This article addresses the growing organizational practice of formally incorporating AI usage as a metric in employee performance reviews, examining both the employer rationale and the employee experience. The author argues that a significant disconnect exists between executive enthusiasm for AI and frontline employee adoption, with data suggesting that mandating AI through performance systems is the mechanism companies are using to close that gap. Key evidence includes statistics from a Betterworks study showing over 80 percent of executives require or encourage AI use while only 16 percent of employees utilize it regularly, and a Section AI consultancy study showing divergent time-savings perceptions between executives and non-management staff. The article also cites practices at Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, Salesforce, Google, OpenAI, and Shopify as examples of formal AI performance measurement. The article concludes by offering employees practical guidance on how to respond to AI-related performance review questions, including tracking usage, quantifying impact, connecting AI activity to organizational goals, explaining process, and demonstrating accountability for AI outputs. Key insights: A substantial gap exists between executive and employee perceptions of AI utility: over 80 percent of executives require or encourage AI use, yet only 16 percent of employees use it regularly or understand their company's AI vision. Major tech companies including Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, Salesforce, Google, OpenAI, and Shopify have moved beyond encouraging AI use to formally measuring it in performance evaluations, treating it as a core competency. Mandating AI usage metrics without clear definitions of quality risks rewarding volume of AI output over accuracy or judgment, a concern the article characterises through the concept of error-riddled 'workslop' appearing as high performance on surface metrics. Practical takeaways: Employees navigating AI-related performance review questions are advised to quantify specific outcomes — time saved, output increased, business goals supported — rather than describing AI use in general terms. Organizations introducing AI as a formal performance metric are observed to achieve more consistent adoption when they pair measurement with explicit training, defined quality standards, and clear organizational AI goals prior to institutionalizing the metric.