More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Where Responsible AI meets Reality: Practitioner Perspectives on Enablers for Shifting Organizational Practices

Authors:

Bogdana Rakova,

Henriette Cramer,

Rumman ChowdhuryAuthors Info & Claims

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 5, Issue CSCW1

Article No.: 7, Pages 1 - 23

https://doi.org/10.1145/3449081

Published: 22 April 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Large and ever-evolving technology companies continue to invest more time and resources to incorporate responsible Artificial Intelligence (AI) into production-ready systems to increase algorithmic accountability. This paper examines and seeks to offer a framework for analyzing how organizational culture and structure impact the effectiveness of responsible AI initiatives in practice. We present the results of semi-structured qualitative interviews with practitioners working in industry, investigating common challenges, ethical tensions, and effective enablers for responsible AI initiatives. Focusing on major companies developing or utilizing AI, we have mapped what organizational structures currently support or hinder responsible AI initiatives, what aspirational future processes and structures would best enable effective initiatives, and what key elements comprise the transition from current work practices to the aspirational future.

References

[1]

Kenneth A. Bamberger and Deirdre K. Mulligan. 2015. Driving Corporate Behavior in the United States and Europe. MIT Press.

Digital Library

[2]

Michalle E Mor Barak. 2016. Managing diversity: Toward a globally inclusive workplace. Sage Publications.

[3]

Haydn Belfield. 2020. Activism by the AI Community: Analysing Recent Achievements and Future Prospects. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 15--21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375627.3375814

Digital Library

[4]

Heloise Berkowitz. 2018. Meta-organizing firms' capabilities for sustainable innovation: A conceptual framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 175 (2018), 420--430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.028

[5]

Elettra Bietti. 2020. From ethics washing to ethics bashing: a view on tech ethics from within moral philosophy. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 210--219.

Digital Library

[6]

Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru. 2018. Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In Conference on fairness, accountability and transparency. 77--91.

[7]

Henriette Cramer, Jean Garcia-Gathright, Aaron Springer, and Sravana Reddy. 2018. Assessing and addressing algorithmic bias in practice. Interactions, Vol. 25, 6 (2018), 58--63.

Digital Library

[8]

Henriette Cramer, Jenn Wortman-Vaughan, Kenneth Holstein, Hanna Wallach, Hal Daumé III, Miroslav Dudík, Sravana Reddy, and Jean Garcia-Gathright. [n.d.]. Industry Translation Tutorial: Algorithmic fairness in practice. In Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAT* 2019.

[9]

Patrick Dawson. 2019. Reshaping change: A processual perspective. 2nd edition. Routledge.

[10]

Miles Brundage et al. 2020. Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims. arxiv: cs.CY/2004.07213

[11]

Sina Fazelpour and Zachary C. Lipton. 2020. Algorithmic Fairness from a Non-Ideal Perspective. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 57--63. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375627.3375828

Digital Library

[12]

Batya Friedman and Helen Nissenbaum. 1996. Bias in computer systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), Vol. 14, 3 (1996), 330--347.

Digital Library

[13]

Kenneth Holstein, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan, Hal Daumé III, Miro Dudik, and Hanna Wallach. 2019. Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--16.

Digital Library

[14]

Karen Holtzblatt and Hugh Beyer. 1997. Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems. Elsevier.

[15]

Anna Jobin, Marcello Ienca, and Effy Vayena. 2019. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, Vol. 1, 9 (2019), 389--399.

[16]

Alexandra Kalev, Frank Dobbin, and Erin Kelly. 2006. Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American sociological review, Vol. 71, 4 (2006), 589--617.

[17]

Margot E Kaminski and Gianclaudio Malgieri. 2020. Multi-layered explanations from algorithmic impact assessments in the GDPR. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 68--79.

