IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/bushor/v64y2021i5p711-724.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision augmentation and automation with artificial intelligence: Threat or opportunity for managers?

Author

Listed:
  • Leyer, Michael
  • Schneider, Sabrina

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising and increasingly available technology for managerial decision-making. With the adoption of AI-enabled software, organizations can leverage various benefits of the technology, but they also have to consider the intended and unintended consequences of using the technology for managerial roles. It is still unclear whether managers will benefit from enhancing their abilities with AI-enabled software or become powerless puppets that do more than announce AI-enabled software results. Our research has revealed distinct ways in which organizations can use AI-enabled decision-making solutions: as tools or novelties, for decision augmentation or automation, and as either a voluntary or a mandatory option. In this article, we discuss the implications of each of these combinations on the relevant managers. We consider outcomes related to managerial job design and derive practical advice for organizational designers and managers who work with AI. Our outcomes provide guidance on how to deal with the conflict-riddled relationship between managers and technology with regard to capabilities, responsibilities, and acceptance of AI-enabled software.

Suggested Citation

  • Leyer, Michael & Schneider, Sabrina, 2021. "Decision augmentation and automation with artificial intelligence: Threat or opportunity for managers?," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(5), pages 711-724.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:bushor:v:64:y:2021:i:5:p:711-724
    DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007681321000288
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.026?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jarrahi, Mohammad Hossein, 2018. "Artificial intelligence and the future of work: Human-AI symbiosis in organizational decision making," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 577-586.
    2. Alina Köchling & Marius Claus Wehner, 2020. "Discriminated by an algorithm: a systematic review of discrimination and fairness by algorithmic decision-making in the context of HR recruitment and HR development," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 795-848, November.
    3. Øystein D. Fjeldstad & Charles C. Snow & Raymond E. Miles & Christopher Lettl, 2012. "The architecture of collaboration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 734-750, June.
    4. Barry Mitnick, 1975. "The theory of agency," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 27-42, December.
    5. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Sam Ransbotham & Robert G. Fichman & Ram Gopal & Alok Gupta, 2016. "Special Section Introduction—Ubiquitous IT and Digital Vulnerabilities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 834-847, December.
    7. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    8. Xu, Yingzi & Shieh, Chih-Hui & van Esch, Patrick & Ling, I-Ling, 2020. "AI customer service: Task complexity, problem-solving ability, and usage intention," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 189-199.
    9. Oldham, Greg R. & Fried, Yitzhak, 2016. "Job design research and theory: Past, present and future," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 20-35.
    10. Kirsten Martin, 2019. "Ethical Implications and Accountability of Algorithms," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 835-850, December.
    11. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Plantec, Quentin & Deval, Marie-Alix & Hooge, Sophie & Weil, Benoit, 2023. "Big data as an exploration trigger or problem-solving patch: Design and integration of AI-embedded systems in the automotive industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    2. Johnson, Prince Chacko & Laurell, Christofer & Ots, Mart & Sandström, Christian, 2022. "Digital innovation and the effects of artificial intelligence on firms’ research and development – Automation or augmentation, exploration or exploitation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    3. Ion Popa & Marian Mihai Cioc & Andreea Breazu & Catalina Florentina Popa, 2024. "Identifying Sufficient and Necessary Competencies in the Effective Use of Artificial Intelligence Technologies," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 26(65), pages 1-33, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rachel Croson & Nicolas Treich, 2014. "Behavioral Environmental Economics: Promises and Challenges," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 335-351, July.
    2. K. Skylar Powell, 2017. "Understanding ‘Misfits’: Aspirations and Systematic Deviations from Firm-Specific Optimal Multinationality," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 529-544, August.
    3. Lane, David C. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A., 2023. "Towards a behavioural system dynamics: Exploring its scope and delineating its promise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 777-794.
    4. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    5. Li Chen & A. Gürhan Kök & Jordan D. Tong, 2013. "The Effect of Payment Schemes on Inventory Decisions: The Role of Mental Accounting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 436-451, September.
    6. Rebecca M. Guidice & Darryl A. Seale & Daniel McAllister, 2013. "Dynamic Decision Making: Individual Attributes And Behavior in a Challenge Dice Game," Business and Economic Research, Macrothink Institute, vol. 3(1), pages 299-321, June.
    7. Ancarani, A. & Di Mauro, C. & D'Urso, D., 2013. "A human experiment on inventory decisions under supply uncertainty," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 61-73.
    8. Kuperman, Ranan, 2011. "Coping with Conflict:A Dynamic Decision Making Perspective," NEPS Working Papers 3/2011, Network of European Peace Scientists.
    9. James Fan & Joaquín Gómez-Miñambres, 2020. "Nonbinding Goals in Teams: A Real Effort Coordination Experiment," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1026-1044, September.
    10. Prasad Padmanabhan & Wenqing Zhang & Chia-Hsing Huang, 2013. "Mitigating the Impact of Managerial Anchoring: The Case for Management by Committee for Major Corporate Financial Decisions," Multinational Finance Journal, Multinational Finance Journal, vol. 17(3-4), pages 341-369, September.
    11. Yuan, Xuchuan & Nishant, Rohit, 2021. "Understanding the complex relationship between R&D investment and firm growth: A chaos perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 666-678.
    12. Harvey, Michael & Griffith, David & Kiessling, Tim & Moeller, Miriam, 2011. "A multi-level model of global decision-making: Developing a composite global frame-of-reference," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 177-184, April.
    13. Pastore, Erica & Alfieri, Arianna & Zotteri, Giulio, 2019. "An empirical investigation on the antecedents of the bullwhip effect: Evidence from the spare parts industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 121-133.
    14. Berry, D. & Naim, M. M., 1996. "Quantifying the relative improvements of redesign strategies in a P.C. supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 181-196, December.
    15. Towill, Denis R. & Zhou, Li & Disney, Stephen M., 2007. "Reducing the bullwhip effect: Looking through the appropriate lens," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1-2), pages 444-453, July.
    16. Andrzej Janowski & Anna Szczepańska-Przekota, 2022. "The Trait of Extraversion as an Energy-Based Determinant of Entrepreneur’s Success—The Case of Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-21, June.
    17. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    18. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    19. Ma, Yungao & Wang, Nengmin & He, Zhengwen & Lu, Jizhou & Liang, Huigang, 2015. "Analysis of the bullwhip effect in two parallel supply chains with interacting price-sensitive demands," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(3), pages 815-825.
    20. Rich, Karl M. & Ross, R. Brent & Baker, A. Derek & Negassa, Asfaw, 2011. "Quantifying value chain analysis in the context of livestock systems in developing countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 214-222, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:bushor:v:64:y:2021:i:5:p:711-724. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/bushor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.