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.
- Kenneth A. Bamberger and Deirdre K. Mulligan. 2015. Driving Corporate Behavior in the United States and Europe. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Michalle E Mor Barak. 2016. Managing diversity: Toward a globally inclusive workplace. Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- 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/10.1145/3375627.3375814Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 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.2017.12.028Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- 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.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru. 2018. Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In Conference on fairness, accountability and transparency. 77--91.Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 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.Google Scholar
- Patrick Dawson. 2019. Reshaping change: A processual perspective. 2nd edition. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Miles Brundage et al. 2020. Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims. arxiv: cs.CY/2004.07213Google Scholar
- 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/10.1145/3375627.3375828Google Scholar
- Batya Friedman and Helen Nissenbaum. 1996. Bias in computer systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), Vol. 14, 3 (1996), 330--347.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 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.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Karen Holtzblatt and Hugh Beyer. 1997. Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems. Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Anna Jobin, Marcello Ienca, and Effy Vayena. 2019. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, Vol. 1, 9 (2019), 389--399.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- 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.Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 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/10.1145/3375627.3375835Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Kimberly D Krawiec. 2003. Cosmetic compliance and the failure of negotiated governance. Wash. ULQ, Vol. 81 (2003), 487.Google Scholar
- 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).Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 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.Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
- 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/10.1145/3375627.3375832Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 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/10.1145/3287560.3287596Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Brent Mittelstadt. 2019. AI Ethics--Too Principled to Fail? arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.06668 (2019).Google Scholar
- Wanda J Orlikowski. 1992. The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization science, Vol. 3, 3 (1992), 398--427.Google Scholar
- 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.11.4.404.14600Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 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/10.1145/3351095.3372873Google Scholar
Digital Library
- W Richard Scott and Gerald F Davis. 2015. Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and open systems perspectives. Routledge.Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 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.Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Yi Zeng, Enmeng Lu, and Cunqing Huangfu. 2018. Linking Artificial Intelligence Principles. arxiv: cs.AI/1812.04814Google Scholar
Index Terms
Where Responsible AI meets Reality: Practitioner Perspectives on Enablers for Shifting Organizational Practices
Recommendations
Designing Responsible AI: Adaptations of UX Practice to Meet Responsible AI Challenges
CHI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsTechnology companies continue to invest in efforts to incorporate responsibility in their Artificial Intelligence (AI) advancements, while efforts to audit and regulate AI systems expand. This shift towards Responsible AI (RAI) in the tech industry ...
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 SocietyScholars 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 SystemsRecently, 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