, individuals with AI scored 0.37 standard deviations above individuals without it, teams with AI scored 0.39 above, and teams without AI scored 0.24 above. Individuals with AI spent 16.4% less time and teams with AI 12.7% less. Participants with AI also reported more positive emotions. The tasks were one-day virtual workshops, and the solutions were proposals that experts scored. P&G gave gifts to the Harvard institute that ran the study, and four authors worked for P&G.","category":"general benefit","unexpected":false,"purpose":"The tool was a general GPT-4 assistant configured for the experiment. Better and faster product development work was the purpose that the experiment tested.","system":"GenAI tool built on GPT-4 (GPT-4o for the July workshop), accessed through Microsoft Azure","model_version":"GPT-4; GPT-4o in the July 2024 sessions","developer":"OpenAI (model), accessed through Microsoft Azure","deployer":"Procter & Gamble, with the Harvard Business School Digital Data Design Institute","location":"Procter & Gamble (the sources do not name the sites)","domain":"Consumer goods product development","segment":null,"benefit_type":"Increased Creativity","taxonomy_note":null,"registry_ids":{},"ratings":[{"group":"personal","depth":1,"reason":"Professionals with AI spent 16.4% less time and reported more positive emotions."},{"group":"organizational","depth":2,"reason":"Individuals with AI produced solutions rated 0.37 SD higher, on par with teams without AI."}],"ai_role":{"status":"assessed","statement":"Professionals were randomly assigned to work with or without AI and alone or in teams, so the differences isolate the effect of AI access."},"evidence":[{"kind":"peer-reviewed study","citation":"Dell'Acqua F, Ayoubi C, Lifshitz H, Sadun R, Mollick E, Mollick L, Han Y, Goldman J, Nair H, Taub S, Lakhani KR. The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI and Teamwork. Organization Science. 2026;37(4):1217-1242. doi:10.1287/orsc.2025.20702 (publisher abstract as deposited with Crossref).","title":"The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI and Teamwork","url":"https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2025.20702","date":"2026-07-01","written_by":"deployer","quote":"individuals with AI matched the performance of teams without AI, suggesting that AI can effectively replicate certain benefits of human collaboration"},{"kind":"preprint","citation":"Dell'Acqua F, Ayoubi C, Lifshitz H, Sadun R, Mollick E, Mollick L, Han Y, Goldman J, Nair H, Taub S, Lakhani K. The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI Reshaping Teamwork and Expertise. NBER Working Paper 33641, April 2025.","title":"The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI Reshaping Teamwork and Expertise","url":"https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w33641/w33641.pdf","date":"2025-04-01","written_by":"deployer","quote":"individuals with AI demonstrate a 0.37 standard deviation increase (p < 0.01), while teams with AI show a 0.39 standard deviation improvement (p < 0.01)"}],"replication":{"produced_by":["Professionals worked on real product challenges in the company's standard process.","Those with AI received one hour of training in prompting the tool."],"must_hold":["Tasks must benefit from mixed technical and commercial knowledge that the model can supply.","Experts must judge the quality of the proposals."],"echoes":[{"date":"2023-09-22","setting":"758 BCG consultants with GPT-4 on designed consulting tasks","model_version":null,"outcome":"recurred","source":"https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=64700"}]},"paired_incident":null,"headline":"A *GPT-4* tool helps lone P&G staff match human teams","metric":"raised solution quality by 0.37 SD and spent 16.4% less time","comparator":{"against":"Individuals and teams working without AI","before":"Control individuals; teams without AI scored 0.24 SD above them","after":"Individuals with AI 0.37 SD above; teams with AI 0.39 SD above","basis":"measured","quote":"individuals with AI spent 16.4% less time than the control group, while teams with AI spent 12.7% less time","url":"https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w33641/w33641.pdf"},"later":null,"value":null,"developer_country":"United States","deployer_country":"United States","unrated_because":null,"brief_notes":null,"brief":null,"revisions":[{"date":"2026-10-29","change":"Added the case.","source":"https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1287/orsc.2025.20702","editor":"AIBD"}],"confidence":"claimed","shade":"low","claim_status":"The deployer's account","claim_basis":"Sources: the deployer's peer-reviewed study and the deployer's preprint. The cited evidence includes no independent source and no finding by a regulator or court.","case_jurisdictions":[],"profile":{"case_id":"AIBD-0671","catalog_version":"1.0.0","source_fingerprint":"688c35a3121fe7b0a17e53ad41ec4edd6b38b430a0a95901e71de9c043d22f62","collection_refs":[{"collection_id":"aibd","version":"2026-10-29"}],"source_ids":["AIBD-0671-source-0001","AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"families":{"strategic assessments":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"Editorial assignment.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","record_ids":[]},"evaluations":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"identifiers","identifiers":["AIBD-0671-evaluation-1"],"role":"Evaluations of the benefit"},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"partial","record_ids":["AIBD-0671-evaluation-1"]},"monetary observations":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"Editorial assignment.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","record_ids":[]},"institutional decisions":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"Editorial assignment.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","record_ids":[]}},"fields":{"actors[]":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"developer":"OpenAI (model), accessed through Microsoft Azure","deployer":"Procter & Gamble, with the Harvard Business School Digital Data Design Institute"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["developer","deployer"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"actors[].ownership_control":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"ai_contribution":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ai_role":{"status":"assessed","statement":"Professionals were randomly assigned to work with or without AI and alone or in teams, so the differences isolate the effect of AI access."