Digital Library

[18]

P. M. Krafft, Meg Young, Michael Katell, Karen Huang, and Ghislain Bugingo. 2020. Defining AI in Policy versus Practice. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 72--78. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375627.3375835

Digital Library

[19]

Kimberly D Krawiec. 2003. Cosmetic compliance and the failure of negotiated governance. Wash. ULQ, Vol. 81 (2003), 487.

[20]

Michael A Madaio, Luke Stark, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan, and Hanna Wallach. 2020. Co-Designing Checklists to Understand Organizational Challenges and Opportunities around Fairness in AI (CHI '20).

Digital Library

[21]

Gianclaudio Malgieri. 2020. The concept of fairness in the GDPR: a linguistic and contextual interpretation. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 154--166.

Digital Library

[22]

Jacob Metcalf, Emanuel Moss, and danah boyd. 2019. Owning Ethics: Corporate Logics, Silicon Valley, and the Institutionalization of Ethics. Social Research: An International Quarterly, Vol. 86 (2019), 449--476. Issue 2.

[23]

Debra Meyerson. 2004. The tempered radicals: How employees push their companies--little by little--to be more socially responsible. Stanford Social Innovation Review (2004), 1--23.

[24]

Margaret Mitchell, Dylan Baker, Nyalleng Moorosi, Emily Denton, Ben Hutchinson, Alex Hanna, Timnit Gebru, and Jamie Morgenstern. 2020. Diversity and Inclusion Metrics in Subset Selection. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 117--123. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375627.3375832

Digital Library

[25]

Margaret Mitchell, Simone Wu, Andrew Zaldivar, Parker Barnes, Lucy Vasserman, Ben Hutchinson, Elena Spitzer, Inioluwa Deborah Raji, and Timnit Gebru. 2019. Model Cards for Model Reporting. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAT* 2019, Atlanta, GA, USA, January 29-31, 2019. ACM, 220--229. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287596

Digital Library

[26]

Brent Mittelstadt. 2019. AI Ethics--Too Principled to Fail? arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.06668 (2019).

[27]

Wanda J Orlikowski. 1992. The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization science, Vol. 3, 3 (1992), 398--427.

[28]

Wanda J. Orlikowski. 2000. Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations. Organization Science, Vol. 11, 4 (July 2000), 404--428. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600

Digital Library

[29]

Inioluwa Deborah Raji, Andrew Smart, Rebecca N. White, Margaret Mitchell, Timnit Gebru, Ben Hutchinson, Jamila Smith-Loud, Daniel Theron, and Parker Barnes. 2020. Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditing. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 33--44. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372873

Digital Library

[30]

W Richard Scott and Gerald F Davis. 2015. Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and open systems perspectives. Routledge.

[31]

Andrew D Selbst, Danah Boyd, Sorelle A Friedler, Suresh Venkatasubramanian, and Janet Vertesi. 2019. Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 59--68.

Digital Library

[32]

Linda Klebe Trevino, Gary R Weaver, David G Gibson, and Barbara Ley Toffler. 1999. Managing ethics and legal compliance: What works and what hurts. California management review, Vol. 41, 2 (1999), 131--151.

[33]

Gary R Weaver, Linda Klebe Trevi no, and Philip L Cochran. 1999. Corporate ethics practices in the mid-1990's: An empirical study of the Fortune 1000. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 18, 3 (1999), 283--294.

[34]

Yi Zeng, Enmeng Lu, and Cunqing Huangfu. 2018. Linking Artificial Intelligence Principles. arxiv: cs.AI/1812.04814

Cited By

Muchowe RMubango H(2024)The Relationship Between Organizational Culture and Academic Staff Performance in Universities in ZimbabweBuilding Organizational Capacity and Strategic Management in Academia10.4018/979-8-3693-6967-8.ch022(623-640)Online publication date: 22-Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-6967-8.ch022
Uzoamaka CSunday Ade B(2024)Relationship between Artificial Intelligence and Business Process Optimization: Insights from Selected Banks in Anambra StateInternational Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology (IJISRT)10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24JUN1673(2162-2171)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24JUN1673
Fenwick AMolnar GFrangos P(2024)Revisiting the role of HR in the age of AI: bringing humans and machines closer together in the workplaceFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence10.3389/frai.2023.12728236Online publication date: 15-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1272823
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Where Responsible AI meets Reality: Practitioner Perspectives on Enablers for Shifting Organizational Practices
1. Human-centered computing

