AI related technostress: A systematic review of workload, incompetence in relation to em-ployee turnover intention

Abstract

The increasing integration of AI in the workplace is transforming job roles, performance expectations, and employee experiences. While AI has the potential to enhance efficiency and decision-making, it may also introduce new challenges, including workload and technological complexity, which can lead to employee technostress and turnover intentions. This systematic review investigates the relationship between AI-related work demands, technostress, and turnover intention, and examines the role of organizational support in alleviating these effects. The literature was sourced from databases including Scopus, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Web of Science, with the final search conducted on 15 September 2026. Studies were selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and their methodological quality was evaluated according to the information provided. Findings were synthesized narratively by identifying common themes and relationships among key variables, without meta-analysis. Twenty-five studies were included, focusing on AI usage, workload, lack of technological competence, technostress, employee well-being, organizational support, and turnover intention. The results indicate that AI-related work demands, particularly workload, technological complexity, can increase technostress and turnover intention. Organizational support may play a crucial role in mitigating these adverse effects. However, the existing evidence is constrained by variations in study contexts, research designs, and measurement methodologies, with limited longitudinal data. The findings underscore the necessity for employee training, competence development, and organizational support alongside AI implementation. This review suggests the concept of AI-Specific Organizational Support (AI-SOS) as a potential mediator between AI-related technostress and turnover intention. No external funding was received, and review was not prospectively registered.