UK civil servants saved 24 minutes per day using Microsoft Copilot, saving two weeks each per year according to a new report

by

It appears that Artificial Intelligence is living up to its promise of increasing productivity, as new evidence indicates it is making a tangible difference.

Microsoft’s AI tool, called Copilot, is seamlessly integrated within Windows, accessible both as a feature on Microsoft Edge and an app for iOS and Android devices. Powered by ChatGPT and other OpenAI models, Copilot assists in tasks such as formatting, creating text, and even generating entirely new content, all from natural language prompts. The latest iteration of this tool also offers conversational audio support, enabling you to converse with the AI almost like a chat, which we can refer to as “interacting” with the AI.

One major question arises concerning the influence of AI services such as Copilot and OpenAI on workplaces. Last week, Anthropic’s CEO sparked controversy by suggesting that up to half of entry-level white collar jobs could be automated in the near future, potentially replaced by AI. Additionally, Microsoft’s focus on “agential” AI has fueled concerns about job losses, as increasingly complex programming tasks are being delegated to these intelligent systems.

In an ideal situation, AI serves to increase human productivity instead of completely replacing workers. Although skepticism may lead one to doubt this, recent evidence from the United Kingdom (as reported by Financial Times) suggests that AI is indeed being utilized effectively within a significant government department.

Based on an FT report, it’s been disclosed that approximately 20,000 UK government staff were involved in a trial of Microsoft Copilot. These employees are now utilizing this service for various purposes, including drafting official documents, jotting down meeting minutes, searching internal data, and even offering customized suggestions to jobless individuals seeking benefits.

The research indicates that, generally speaking, employees of the UK government participating in a particular program typically saved an average of 19 to 24 minutes daily, which equates to roughly two weeks for each individual annually. However, the specific approach used to calculate these figures precisely isn’t clearly defined.

24 minutes per day might not have initially seemed significant to me, but if we calculate it based on Microsoft Copilot’s figures: 26 minutes multiplied by 253 working days multiplied by 20,000 workers equals 131,560,000 minutes. This translates to 2,192,667 hours or approximately 91,361 days in a standard UK working year, accounting for holidays and vacations. Therefore, it’s quite an impressive productivity boost.

Despite potential flaws or inaccuracies in the daily time savings measurements, a staggering 82% of participants expressed their preference for the technology and indicated their desire to keep utilizing it.

The big AI debate rages on

As a researcher delving into the realm of AI applications in the professional sphere, I find myself navigating through heated debates surrounding its use. There’s a significant push for limitations and regulations on this technology, particularly among UK artists who are urging the government to prohibit AI from learning models based on copyrighted works. Even Facebook, an influential player in the industry, has voiced concerns that such a ban would effectively “eliminate” the AI sector due to the alleged inability of AI to infringe upon copyrighted content.

Companies appear to be drawn towards the concept of automating jobs previously done by humans using artificial intelligence, yet they have expressed concerns about potential harm to their reputation that this move might bring. For instance, Duolingo’s online platforms have received an influx of negative comments against AI since its CEO announced plans to replace human staff with AI, resulting in a significant backlash and ultimately a reversal of the decision.

I employed Copilot to perform the given calculation, sparing me the task of excelling in math (even though I did verify the process). However, this convenience comes with a catch, as pointed out in FT’s report, AI’s occasional lapses and errors necessitate human validation, which might even lower productivity. In extreme instances, AI could generate inaccuracies that lead to legal complications for businesses and administrations. I can’t rely on it to create content for articles due to this issue (not to mention my personal preference for writing), as it’s more straightforward to compose things myself rather than constantly scrutinize Copilot’s output.

Where Copilot does tend to shine, for me, is formatting. Converting columns in Excel to comma separated lists without having to use the TEXTJOIN function is really handy. It can also create hardware spec tables for articles in HTML really quickly, which does save on tedium writing reviews occasionally.

Before we delve into the discussion on the carbon impact, let’s consider it first: The study mentioned that Copilot saves a significant amount of time each year through queries, and with each query generating approximately 4.32g of CO2 emissions, the UK government’s AI study resulted in 568 metric tons of CO2. Now, if we were to compare this with an additional 91,361 days worth of human productivity, how much more carbon would that produce? This investigation has certainly led us down a fascinating path.

Read More

2025-06-02 18:09