A study by researchers from MIT and elsewhere compares productivity differences between remote and in-person work attendance, reports Gleb Tsipursky for The Hill. The study found that “employees do not simply become more efficient because a manager watches their every move,” explains Tsipursky. “Rather, they want clarity, communication, and trust.”
Researchers at MIT have found that “AI agents can make the workplace more productive when fine-tuned for different personality types, but human co-workers pay a price in lost socialization,” reports Kaustuv Basu for Bloomberg. The researchers concluded “found that humans using AI raised their productivity by 60%—partly because those workers sent 23% fewer social messages,” writes Basu.
Prof. Daniela Rus, director of CSAIL, speaks with Newsweek reporter Marni Rose McFall about the impact of AI on entry level jobs. “We need a strong pipeline of talent that starts with entry-level roles, internships, and hands-on learning opportunities," says Rus. "These early experiences remain essential stepping stones, helping people build technical confidence, domain fluency, and problem-solving skills. And soon, the skills companies will be looking for in entry-level workers is how well they can make the most of AI tools."
Prof. David Autor speaks with Wired reporter Will Knight about the anticipated impact of AI on employment. “If demand for software were like demand for colonoscopies, no improvement in speed or reduction in costs would create a mad rush for the proctologist's office,” says Autor. “But if demand for software is like demand for taxi services, then we may see an Uber effect on coding: more people writing more code at lower prices, and lower wages.”
Prof. Simon Johnson speaks with Wired reporter Paresh Dave about the financial and social cost of AI implantation in the workforce, making the case that governments should lower payroll taxes for entry-level roles to encourage hiring and help humans build careers. “The right lever to pull is one that reduces costs to employers,” says Johnson.
A study by researchers at MIT explores “worker attitudes surrounding automation,” reports Sage Lazzaro for Fortune. “A lot of factories and other industrial environments have had data around for a long time and haven’t necessarily known what to do with it,” explains Research Scientist Ben Armstrong. “Now there are new algorithms and new software that’s allowing these companies to be a lot more intelligent with using that data to make work better.”
Postdoc Isabella Loaiza speaks with ABC News reporter Max Zahn about her study examining how jobs and tasks across the U.S. economy shifted between 2016-2024. Loaiza and her colleagues found that “rather than dispense with qualities like critical thinking and empathy, workplace technology heightened the need for workers who exhibit those attributes,” Zahn explains. “It is true we’re seeing AI having an impact on white-collar work instead of more blue-collar work,” says Loaiza. “We found that jobs that are very human-intensive are probably more robust.”
Writing for The Boston Globe, Prof. David Mindell spotlights how “a new wave of industrial companies, many in New England, are leveraging new technologies to create jobs, empower workers, and address climate change.” Mindell notes that “young Americans — new industrialists — are devoting themselves to making things for the common good.” He adds: "The country needs this generation of builders who are excited about working with their hands, about the satisfactions of building the world, and who see that work as building our communities.”
Forbes reporter Michael Nietzel spotlights MIT’s Initiative for New Manufacturing (INM), “an institution-wide effort intended to promote and advance the future of U.S. manufacturing.” Nietzel notes that the INM is part of an effort to “rethink how MIT could help shape the future of manufacturing through workforce training, advanced technologies, and industry collaborations. It will focus on enhancing the future manufacturing capacity and sophistication of several major industries.”
Prof. Nelson Repenning and Don Kieffer, a senior lecturer at MIT Sloan, speak with Boston Herald reporter Vicki Salemi about how spring-cleaning strategies can be applied to organizing work, from handling emails and meeting requests to tackling new assignments. “First, most people take on too many tasks at once and start those tasks before they are ready,” says Repenning. “We would never let a surgeon do three procedures at once or start operating before all the equipment and people were in place, but knowledge workers do this every day.”
Prof. David Autor speaks with Rogé Karma from The Atlantic about the role of tariffs in the American manufacturing industry. “Letting free trade rip is an easy policy,” says Autor. “Putting up giant tariffs is an easy policy. Figuring out some middle path is hard. Deciding what sectors to invest in and protect is hard. Doing the work to build new industries is hard. But this is how great nations lead.”
Prof. David Autor speaks with Financial Times reporter Martin Wolf about the impact of AI on the workforce. “I think [AI] will be quite important, it will be pervasive, it will be transformative in some activities, but I don’t think in general, it’s going to cause an economic implosion of work anytime in the near future,” explains Autor.
Speaking with Wall Street Journal reporter Justin Lahart, Prof. Sendhil Mullainathan makes the case that people have a choice about what kind of technology AI becomes. “People imagine that AI is going to automate things, but they don’t appreciate that automation is just one path. There’s nothing intrinsic about machine learning or AI that puts us on that path. The other path is really the path of augmentation,” says Mullainathan. “Whether we end up building things that replace us, or things that enhance our capacities, that is something that we can influence.”
Ben Armstrong, executive director of the MIT Industrial Performance Center, speaks with Marketplace reporter Samantha Fields about the impact of tariffs on manufacturing in the U.S. “Things like magnets, which are really critical for batteries and other core electronic technologies, we’ve really lost the capacity to build in the U.S.” Armstrong adds that it’s possible to build that capacity here, but “it takes a long time, and it takes really significant investment,” likely from the government and from companies.
Wall Street Journal reporter Lauren Weber spotlights a paper by Prof. David Autor that finds import tariffs have had little effect on job creation and preservation in the U.S., particularly in parts of the country with tariff-protected industries. Autor and his colleagues found “manufacturing employment didn’t increase, though it also didn't fall (other research found that U.S. companies had a hard time selling more products abroad, which may help explain why manufacturers didn't add jobs),” Weber explains. “Worse than that, retaliatory tariffs from trading partners led to job losses, especially in agriculture.”