Agentic AI use has surged: active Codex users quintupled in the first half of 2026 and multi-agent, skill-based workflows are increasingly common; internal OpenAI staff report large token-output gains, signalling substantial workplace change even as external adoption remains uneven.

Main Finding

Agentic AI (OpenAI’s Codex) is diffusing rapidly but unevenly. Over early 2026 Codex adoption and intensity rose sharply—especially inside organizations and at OpenAI—shifting work from conversational assistance toward delegated, executable workflows. Heavy users are organizing work around parallel, repeatable agentic processes, increasing task complexity and measured AI-mediated output; but broad population-level adoption remains heterogeneous and concentrated in settings with favorable organizational complements.

Key Points

• Rapid growth, uneven diffusion

  • Weekly active Codex users grew more than fivefold in the first half of 2026.
  • Adoption and intensity differ by context: OpenAI workers show near-universal, intensive use; organizational users show substantial but uneven adoption; individual (personal-account) use is still limited.
  • As of June 11, 2026, Codex accounted for ~99.8% of output tokens at OpenAI, 63.3% for organizational users, and 16.5% for individual users (measured as Codex share of output tokens across Codex and ChatGPT).

• Agentic use = delegated production, not just conversation

  • Users increasingly ask Codex to carry out multi-step, executable tasks (debugging, refactoring, configuring systems, drafting and validating artifacts), i.e., delegated production rather than consultation.
  • Tool invocation is more common in Codex (60.3% of turns invoked an external tool in the week before June 11, 2026) than in ChatGPT (21.9% of turns).

• Anchored in software but expanding beyond it

  • The largest share of tasks remain software-related (implementation, understanding, validation, ops, docs), but in contexts with deep adoption (notably OpenAI) Codex is used for research, planning, communication, data analysis, recruiting, sales, and other non-engineering tasks.

• Intensive users organize workflows differently

  • Multiple signals of intensification: output volume, task complexity, reusable “skills” usage, runtime of autonomous activity, and concurrency.

  • 10% of users manage 3+ concurrent Codex agents at least weekly; 26.6% of users invoke skills (shareable instructions/workflows).

  • The share of users submitting at least one request estimated to require >8 human-hours rose nearly tenfold since the start of 2026.
  • Output increases: e.g., median OpenAI legal employee produced 13× more monthly output tokens across Codex+ChatGPT in June 2026 vs Nov 2025; median researcher produced >50× more.

Data & Methods

• Data sources and scope

  • Usage logs from OpenAI’s Codex product (initially released April 2025) analyzed across three populations: individual (personal-account) users, organizational (Business/Enterprise) users, and OpenAI employees.
  • Time window emphasized: Jan–June 2026 (with some comparisons to Nov 2025 and earlier).

• Privacy and aggregation

  • Analyses use an automated, privacy-protecting pipeline that extracts aggregated, anonymized metrics without human review of individual messages.

• Key metrics

  • Active users (28-day activity), output tokens (tokens generated by Codex vs ChatGPT), tool invocations (proxy for agency), task complexity (estimated human time to complete delegated task), skill usage (invocation of reusable workflows/instructions), runtime and concurrency (active agent execution and parallel agents).

• Classification and validation

  • Automated classifiers assigned request-level labels (persona: Developer / General Knowledge Worker / Personal), task types, and estimated human-time complexity. Users were assigned personas by modal label over prior 30 days.
  • Job-title inference and seniority classifiers used for organizational analyses (high-quality job-title subset for firms where title coverage was strong).
  • Validation: persona classifier checked on a sample of employees—>90% agreement with HR titles; some figures based on a 3% sample of users.

• Limitations of measurement

  • Output tokens are an imperfect proxy for economic value and productivity.
  • Tool invocation is an imperfect proxy for agency.
  • The OpenAI worker population is an extreme, low-friction adoption environment and not representative of typical firms.
  • Automated classifiers carry classification error; causal claims about productivity require experimental or quasi-experimental designs beyond this descriptive study.

Implications for AI Economics

• Productivity and measurement

  • Agentic AI enables delegation of larger, multi-step tasks, which can produce large task-level gains (faster completion, higher throughput). However, token-based output increases may over- or under-state true productivity gains because downstream verification, integration, and non-automated bottlenecks matter.
  • Standard productivity statistics may undercount value created if they fail to capture quality improvements, task reallocation, or complementary organizational changes.

• Organizational complements and heterogeneity

  • Diffusion depends heavily on organizational context: access to relevant systems/files, permissions, review practices, training/knowledge sharing, and incentives matter. Firms with stronger complements (training, monitoring, low friction) will realize agentic gains sooner and more fully.
  • Result: widening gaps across firms and within firms (roles) in realized productivity and work composition.

• Job reorganization and skill demands

  • Agentic systems shift tasks from execution to delegation, supervision, verification, and coordination. Demand will likely rise for workers who can design, oversee, and validate agentic workflows (domain experts and supervisors) while routine implementation tasks decline or transform.
  • Evidence of rapid adoption among developers and technical roles suggests both displacement of some coding tasks and expansion of higher-order engineering, review, and systems-integration work.

• Labor-market and distributional effects

  • Heterogeneous adoption implies differential labor demand and wage pressures across occupations and firms. Skill-biased gains may increase returns to workers who can harness agentic tools and supervise them, while workers in low-adoption contexts may not capture gains.
  • Organizational adoption could reshape hiring (more emphasis on domain expertise, verification skills, systems integration) and redeployment of tasks within teams.

• Policy and management

  • Firms and policymakers should focus on (a) investing in complementary organizational changes (training, workflow redesign, monitoring and verification systems), (b) updating measurement and evaluation of worker output when agentic tools are used, and (c) addressing security, privacy, and governance of agentic workflows.
  • Workforce transition policies (retraining, role redesign, social safety nets) may be warranted to manage uneven disruption.

• Research directions

  • Need for causal evidence on productivity, quality, and labor-market outcomes from agentic AI (field experiments, natural experiments).
  • Better measurement linking token/output metrics to economic value, and deeper study of verification costs and downstream bottlenecks.
  • Comparative studies of adoption across firm types, industries, and regulatory environments to understand diffusion barriers and complementarities.

Limitations to keep in mind: descriptive, observational analysis based on internal product logs; OpenAI worker patterns are a frontier case; classifiers and proxies (tokens, tool use, estimated human-hours) are noisy and imperfect proxies for economic outcomes.