The other day, someone asked me if my clients would start demanding that I lower my prices “because of AI.”
The primary way I earn money is by working as a freelance content marketer for B2B SaaS companies. It’s a question that a lot of people are facing right now — freelancers, employees, anyone whose work has gotten faster or more efficient thanks to AI tools. The assumption baked into that question is that if something can be produced faster, it must be worth less. Or that workers should be producing significantly more of it for the same price.
The pressure to lower prices or produce exponentially more “because AI” rests on a specific assumption: that the value of work is measured by how long it takes to produce it. If something gets done faster, it should “cost” less in some shape or form.
That assumption was always wrong.
The “do more with less” trap
The demand that AI should make workers cheaper or exponentially more productive is the latest version of a pattern that has been squeezing workers for years. Automation did it before AI. “Lean” management did it before automation. CEOs have long demanded “more with less” — AI is just the latest mechanism.
The basic way economists measure productivity is in output per hour. If you produce more output in the same number of hours, that makes you more productive. No wonder CEOs are salivating.
I had written almost this entire draft and was ready to publish when the CEO of ClickUp (a project management software) decided to further illustrate my point. He wrote on X/Twitter:
Today we reduced headcount by 22%. The business is the strongest it’s ever been. So I think it’s important to be direct about what I’m seeing and why.
This wasn’t about cutting costs. Most savings from this change will flow directly back into the people who stay. We’ll be introducing million-dollar salary bands. If you create outsized impact using AI, you’ll be paid outside of traditional bands.
The primary change is that we’re reconstructing around what I call 100x org. The goal is 100x output. The roles required to build at the highest level are fundamentally different than they were a year ago.
The 100x org is actually heavily dependent on people — infinitely more than today. This is only possible with 10x people that have embraced and adopted new ways of working.
(There was a lot more after this about the 100x org… it was a long post.)
Translation: “This isn’t about cutting costs. I just don’t give AF about the people who work for me.”
He doesn’t care about the former employees and families of nearly 25% of people who are now unemployed at the whim of the CEO.
He doesn’t care about the employees left behind, because 100x output is insanity. And even though he says that they will be increasing the salaries to match the impact… is it 100x? No. The difference between the impact, what flows to the company, and what flows back to the employee is what’s outsized.
He said the quiet part out loud (at least, according to a CEO’s way of thinking): AI isn’t about freeing up anyone’s time, as it promises. It’s about creating and requiring more work.
The infuriating part of his word salad of a statement was saying that the 100x org is “heavily dependent on people.” Just… not the people that the company had already hired, apparently.
How to think about your value at work
100x org aside, productivity gains that flow entirely to the employer or client have absolutely no benefit for the worker. What is the point of a 100x org? It’s a means of extracting more output for the same money (or the same output with fewer people, or for less money).
The conversation about AI and compensation — whether that’s salary negotiations, freelance rates, or even workload expectations — needs reframing now, before this intense and unrealistic focus on increased output becomes the new baseline.
For employees: When a manager suggests that AI should allow the team to take on twice the workload, that’s a change in the requirements of the role — and workers need to treat it as such before it becomes the default expectation. 100x is ridiculous. He’s probably blowing smoke, but it’s smoke he chose to blow in public. I know for many people, quitting is not an option, but I hope the CEO’s post scares away any new talent.
If you take AI out of the picture and were asked to take on more responsibilities, you are being asked to do more for the same pay (which isn’t right). Even ClickUp’s promise of higher salary bands isn’t aligned with the 100x output the CEO is expecting.
I’ve long advocated that people research a company before applying for a job, and public statements like this are self-filtering. Don’t apply unless you plan to create value only for the company, and not for yourself.
For the self-employed: Thinking about client expectations in a world of AI, the frame is simpler (though the stakes may feel high because your livelihood depends on clients). The deliverable is the deliverable. If the quality hasn’t changed, the price hasn’t changed. No “extra output” for the same cost, and certainly not a lower cost. How you produce the work is your business — literally.
I’ve used AI in many parts of my business. I used to have a manual process (copying/pasting) from client briefs to my own project management tool. Automation and AI now do that formatting for me, saving time with every deliverable. I have one client who requires heavily researched articles. Claude now does the bulk of the research, and I check the results to make sure it’s correct and relevant to what I’m writing. These are process improvements, not a devaluation of my work.
If you’re navigating these conversations right now, don’t concede the premise that “faster” means “cheaper.”
This latest wave of “do more with less” doesn’t have to be the one that pushes people over the edge.
Thinking about a career change? Download my guide: 5 Types of Career Pivots.
If you want to support my work as a writer, you can subscribe to receive additional issues I publish.
Have a work story you’d like to share? Please reach out using this form. I can retell your story while protecting your identity, share a guest post, or conduct an interview.