}}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ai_role"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"ai_relationship":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"category":"general benefit","ai_role":{"status":"assessed","statement":"Professionals were randomly assigned to work with or without AI and alone or in teams, so the differences isolate the effect of AI access."}}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ai_role","category"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].alternatives":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].assessor_date":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].depth":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ratings":[{"group":"personal","depth":1,"reason":"Professionals with AI spent 16.4% less time and reported more positive emotions."},{"group":"organizational","depth":2,"reason":"Individuals with AI produced solutions rated 0.37 SD higher, on par with teams without AI."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ratings"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].display_confidence":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"structured","data":{"confidence":"low","evidence_word":"claimed","claim_status":"The deployer's account","basis":"Sources: the deployer's peer-reviewed study and the deployer's preprint. The cited evidence includes no independent source and no finding by a regulator or court.","interpretation":"Existing display rule preserved; the richer outcome-specific confidence question still needs review."}},"provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].rationale":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ratings":[{"group":"personal","depth":1,"reason":"Professionals with AI spent 16.4% less time and reported more positive emotions."},{"group":"organizational","depth":2,"reason":"Individuals with AI produced solutions rated 0.37 SD higher, on par with teams without AI."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ratings"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].rubric_version":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].status_basis":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].target":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ratings":[{"group":"personal","depth":1,"reason":"Professionals with AI spent 16.4% less time and reported more positive emotions."},{"group":"organizational","depth":2,"reason":"Individuals with AI produced solutions rated 0.37 SD higher, on par with teams without AI."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ratings"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"availability":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"brief":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"case_kind":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"structured","data":{"classification":"evaluation or study","answer":"The case describes an evaluation or a study. A preregistered field experiment.","scope":"The period and activity described in the case."}},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["account","evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0001"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"The case describes an evaluation or a study. A preregistered field experiment.","inferred":false}},"case_links[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Compared with the incidents in the AI Incident Database snapshot of 26 October 2026.","record_fields":["paired_incident"],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"No incident in the AI Incident Database snapshot of 26 October 2026 concerns the same kind of system harming the same kind of stakeholder.","review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"partial"},"claims[].evidence_links":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"claims[].evidence_strength":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"structured","data":{"answer":"The deployer's account. Sources: the deployer's peer-reviewed study and the deployer's preprint. The cited evidence includes no independent source and no finding by a regulator or court.","evidence_word":"claimed","claim_status":"The deployer's account"}},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0001","AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"The deployer's account. Sources: the deployer's peer-reviewed study and the deployer's preprint. The cited evidence includes no independent source and no finding by a regulator or court.","inferred":false}},"claims[].missingness":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"claims[].proposition":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"cross_border_flows[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"decisions[].action_outcome":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"institutional decisions"},"decisions[].grounds":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"institutional decisions"},"decisions[].institution_task":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"institutional decisions"},"decisions[].success_criterion":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"institutional decisions"},"deployment_stage":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"structured","data":{"classification":"pilot","answer":"The system was used in a pilot. The tool was provided in workshops within an experiment and upskilling program.","scope":"The period and activity described in the case."}},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["account","evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0001"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"The system was used in a pilot. The tool was provided in workshops within an experiment and upskilling program.","inferred":false}},"economics[].amount":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].costs[]":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].counterfactual":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].currency_price_basis":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].gross_net":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].measure_type":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].period_unit":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].realization":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].recipient_payer":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].return_payback":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].valuation_method":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"evaluations[].ai_uplift":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"AI let individuals match teams."