The paradoxes of AI in management education: comparing human and AI feedback in student global virtual teams

PurposeThis study aims to investigate the paradoxes of artificial intelligence (AI) in management education as revealed by a large-scale exercise in which students work in global virtual teams (GVTs). AI is often forbidden to students because it is considered unethical or harmful to creativity and learning. Its use by academics is stigmatised for similar reasons. On the other hand, AI skills are highly demanded.Design/methodology/approachIt uses an experimental design to compare the satisfaction, performance, and creativity of students randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions: 1) feedback received from humans, 2) feedback received from AI with students told the feedback was generated by AI, 3) feedback received from AI but students are not told that AI created the feedback, and 4) no feedback provided (control group).FindingsThere is no difference in student satisfaction between teams receiving human and AI feedback. Also, there is no difference in student satisfaction regardless of whether students know feedback is from AI. Teams receiving AI feedback underperformed and were less creative compared to those receiving human feedback, but if students are unaware that the feedback was from AI, there is no difference.Practical implicationsThis study illustrates the unavoidable paradoxes of AI in contemporary GVTs-based management education by showing both the value and the hazards of using AI. It compares the implications of adopting human or AI feedback on students’ satisfaction, performance and creativity.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first study to use the largest database on GVTs to analyse the impact of AI on contemporary GVTs-based management education and to do so through paradoxical theory.