New research from document platform Smallpdf highlights how easily digital files can be edited or fabricated, creating a significant productivity drag in offices across the US.
Professionals now spend considerable time checking screenshots, PDFs, exported dashboards and shared documents before acting on them. Tasks that should be straightforward have become time-consuming verification processes.
Verification replaces traditional productivity drains
The study suggests that verification, rather than meetings or artificial intelligence tools, has become a major workplace inefficiency.
Modern workplaces rely on digital proof. When files can be altered quickly and are difficult to validate instantly, even genuine documents raise doubts. As a result, teams often double-check information before moving forward, slowing decision-making.
Smallpdf surveyed 1,000 full-time US professionals across industries and job levels. The findings show widespread scepticism towards digital files.
Key findings
- 87% of professionals have dismissed a document because it looked fake
- 19% have caught someone fabricating a file at work
- More than 1 in 5 have accepted a document they did not trust to keep work moving
- Nearly 1 in 10 workers have shared a fake document at work
- More than 1 in 10 cannot confidently spot a fake or AI-generated document
- 1 in 5 have lost trust in a colleague due to a questionable file
These results point to mistrust in files presented as proof rather than personal distrust between colleagues. In environments dominated by forwarded attachments and cropped screenshots, many professionals default to verifying first.
How professionals assess documents
First impressions strongly influence decisions. Nearly 9 in 10 professionals have ignored a file because it looked fake.
Validation is typically social rather than technical
- 68% check the sender or source first
- 11% check the platform or app
- 9% examine file format
- 8% review date and timestamp
Confidence remains low. 13% say they cannot identify a doctored document or AI-generated image. At the same time, about 1 in 5 admit accepting questionable files to avoid conflict or delays.
Measuring trust: The Document Trust Index
Smallpdf developed the Document Trust Index to assess trust levels among workers handling digital files. The index averages 60 out of 100, indicating moderate trust that is not automatic.
It is based on 5 factors
- exposure
- scepticism
- verification friction
- compliance under pressure
- detection confidence
Each factor is scored from 0–100, with higher scores indicating greater risk or friction. The overall trust score is calculated by subtracting the average risk score from 100.
Scepticism and verification friction scored highest at 57, making them the main drivers of slowdowns. Exposure scored 20, while compliance under pressure scored 19, suggesting the issue stems more from routine doubt than widespread fraud.
Benchmarks classify scores as:
- 0–49: low trust
- 50–69: moderate trust
- 70 and above: high trust
Most groups fall within the low 60s. Experts recommend aiming for a score closer to 70 so teams can validate selectively rather than by default.
Workplace impact and ethical boundaries
Incidents involving questionable files are not uncommon
- About 1 in 5 professionals have caught a coworker fabricating documents
- 9% admit sharing fake files
- 25% feel pressured to accept documents they are unsure about
- 21% say a questionable file caused them to lose trust in a colleague or manager
Most professionals accept basic edits such as annotation, cropping and blurring. However, they draw a clear ethical line when edits alter meaning. Nearly nine in 10 consider changing numbers or removing timestamps unethical.
A checklist for verification
To address the issue, Smallpdf introduced a Document Verification Checklist known as S.C.O.R.E.
Sender
Is the file expected from this person at this time
Context
Are any details missing, such as explanation or full conversation
Original
Is there a clean source export like a full report or PDF
Red Flags
Are there signs of editing such as mismatched fonts or blurred numbers
External Check
Can one detail be verified outside the file
The aim is to build consistent habits that protect both speed and trust, especially when documents influence decisions, finances or reputations.
Industry perspective
Malte Schiebelmann, Senior Vice President of Product at Smallpdf, said: “The Document Trust Index puts a number on something teams feel every day: when proof is easy to edit and hard to validate, work slows down. Our goal is not to make people suspicious, it is to make files easier to trust by default, with clearer context, cleaner originals, and fewer verification loops.”
Growing reliance on digital proof
Fake or altered documents may not dominate workflows, but they appear often enough that many teams now operate in a verify-first mode.
As reliance on digital proof increases, clearer standards, shared expectations and improved tools could reduce second-guessing. This would allow professionals to spend less time verifying files and more time advancing work with confidence.