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"AI let individuals match teams.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].comparator":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"Individuals without AI."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"Individuals without AI.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].design":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"Randomized."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"Randomized.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].effect":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"0.37 SD (individuals with AI), 0.39 SD (teams with AI), 0.24 SD (teams without AI)."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"0.37 SD (individuals with AI), 0.39 SD (teams with AI), 0.24 SD (teams without AI).","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].exposure":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"GenAI tool during one workshop task, after one hour of training."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"GenAI tool during one workshop task, after one hour of training.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].id":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"identifiers","identifiers":["AIBD-0671-evaluation-1"],"role":"Evaluations of the benefit"},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"Randomized.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].measurement_method":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"Blinded expert quality scores, time on task, self-reported emotions."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"Blinded expert quality scores, time on task, self-reported emotions.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].metric":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"Standardized solution quality."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"Standardized solution quality.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].reproduction_materials":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"Preregistered; data not public."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"Preregistered; data not public.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].setting_sample":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"776 P&G professionals in R&D and commercial roles."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"776 P&G professionals in R&D and commercial roles.","inferred":false}},"evaluations[].uncertainty_limitations":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"text","text":"One-day workshop tasks; quality judged as proposals; P&G funding and co-authors."},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"One-day workshop tasks; quality judged as proposals; P&G funding and co-authors.","inferred":false}},"external_references[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"follow_up[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"human_oversight":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"id":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"id":"AIBD-0671"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["id"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"infrastructure_dependencies[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].beneficiaries":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].beneficiary_count":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].benefit_type":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"benefit_type":"Increased Creativity"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["benefit_type"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].claim":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"account":"Between May and July 2024, researchers from Harvard Business School, Wharton and ESSEC, with Procter & Gamble staff, ran a preregistered field experiment with experienced P&G professionals working on real product innovation challenges in the company's new product development process. The working paper analyzes 776 of 811 participants, and the version that Organization Science published in 2026 reports 791. Professionals were randomly assigned to work alone or in two-person teams of one R&D and one commercial professional, with or without a generative AI tool built on GPT-4 and accessed through Microsoft Azure; July participants had GPT-4o, and those with AI received one hour of training. Expert evaluators who did not know the conditions scored the solutions. In the working paper, individuals with AI scored 0.37 standard deviations above individuals without it, teams with AI scored 0.39 above, and teams without AI scored 0.24 above. Individuals with AI spent 16.4% less time and teams with AI 12.7% less. Participants with AI also reported more positive emotions. The tasks were one-day virtual workshops, and the solutions were proposals that experts scored. P&G gave gifts to the Harvard institute that ran the study, and four authors worked for P&G.","benefit_type":"Increased Creativity"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["account","benefit_type"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].distribution":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].duration":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].id":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].stakeholder_group":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ratings":[{"group":"personal","depth":1,"reason":"Professionals with AI spent 16.4% less time and reported more positive emotions."},{"group":"organizational","depth":2,"reason":"Individuals with AI produced solutions rated 0.37 SD higher, on par with teams without AI."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ratings"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].status":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"benefit_status":"reported"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["benefit_status"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].tradeoffs":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].unexpected":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"unexpected":false,"purpose":"The tool was a general GPT-4 assistant configured for the experiment. Better and faster product development work was the purpose that the experiment tested."