The decision to speak up or stay silent when faced with a dilemma is one every person will face, more than one, throughout their careers. In these moments, the pressure and stakes often loom large. Speak up or stay quiet decisions taken can make or break careers and further impact those nearest and dearest to us.
The Dilemma
Let’s imagine an increasingly common event within organizations, the drive to use artificial intelligence (AI) to improve business performance, in some way.
The Bargain Machinery Company (BMC) executive leadership team wants to implement an AI solution that can pre-screen the thousands of applications received for a new job posting. The team is excited – the idea of efficiency gains from no longer performing the time-intensive and tedious task of narrowing the field to a more manageable top ten candidate list is irresistible! After a cross-functional meeting, three (simplified) options emerge for a decision:
- Develop and implement an AI algorithm that identifies 10 desirable applicants based on BMC’s high performing employee profile
- Extend option one and further implement an AI agent to perform the first online screening interview for the 10 candidates
- Develop and implement a basic option to narrow the desirable candidate field to 100, following which a human team narrows the final list to 10
You, and 4 other functional executives, will decide on the best way forward.
Your peers are enthusiastic and quickly decide to press ahead with option 2 – the idea of reducing total screening time from 4-6 weeks to a day or two is irresistible! Through the discussion, you’ve identified a few concerning aspects with the extensive use of AI in recruiting which you believe require further consideration. You raise your concerns surround data privacy, AI bias, possible hallucinations and the need for transparency in explaining decisions to candidates (i.e.: the black box challenge).
Pressure Mounts to Agree
Let’s be honest in recognizing, first and foremost, that it is important to pick one’s battles carefully.
Two basic “rules” help point the way.
- If in staying silent one or more individuals are hurt – then speaking up is the right thing to do. Unless, of course, speaking up causes even more harm.
- Only address what you have first-hand knowledge of – never gossip or repeat something you haven’t independently verified.
Back to BMC and your dilemma: do you speak up or stay silent and go along with your peers?
Looking through the first rule lens. Will a person, or a group of individuals get hurt? This question requires a multi-perspective assessment, for instance:
- Inherent biases – the fundamental question to consider here relative to the proposed AI solution. How will BMC assure itself that the AI training uses an unbiased dataset?
- To answer that question – further consideration must understand if the current employee population itself diverse. Is the ideal employee profile concentrated in a particular type? Such as white males, 35-45 years old with a master’s degree? Does the employee population contain the future skills, competencies and diversity that BMC needs? You get the idea…
- Data Privacy – how will BMC ensure that any AI usage does not result in a data breach, misuse or mishandling of personal data and surveillance overreach, for instance?
- Here considerations include ensuring data usage consent . The risk is data collection for one purpose and use in another purpose without the knowledge and consent of the individual employee (past, present and potential). A second example may be where an organization collects routine employee data later converted into detailed behavioural profiles that reveal intimate details about an individual’s life.
The first lens indicates a clear risk of doing harm absent appropriate safeguards. The second lens is more easily satisfied in light of the extensive empirical data demonstrating AI development and usage risks.
Ethics Lead the Way
We have legitimate concerns that the executive AI decision is being rushed without addressing real risks of harm absent safeguards. We also recognise that every decision made has consequences.
Ethical choices are instrumental in shaping the environment within which we, and our organizations, operate. Making ethical decisions strengthens our character and promotes trust and integrity with teams, peers and other individuals around us. This reputation for integrity leads to increased credibility and opportunities for collaboration, both within and outside of the organization. A useful ethics reference Code to guide ethical decision making is the IESBA Code.
So, by staying quiet we may inadvertently condone any negative impacts and contribute to an environment where public trust erodes.
By speaking up, we model trust and integrity which has a positive long-term effect on our leadership reputation and value.
The right decision becomes clear!