By: Ankita Manohar Walawalkar, Business Administration Department Asia University, Taiwan, 2018ankitawalawalkar@gmail.com
Abstract:
Corporations perform a most important role in artificial intelligence (AI) study, growth, and deployment. This article investigates an opportunity to improve by what means companies govern their AI activities in order to advances the public interest. The article explains these prospects with many cases, including the possibility of injurious AI investigation by OpenAI and the Corporation on AI contribution of Google and the auction of facial acknowledgement technology to law implementation by companies counting Microsoft, Amazon and IBM. These instances, show how varied participants might collaborate to promote AI business regulation for the community attention.
Introduction:
Artificial Intelligence potential corporate claims could possibly lead to long-lasting unemployment and noteworthy profits for AI businesses, upsetting social justice, financial vitality, and international safety [1]. This article exploring comprehensive overview of prospects in AI Corporate governance, which primarily include Alphabet (Google’s parent company), Facebook, Amazone as lead of AI research and development. Moreover, emphasised on The European Union, the one most progressive governing landscape for AI. Lastly, focused on machine learning, the leading AI model [2].
Corporate Governance
Corporate governance includes management, operations, regulation, and finance. Also, includes legal standing, investor-executive relations, statistics flow, and operational decisions. Corporate governance can be prejudiced by both inside and outside stakeholders. To certify actual business governance of AI, essential to study a widespread band of participants[3] .
Public Welfare
The public welfare could be considered in numerous conducts, including costs and rewards, voting favourites, and fundamental rights and duties. The exact description of the public welfare can be critical for AI business governance, as showed by a amount of conflicts nearby AI technologies [4] [5].
AI system lifecycle
The procedure of emerging and applying an AI system. Examining the AI lifecycle can disclose chances for improved corporate governance. Diverse individuals and actions will have varying degrees of influence across diverse stages of a corporation’s AI system lifecycle. This article employs the AI scheme lifespan to better understand the impact of various performers and happenings [6]. Commonly, initiatives to advance AI business governance necessity trace at minimum single stage of the lifespan then, there is not at all consequence on any actual AI systems [2].
The article utilise an AI system lifecycle framework, which consists of four phases. Phase 1 includes research and design, tracked by testing and deployment. Phase 2 includes real-world use cases, regulatory obedience, and user involvement evaluation with verification and validation. Phase 3 includes real-world deployment. Phase 4 contains monitoring and addressing matters, either by regressive to other stages or eradicating the AI system [2].
Actor-Specific Occasions to Advance AI Corporate Governance
This segment confers nine kinds of actors, including internal (managers, investors, workers) and external (corporate partners, nonprofit organizations, public, media, competitors, industry consortia and governments), to develop AI corporate governance, out of which few explain below [2].
a. Management
It’s from top executives to mid-level managers, acting a pivotal part in AI governance, determining policies, procedures, and corporate culture. To improve AI in the public welfare, organization can find ethical guidelines and strategic objectives, as seen in companies like Google and Microsoft [2]. The change of these guidelines into practical policies, exemplified by OpenAI’s phased GPT-2 announcement, ruins a challenge. Devoted structures, like advisory committees, can offer oversight, but their achievement differs. Participating AI governance into current structures, such as compliance teams, is planned. Finally, development a corporate culture supportive of responsible AI [2], through creativities like onboarding and performance reviews, is vital for positioning practices with values [6].
b. Labors
Labors can affect AI business governance, through their movements upsetting AI systems, by persuading organization. There opportunities for straight effect may be particularly strong at previous phases of the AI scheme lifespan and at companies and dissections whose administration offer labors extensive liberty for decision-making [1]. Similarly, their prospects for unintended inspiration may be utmost at companies and divisions whose administration is particularly open to employee contribution [2].
c. Investors
Companies invest in AI through stock or bond sales, with shareholders playing a crucial role in inducing corporate governance [5]. The principal-agent problem highlights the importance of shareholders ensuring their agents act in their best interests. Bond issuers are less dominant due to competitive marketplaces. Investors can influence companies through pronounced concerns to management, voting in shareholder resolutions, and voting in non-binding resolutions, which can progress corporate governance, mainly in environmental, social, and governance issues [2].
d. Corporate Partners and Competitors
Partners can impact on AI companies’ reputations, manipulating actions to protect it. Microsoft’s human rights policies were exposed by Article One Advisors, boosting its standing. Google’s facial recognition features were disparaged by Randstad, attracting disapproval. Reputation is vital for big, public-facing companies like Microsoft and Google [7].
e. NGO
NGO show a vital role in progressing AI business governance through research, encouragement, coalition establishing, and education. Study aids from not-for-profit universities and think tanks are plentiful. These establishments aim to progress AI businesses’ human rights records, censorship cooperation, and public accountability [2].
Conclusion
The article found that enhancing AI corporate governance goes outside the domain of limited corporate, including a wide range of group of actors both inside and outside to AI firms. Association amongst multiple stakeholders, is critical for real effect on management and governance [3].
In this article, limitations comprise a discerning attention on bigger companies. The active nature of AI improvement makes it problematic to maintain ongoing significance. Future research stated measuring the quality of probabilities for actors to improve AI corporate governance and present exact proposals for their actions [2].
Reference:
- Q. P. Nguyen and D. H. Vo, “Artificial intelligence and unemployment:An international evidence,” Struct. Change Econ. Dyn., vol. 63, pp. 40–55, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.strueco.2022.09.003.
- P. Cihon, J. Schuett, and S. D. Baum, “Corporate Governance of Artificial Intelligence in the Public Interest,” Information, vol. 12, no. 7, Art. no. 7, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.3390/info12070275.
- “Full article: Corporate governance regulation: a practice theory perspective.” Accessed: Feb. 27, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01559982.2021.1995934
- C. Bezemek and T. Dumbrovsky, “The Concept of Public Interest,” 2021, pp. 3–24. doi: 10.1017/9781839701337.002.
- T. Züger and H. Asghari, “AI for the public. How public interest theory shifts the discourse on AI,” AI Soc., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 815–828, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s00146-022-01480-5.
- M. C. M. Lee, H. Scheepers, A. K. H. Lui, and E. W. T. Ngai, “The implementation of artificial intelligence in organizations: A systematic literature review,” Inf. Manage., vol. 60, no. 5, p. 103816, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.im.2023.103816.
- S. D. Ramchurn, S. Stein, and N. R. Jennings, “Trustworthy human-AI partnerships,” iScience, vol. 24, no. 8, p. 102891, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.102891.
Cite As
Walawalkar A. M. (2024) Corporate Governance: Striking balance of Artificial Intelligence for Public Welfare, Insights2Tectinfo, pp.1