}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["unexpected","purpose"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"places[]":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"location":"Procter & Gamble (the sources do not name the sites)","developer_country":"United States","deployer_country":"United States"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["location","developer_country","deployer_country"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"purpose":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"purpose":"The tool was a general GPT-4 assistant configured for the experiment. Better and faster product development work was the purpose that the experiment tested."}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["purpose"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"record_dates":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"date_observed":"2024-07-01","date_basis":"source information","date_precision":"month","revisions":[{"date":"2026-10-29","change":"Added the case.","source":"https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1287/orsc.2025.20702","editor":"AIBD"}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["date_observed","date_basis","date_precision","revisions"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"replication.attempts[]":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"replication":{"produced_by":["Professionals worked on real product challenges in the company's standard process.","Those with AI received one hour of training in prompting the tool."],"must_hold":["Tasks must benefit from mixed technical and commercial knowledge that the model can supply.","Experts must judge the quality of the proposals."],"echoes":[{"date":"2023-09-22","setting":"758 BCG consultants with GPT-4 on designed consulting tasks","outcome":"recurred","source":"https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=64700"}]}}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["replication"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"replication.conditions":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"replication":{"produced_by":["Professionals worked on real product challenges in the company's standard process.","Those with AI received one hour of training in prompting the tool."],"must_hold":["Tasks must benefit from mixed technical and commercial knowledge that the model can supply.","Experts must judge the quality of the proposals."],"echoes":[{"date":"2023-09-22","setting":"758 BCG consultants with GPT-4 on designed consulting tasks","outcome":"recurred","source":"https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=64700"}]}}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["replication"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"revision_history[]":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"revisions":[{"date":"2026-10-29","change":"Added the case.","source":"https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1287/orsc.2025.20702","editor":"AIBD"}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["revisions"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"sector":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"domain":"Consumer goods product development"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["domain"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].access_version":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].citation_locator":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"evidence":[{"kind":"peer-reviewed study","citation":"Dell'Acqua F, Ayoubi C, Lifshitz H, Sadun R, Mollick E, Mollick L, Han Y, Goldman J, Nair H, Taub S, Lakhani KR. The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI and Teamwork. Organization Science. 2026;37(4):1217-1242. doi:10.1287/orsc.2025.20702 (publisher abstract as deposited with Crossref).","title":"The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI and Teamwork","url":"https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2025.20702","date":"2026-07-01","written_by":"deployer","quote":"individuals with AI matched the performance of teams without AI, suggesting that AI can effectively replicate certain benefits of human collaboration"},{"kind":"preprint","citation":"Dell'Acqua F, Ayoubi C, Lifshitz H, Sadun R, Mollick E, Mollick L, Han Y, Goldman J, Nair H, Taub S, Lakhani K. The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI Reshaping Teamwork and Expertise. NBER Working Paper 33641, April 2025.","title":"The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI Reshaping Teamwork and Expertise","url":"https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w33641/w33641.pdf","date":"2025-04-01","written_by":"deployer","quote":"individuals with AI demonstrate a 0.37 standard deviation increase (p < 0.01), while teams with AI show a 0.39 standard deviation improvement (p < 0.01)"}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].id":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"identifiers","identifiers":["AIBD-0671-source-0001","AIBD-0671-source-0002"],"role":"Existing evidence items, in their original order"},"provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"complete"},"sources[].language":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].relationship":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"evidence":[{"kind":"peer-reviewed study","citation":"Dell'Acqua F, Ayoubi C, Lifshitz H, Sadun R, Mollick E, Mollick L, Han Y, Goldman J, Nair H, Taub S, Lakhani KR. The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI and Teamwork. Organization Science. 