This study investigates how occupational AI exposure impacts employment at the intensive margin, i.e., the length of workdays and the allocation of time between work and leisure. Drawing on individual-level time diary data from 2004–2023, we find that higher AI exposure---whether stemming from the ChatGPT shock or broader AI evolution---is associated with longer work hours and reduced leisure time, primarily due to AI complementing human labor rather than replacing it. This effect is particularly pronounced in contexts where AI significantly enhances marginal productivity and monitoring efficiency. It is further amplified in competitive labor and product markets, where workers have limited bargaining power to retain the benefits of productivity gains, which are often captured by consumers or firms instead. The findings question the expectation that technological advancements alleviate human labor burdens, revealing instead a paradox where such progresses compromise work-life balance.

Scientific research is a fundamental driver of innovation. Yet, corporate investment in scientific research is declining relative to patent development, potentially delaying the economic benefits of valuable scientific research. This study investigates how Scientists on Corporate Boards (BdScis), drawn from industry and academia, support corporate innovation by bridging the scientific research to patent gap. We measure scientific expertise using BdScis' publications. Network analysis shows that firms are more successful in recruiting and retaining talented inventors from their BdScis' professional networks. To address endogeneity concerns, we examine local supplies of BdSci candidates and the Human Genome Project's technological shock to establish causality.

We use the staggered rollout of a mentorship program within a superstar technology firm to test whether a small-scale, targeted intervention can reduce frictions limiting latent innovation potential. Analyzing novel data capturing the complete innovation pipeline---from initial idea disclosures through patent applications---we study seven mentoring cohorts with 633 mentees and track outcomes for over 20,000 employees. First, we find a positive and significant relationship between participating in the mentorship program and innovative productivity in the short- and long-term, with underrepresented innovators realizing the largest gains. Second, we document significant indirect spillovers through team formation, with non-mentored peers experiencing productivity gains through collaboration. Survey evidence points to three mechanisms: knowledge transfer about patent processes, expanded professional networks, and increased satisfaction at work. Additional analyses show broader organizational improvements: engineers perceive stronger cultural norms, and attrition is lower than at peer firms. Accounting for these spillovers indicates a substantial return on investment, so we conclude by evaluating its scaling potential.