Recommendations

The Organizational Design of High-Tech Entrepreneurial Ventures

The majority of the theoretical and empirical work in the field of organizational design has focused on large established companies, disregarding entrepreneurial ventures, although the organization of these firms is of paramount importance to their ...
Artificial Concepts of Artificial Intelligence: Institutional Compliance and Resistance in AI Startups
AIES '22: Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

Scholars and industry practitioners have debated how to best develop interventions for ethical artificial intelligence (AI). Such interventions recommend that companies building and using AI tools change their technical practices, but fail to wrangle ...
“It is currently hodgepodge”: Examining AI/ML Practitioners’ Challenges during Co-production of Responsible AI Values
CHI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Recently, the AI/ML research community has indicated an urgent need to establish Responsible AI (RAI) values and practices as part of the AI/ML lifecycle. Several organizations and communities are responding to this call by sharing RAI guidelines. ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction Volume 5, Issue CSCW1

CSCW

April 2021

5016 pages

EISSN:2573-0142

DOI:10.1145/3460939

Editor:
Jeff Nichols
Apple Inc., United States

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2021 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 22 April 2021

Published in PACMHCI Volume 5, Issue CSCW1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

110
Total Citations
View Citations
2,594
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)1,084
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)125

Reflects downloads up to 19 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Muchowe RMubango H(2024)The Relationship Between Organizational Culture and Academic Staff Performance in Universities in ZimbabweBuilding Organizational Capacity and Strategic Management in Academia10.4018/979-8-3693-6967-8.ch022(623-640)Online publication date: 22-Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-6967-8.ch022
Uzoamaka CSunday Ade B(2024)Relationship between Artificial Intelligence and Business Process Optimization: Insights from Selected Banks in Anambra StateInternational Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology (IJISRT)10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24JUN1673(2162-2171)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24JUN1673
Fenwick AMolnar GFrangos P(2024)Revisiting the role of HR in the age of AI: bringing humans and machines closer together in the workplaceFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence10.3389/frai.2023.12728236Online publication date: 15-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1272823
Cheong B(2024)Transparency and accountability in AI systems: safeguarding wellbeing in the age of algorithmic decision-makingFrontiers in Human Dynamics10.3389/fhumd.2024.14212736Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/fhumd.2024.1421273
Sciannamè M(2024)Preparing humane ML experts for a better future. Experiments with design and engineering studentsJournal of Entrepreneurial Researchers10.29073/jer.v2i1.212:1(027-048)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.29073/jer.v2i1.21
Okolo CLin H(2024)Explainable AI in Practice: Practitioner Perspectives on AI for Social Good and User Engagement in the Global SouthProceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization10.1145/3689904.3694707(1-16)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3689904.3694707
Kallina ESingh J(2024)Stakeholder Involvement for Responsible AI Development: A Process FrameworkProceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization10.1145/3689904.3694698(1-14)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3689904.3694698
Recki LLawo DKrauß VPins DBoden A(2024)"You Can either Blame Technology or Blame a Person..." --- A Conceptual Model of Users' AI-Risk Perception as a Tool for HCIProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36869968:CSCW2(1-25)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686996
Muralikumar MMcDonald D(2024)Analyzing Collaborative Challenges and Needs of UX Practitioners when Designing with AI/MLProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36869868:CSCW2(1-25)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686986
Constantinides MBogucka EQuercia DKallio STahaei M(2024)RAI Guidelines: Method for Generating Responsible AI Guidelines Grounded in Regulations and Usable by (Non-)Technical RolesProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36869278:CSCW2(1-28)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686927
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents