Before buying more AI seats, why are some workers not using the ones you have?

A new NBER working paper finds that AI use at work is widespread but uneven: it reaches many occupations and tasks, yet fewer than half of workers use it in most of them. The useful question is not only what the tool can do. It is why people doing similar jobs make different calls about using it. Before a small team buys more seats, I would sit with three people in the same role: one who uses it, one who tried and stopped, and one who never started. What took longer than expected? Which customer or record did they not want to put in it? What already works well enough without it? Non-use is not automatically resistance. It can be a bad fit, a missing permission, an unclear expectation, or a tool that leaves extra checking to the person who uses it. If the team cannot name which one, another rollout mostly creates more licenses. What would you ask before expanding?