Federal Employee Surveys Could Clarify Barriers to Agency AI Adoption

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has shifted to agency-administered employee surveys, giving federal organizations a potential mechanism to understand what is driving employee resistance to artificial intelligence adoption. The survey approach could help agencies distinguish among concerns about job security, uncertainty over which AI tools are approved for use, and questions about the accuracy of AI-generated results and the protection of data. For agencies planning AI deployments, this information can provide workforce context for implementation and change-management decisions rather than treating adoption as solely a technology procurement issue.

The survey process also has a compliance dimension. Agencies that want to add supplemental questions should plan for a separate information-collection approval and an agency-specific Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. That requirement may affect survey schedules and the design of agency-specific research. Program, human-resources, privacy, and legal teams may need to coordinate before collecting additional employee responses, particularly where questions address confidence in tools, workplace effects, or handling of sensitive information.

For contractors, the described needs point to possible demand for survey design, privacy support, analytics, and workforce-readiness services. A provider could potentially help an agency frame questions, manage collection and analysis, or translate employee feedback into practical adoption planning. However, this is an indication of a potential market need—not an active procurement. The source identifies no solicitation, contract vehicle, funding amount, or named agency requirement, so companies should avoid treating the survey shift as a confirmed near-term opportunity.

Companies tracking federal AI activity can use the development as an early signal to align relevant capabilities with agencies’ likely implementation challenges. Offerings should account for both the substantive concerns employees may raise and the procedural approval steps for supplemental information collection. Contractors can monitor agency announcements and procurement channels for follow-on requirements, while keeping claims about demand appropriately qualified: the immediate development is a survey and oversight process, not a contract award or request for proposals.

• OPM has shifted to agency-administered employee surveys that can help federal agencies assess barriers to AI adoption.
• The concerns identified include job-security concerns, uncertainty about approved AI tools, and questions about accuracy and data protection.
• Agencies adding supplemental questions must obtain separate information-collection approval.
• Supplemental questions also require an agency-specific OMB control number, a procedural factor that can affect planning and timing.
• Potential contractor service areas include survey design, privacy support, analytics, and workforce-readiness assistance.
• Agencies may need to coordinate survey planning across program, human-resources, privacy, and legal functions; the source does not specify a required delivery model.
• Companies can align relevant capabilities with the needs described, but should distinguish potential demand from a funded or competed requirement.
• No specific solicitation, contract opportunity, award, funding amount, or agency-level procurement is announced in the source.