IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/bushor/v61y2018i4p577-586.html

Artificial intelligence and the future of work: Human-AI symbiosis in organizational decision making

Author

Listed:
  • Jarrahi, Mohammad Hossein

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has penetrated many organizational processes, resulting in a growing fear that smart machines will soon replace many humans in decision making. To provide a more proactive and pragmatic perspective, this article highlights the complementarity of humans and AI and examines how each can bring their own strength in organizational decision-making processes typically characterized by uncertainty, complexity, and equivocality. With a greater computational information processing capacity and an analytical approach, AI can extend humans’ cognition when addressing complexity, whereas humans can still offer a more holistic, intuitive approach in dealing with uncertainty and equivocality in organizational decision making. This premise mirrors the idea of intelligence augmentation, which states that AI systems should be designed with the intention of augmenting, not replacing, human contributions.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:bushor:v:61:y:2018:i:4:p:577-586
    DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2018.03.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007681318300387
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.03.007?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hirokazu Shirado & Nicholas A. Christakis, 2017. "Locally noisy autonomous agents improve global human coordination in network experiments," Nature, Nature, vol. 545(7654), pages 370-374, May.
    2. Dane, Erik & Rockmann, Kevin W. & Pratt, Michael G., 2012. "When should I trust my gut? Linking domain expertise to intuitive decision-making effectiveness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 187-194.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Christian Julmi, 2019. "When rational decision-making becomes irrational: a critical assessment and re-conceptualization of intuition effectiveness," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 291-314, April.
    2. Niccolo Pescetelli, 2021. "A Brief Taxonomy of Hybrid Intelligence," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-11, September.
    3. Kopalle, Praveen K. & Kuusela, Hannu & Lehmann, Donald R., 2023. "The role of intuition in CEO acquisition decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    4. Rodríguez Sánchez, Isabel & Makkonen, Teemu & Williams, Allan M., 2019. "Peer review assessment of originality in tourism journals: critical perspective of key gatekeepers," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-11.
    5. Baethge, Caroline & Fiedler, Marina, 2016. "All or (almost) nothing? The influence of information cost and training on information selection and the quality of decision-making," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Betriebswirtschaftliche Reihe B-19-16, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    6. repec:osf:socarx:x6q7g_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Pei, Shan & Cressman, Ross & Zhang, Boyu, 2024. "Dynamic games on arbitrary networks with two types of players," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    8. Chowdhury, Soumyadeb & Budhwar, Pawan & Dey, Prasanta Kumar & Joel-Edgar, Sian & Abadie, Amelie, 2022. "AI-employee collaboration and business performance: Integrating knowledge-based view, socio-technical systems and organisational socialisation framework," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 31-49.
    9. Li, Sen & Gao, Yihang & Li, Wenxue, 2026. "Consensus of multi-agent systems under variable denial-of-service attacks: Noise-based event-triggered protocols," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 515(C).
    10. Satterstrom, Patricia & Polzer, Jeffrey T. & Kwan, Lisa B. & Hauser, Oliver P. & Wiruchnipawan, Wannawiruch & Burke, Marina, 2019. "Thin slices of workgroups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 104-117.
    11. Zou, Tengjian & Ertug, Gokhan & Roulet, Thomas, 2024. "Learning from machines: How negative feedback from machines improves learning between humans," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    12. Mike Farjam & Olexandr Nikolaychuk & Giangiacomo Bravo, 2018. "Does risk communication really decrease cooperation in climate change mitigation?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(2), pages 147-158, July.
    13. Brent Simpson & Bradley Montgomery & David Melamed, 2023. "Reputations for treatment of outgroup members can prevent the emergence of political segregation in cooperative networks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    14. Kinga Makovi & Anahit Sargsyan & Wendi Li & Jean-François Bonnefon & Talal Rahwan, 2023. "Trust within human-machine collectives depends on the perceived consensus about cooperative norms," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    15. Anthony Newell, 2020. "Is your heart weighing down your prospects? Interoception, risk literacy and prospect theory," QuBE Working Papers 058, QUT Business School.
    16. Arno Riedl & Ingrid M. T. Rohde & Martin Strobel, 2021. "Free Neighborhood Choice Boosts Socially Optimal Outcomes in Stag-Hunt Coordination Problem," CESifo Working Paper Series 9012, CESifo.
    17. Agnieszka Kowalska-Styczeń & Krzysztof Malarz, 2020. "Noise induced unanimity and disorder in opinion formation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-22, July.
    18. Liangru Yu & Bo Yu, 2024. "Uncovering the impact of technology convergence on innovation quality: From the perspective of ego‐network dynamics pathway," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 45(6), pages 3641-3662, September.
    19. Niccolo Pescetelli & Patrik Reichert & Alex Rutherford, 2022. "A variational-autoencoder approach to solve the hidden profile task in hybrid human-machine teams," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-20, August.
    20. Julián Vicens & Josep Perelló & Jordi Duch, 2018. "Citizen Social Lab: A digital platform for human behavior experimentation within a citizen science framework," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, December.
    21. Gallo, Edoardo & Barak, Darija & Langtry, Alastair, 2023. "Social distancing in networks: A web-based interactive experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:61:y:2018:i:4:p:577-586. 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.