IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jorgde/v10y2021i2d10.1007_s41469-021-00095-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Human–AI collaborative decision-making as an organization design problem

Author

Listed:
  • Phanish Puranam

    (INSEAD)

Abstract

The promise of collaboration between humans and algorithms in producing good decisions is stimulating much experimentation. Drawing on research in organization design can help us to approach this experimentation systematically. I propose typologies for considering different forms of division of labor between human and algorithm as well as the learning configurations they are arranged in, as basic building blocks for this endeavor.

Suggested Citation

  • Phanish Puranam, 2021. "Human–AI collaborative decision-making as an organization design problem," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 10(2), pages 75-80, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jorgde:v:10:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s41469-021-00095-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s41469-021-00095-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41469-021-00095-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41469-021-00095-2?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard P. Larrick & Jack B. Soll, 2006. "Erratum--Intuitions About Combining Opinions: Misappreciation of the Averaging Principle," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 309-310, February.
    2. Manav Raj & Robert Seamans, 2019. "Primer on artificial intelligence and robotics," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Deborah Dougherty, 2001. "Reimagining the Differentiation and Integration of Work for Sustained Product Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(5), pages 612-631, October.
    4. Jerker. Denrell & Christina. Fang & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2004. "From T-Mazes to Labyrinths: Learning from Model-Based Feedback," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1366-1378, October.
    5. Pertti H. Lounamaa & James G. March, 1987. "Adaptive Coordination of a Learning Team," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 107-123, January.
    6. Michael Christensen & Thorbjørn Knudsen, 2020. "Division of roles and endogenous specialization," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(1), pages 105-124.
    7. Phanish Puranam & Murali Swamy, 2016. "How Initial Representations Shape Coupled Learning Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 323-335, April.
    8. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 511-528, June.
    9. Vikas A. Aggarwal & Hart E. Posen & Maciej Workiewicz, 2017. "Adaptive capacity to technological change: A microfoundational approach," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1212-1231, June.
    10. Richard P. Larrick & Jack B. Soll, 2006. "Intuitions About Combining Opinions: Misappreciation of the Averaging Principle," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 111-127, January.
    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. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:91-105 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Julia A. Minson & Jennifer S. Mueller & Richard P. Larrick, 2018. "The Contingent Wisdom of Dyads: When Discussion Enhances vs. Undermines the Accuracy of Collaborative Judgments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(9), pages 4177-4192, September.
    4. Schlag, Karl H. & Zapechelnyuk, Andriy, 2017. "Dynamic benchmark targeting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 145-169.
    5. Wang, Xiaoqian & Hyndman, Rob J. & Li, Feng & Kang, Yanfei, 2023. "Forecast combinations: An over 50-year review," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1518-1547.
    6. Irene Scopelliti & Carey K. Morewedge & Erin McCormick & H. Lauren Min & Sophie Lebrecht & Karim S. Kassam, 2015. "Bias Blind Spot: Structure, Measurement, and Consequences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2468-2486, October.
    7. Oliver Baumann & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2013. "Dealing with Complexity: Integrated vs. Chunky Search Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 116-132, February.
    8. Johannes Müller-Trede & Shoham Choshen-Hillel & Meir Barneron & Ilan Yaniv, 2018. "The Wisdom of Crowds in Matters of Taste," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1779-1803, April.
    9. Healey, Mark P. & Bleda, Mercedes & Querbes, Adrien, 2021. "Opportunity evaluation in teams: A social cognitive model," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(4).
    10. Yael Grushka-Cockayne & Kenneth C. Lichtendahl Jr. & Victor Richmond R. Jose & Robert L. Winkler, 2017. "Quantile Evaluation, Sensitivity to Bracketing, and Sharing Business Payoffs," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 712-728, June.
    11. Kausel, Edgar E. & Culbertson, Satoris S. & Leiva, Pedro I. & Slaughter, Jerel E. & Jackson, Alexander T., 2015. "Too arrogant for their own good? Why and when narcissists dismiss advice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 33-50.
    12. Albert E. Mannes, 2009. "Are We Wise About the Wisdom of Crowds? The Use of Group Judgments in Belief Revision," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1267-1279, August.
    13. Saemi Park & David V. Budescu, 2015. "Aggregating multiple probability intervals to improve calibration," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(2), pages 130-143, March.
    14. Vincenz Frey & Arnout van de Rijt, 2021. "Social Influence Undermines the Wisdom of the Crowd in Sequential Decision Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(7), pages 4273-4286, July.
    15. Eric Libby & Leon Glass, 2010. "The Calculus of Committee Composition," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(9), pages 1-8, September.
    16. Marc Keuschnigg & Christian Ganser, 2017. "Crowd Wisdom Relies on Agents’ Ability in Small Groups with a Voting Aggregation Rule," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 818-828, March.
    17. Onishi Hiroshi, 2018. "Consumers’ Social Learning About Videogame Consoles Through Multiple Website Browsing," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 6(6), pages 495-511, December.
    18. Karsten Hueffer & Miguel A. Fonseca & Anthony Leiserowitz & Karen M. Taylor, 2013. "The wisdom of crowds: Predicting a weather and climate-related event," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(2), pages 91-105, March.
    19. Jon Atwell & Marlon Twyman II, 2023. "Metawisdom of the Crowd: How Choice Within Aided Decision Making Can Make Crowd Wisdom Robust," Papers 2308.15451, arXiv.org.
    20. Phanish Puranam & Murali Swamy, 2016. "How Initial Representations Shape Coupled Learning Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 323-335, April.
    21. Yun Shin Lee & Enno Siemsen, 2017. "Task Decomposition and Newsvendor Decision Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(10), pages 3226-3245, October.

    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:spr:jorgde:v:10:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s41469-021-00095-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.