2026;37(4):1217-1242. doi:10.1287/orsc.2025.20702 (publisher abstract as deposited with Crossref).","title":"The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI and Teamwork","url":"https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2025.20702","date":"2026-07-01","written_by":"deployer","quote":"individuals with AI matched the performance of teams without AI, suggesting that AI can effectively replicate certain benefits of human collaboration"},{"kind":"preprint","citation":"Dell'Acqua F, Ayoubi C, Lifshitz H, Sadun R, Mollick E, Mollick L, Han Y, Goldman J, Nair H, Taub S, Lakhani K. The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI Reshaping Teamwork and Expertise. NBER Working Paper 33641, April 2025.","title":"The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI Reshaping Teamwork and Expertise","url":"https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w33641/w33641.pdf","date":"2025-04-01","written_by":"deployer","quote":"individuals with AI demonstrate a 0.37 standard deviation increase (p < 0.01), while teams with AI show a 0.39 standard deviation improvement (p < 0.01)"}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].upstream_sources":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"strategic_assessments[]":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"strategic assessments"},"summary":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"summary":"In a field experiment with 776 P&G professionals, individuals using a GPT-4-based tool raised solution quality by 0.37 SD and spent 16.4% less time, matching teams without AI.","account":"Between May and July 2024, researchers from Harvard Business School, Wharton and ESSEC, with Procter & Gamble staff, ran a preregistered field experiment with experienced P&G professionals working on real product innovation challenges in the company's new product development process. The working paper analyzes 776 of 811 participants, and the version that Organization Science published in 2026 reports 791. Professionals were randomly assigned to work alone or in two-person teams of one R&D and one commercial professional, with or without a generative AI tool built on GPT-4 and accessed through Microsoft Azure; July participants had GPT-4o, and those with AI received one hour of training. Expert evaluators who did not know the conditions scored the solutions. In the working paper, individuals with AI scored 0.37 standard deviations above individuals without it, teams with AI scored 0.39 above, and teams without AI scored 0.24 above. Individuals with AI spent 16.4% less time and teams with AI 12.7% less. Participants with AI also reported more positive emotions. The tasks were one-day virtual workshops, and the solutions were proposals that experts scored. P&G gave gifts to the Harvard institute that ran the study, and four authors worked for P&G."}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["summary","account"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].autonomy_permissions":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].component_role":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].deployment_configuration":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].inputs_outputs":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].model_name":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].model_version":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"model_version":"GPT-4; GPT-4o in the July 2024 sessions"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["model_version"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].product_name":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"system":"GenAI tool built on GPT-4 (GPT-4o for the July workshop), accessed through Microsoft Azure"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["system"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].provider":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"taxonomy_crosswalks[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"title":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"title":"Procter & Gamble field experiment: professionals working alone with a GPT-4 tool match two-person teams on product innovation tasks","headline":"A *GPT-4* tool helps lone P&G staff match human teams"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["title","headline"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"version":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"identifiers","identifiers":["142efe1afe49c743b488ff2e33a336f77f9a378151df3833acb70f1834d9c92b"],"role":"SHA-256 of the complete public case and its assessments"},"provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"SHA-256 of the public case, its assessments, and its displayed answers and notes, excluding its own identifier and the derived coverage summary.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"complete"},"workflow":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"account":"Between May and July 2024, researchers from Harvard Business School, Wharton and ESSEC, with Procter & Gamble staff, ran a preregistered field experiment with experienced P&G professionals working on real product innovation challenges in the company's new product development process. The working paper analyzes 776 of 811 participants, and the version that Organization Science published in 2026 reports 791. Professionals were randomly assigned to work alone or in two-person teams of one R&D and one commercial professional, with or without a generative AI tool built on GPT-4 and accessed through Microsoft Azure; July participants had GPT-4o, and those with AI received one hour of training. Expert evaluators who did not know the conditions scored the solutions. In the working paper, individuals with AI scored 0.37 standard deviations above individuals without it, teams with AI scored 0.39 above, and teams without AI scored 0.24 above. Individuals with AI spent 16.4% less time and teams with AI 12.7% less. Participants with AI also reported more positive emotions. The tasks were one-day virtual workshops, and the solutions were proposals that experts scored. P&G gave gifts to the Harvard institute that ran the study, and four authors worked for P&G.","replication":{"produced_by":["Professionals worked on real product challenges in the company's standard process.","Those with AI received one hour of training in prompting the tool."],"must_hold":["Tasks must benefit from mixed technical and commercial knowledge that the model can supply.","Experts must judge the quality of the proposals."],"echoes":[{"date":"2023-09-22","setting":"758 BCG consultants with GPT-4 on designed consulting tasks","outcome":"recurred","source":"https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=64700"}]}}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["account","replication"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"}},"summary":{"total":91,"addressed":91,"known":43,"reviewed":15,"reviewed_complete":14,"reviewed_partial":1,"record_mapped":29,"review_not_assessed":47,"not_assessed":0,"complete":false,"by_state":{"value_present":43,"not_reported":0,"unresolved":48,"not_assessed":0,"not_applicable":0,"withheld":0,"source_unavailable":0}}},"presentation_version":"4cdb5eca25d2919d99c43930900dad2bb397341b87344d3287a2f0f0dbfccc27"}