Big tech companies are no longer content with simply encouraging their employees to experiment with AI. They are tracking hiring, incorporating it into performance reviews, and in some cases refusing to hire candidates who can’t demonstrate AI fluency.
According to recent information, wall street journal According to the report, companies ranging from 300-employee startups to giants like Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Salesforce are moving into aggressive enforcement mode. This year, for the first time, Google is incorporating the use of AI into its performance evaluations for software engineers. To do something similar, Meta overhauled its review system to track the number of lines of code its engineers wrote with AI assistance.
The forced push is not surprising given what the data shows about voluntary adoptions. Deloitte’s The state of AI in enterprises in 2026 Based on a survey of more than 3,200 business and IT leaders, the report found that while employee access to AI tools has grown by 50% in one year, less than 60% of those with access actually use AI in their daily workflows. Businesses gave people tools. Many people didn’t pick them up.
Seth Besmertnik, CEO of Conductor, a 300-person digital marketing company, described his response as “carrot and stick.” WSJ Report. The company built an AI competency scoring system that rates employees on a scale of 1 to 5. The highest scores are given to employees who create AI-powered workflows that improve the outcomes of their colleagues.
What AI enforcement means for HR
The measurement problem is trickier than it seems. Tracking whether your employees are using AI tools is relatively easy. Measure whether you are using good it’s not. Lines of code written with AI assistance say little about the quality, strategic thinking, and judgment needed to know when the AI output needs modification. HR teams will need a rubric that distinguishes true fluency from surface-level compliance.
There are also equity and legal risks worth noting. AI tools are not equally accessible or intuitive for all roles. Employees with limited technical backgrounds or in departments where AI applications are still in their infancy may face different adoption challenges than engineers at resource-rich companies.
Employment lawyers warn that tying performance evaluations to AI proficiency and adoption rates risks disparately impacting discrimination against protected groups under Title VII and the ADEA. Concerns about ageism are particularly salient, as studies report significant generational gaps in comfort levels with AI. Employers should audit these indicators to reduce bias, according to guidance from employment law firm Ogletree Deakins.
read more: Why CHROs need to redefine performance in 2026
Keyword: training
The tension at the heart of this story is: Companies are mandating the use of AI, but failing to redesign their operations around it. A Deloitte report found that 84% of organizations have not re-engineered jobs and workflows around AI capabilities, despite workforce skills shortages being the biggest barrier to AI integration.
of the general meeting Current state of the latest technical talent in 2026based on a survey of 500 HR leaders, found that 83% now believe their company’s success depends on upskilling existing employees in AI rather than hiring new talent. However, the same study identifies low employee buy-in and low leader buy-in as the biggest barriers to actually making training programs stick.
“The AI skills gap is growing too quickly for companies to adopt the loophole,” Daniele Grassi, CEO of General Assembly, said in a release. He said increased investment in upskilling reflects leaders’ understanding that existing employees bring the necessary business context, organizational knowledge and cultural navigation skills. “Continuous, incremental, role-specific learning is the only way to keep up with the pace of technological change.”
