Mohammad Islam Biswas, Md. Shamim Talukder, Atikur Rahman Khan
{"title":"Who do you choose? Employees' perceptions of artificial intelligence versus humans in performance feedback","authors":"Mohammad Islam Biswas, Md. Shamim Talukder, Atikur Rahman Khan","doi":"10.1108/cafr-08-2023-0095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeFirms have already begun integrating artificial intelligence (AI) as a replacement for conventional performance management systems owing to its technological superiority. This transition has sparked a growing interest in determining how employees perceive and respond to performance feedback provided by AI as opposed to human supervisors.Design/methodology/approachA 2 x 2 between-subject experimental design was employed that was manipulated into four experimental conditions: AI algorithms, AI data, highly experienced human supervisors and low-experience human supervisor conditions. A one-way ANOVA and Welch t-test were used to analyze data.FindingsOur findings revealed that with a predefined fixed formula employed for performance feedback, employees exhibited higher levels of trust in AI algorithms, had greater performance expectations and showed stronger intentions to seek performance feedback from AI algorithms than highly experienced human supervisors. Conversely, when performance feedback was provided by human supervisors, even those with less experience, in a discretionary manner, employees' perceptions were higher compared to similar feedback provided by AI data. Moreover, additional analysis findings indicated that combined AI-human performance feedback led to higher levels of employees' perceptions compared to performance feedback solely by AI or humans.Practical implicationsThe findings of our study advocate the incorporation of AI in performance management systems and the implementation of AI-human combined feedback approaches as a potential strategy to alleviate the negative perception of employees, thereby increasing firms' return on AI investment.Originality/valueOur study represents one of the initial endeavors exploring the integration of AI in performance management systems and AI-human collaboration in providing performance feedback to employees.","PeriodicalId":248971,"journal":{"name":"China Accounting and Finance Review","volume":"53 40","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"China Accounting and Finance Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/cafr-08-2023-0095","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
PurposeFirms have already begun integrating artificial intelligence (AI) as a replacement for conventional performance management systems owing to its technological superiority. This transition has sparked a growing interest in determining how employees perceive and respond to performance feedback provided by AI as opposed to human supervisors.Design/methodology/approachA 2 x 2 between-subject experimental design was employed that was manipulated into four experimental conditions: AI algorithms, AI data, highly experienced human supervisors and low-experience human supervisor conditions. A one-way ANOVA and Welch t-test were used to analyze data.FindingsOur findings revealed that with a predefined fixed formula employed for performance feedback, employees exhibited higher levels of trust in AI algorithms, had greater performance expectations and showed stronger intentions to seek performance feedback from AI algorithms than highly experienced human supervisors. Conversely, when performance feedback was provided by human supervisors, even those with less experience, in a discretionary manner, employees' perceptions were higher compared to similar feedback provided by AI data. Moreover, additional analysis findings indicated that combined AI-human performance feedback led to higher levels of employees' perceptions compared to performance feedback solely by AI or humans.Practical implicationsThe findings of our study advocate the incorporation of AI in performance management systems and the implementation of AI-human combined feedback approaches as a potential strategy to alleviate the negative perception of employees, thereby increasing firms' return on AI investment.Originality/valueOur study represents one of the initial endeavors exploring the integration of AI in performance management systems and AI-human collaboration in providing performance feedback to employees.
目的由于人工智能(AI)在技术上的优越性,企业已经开始将其作为传统绩效管理系统的替代品。这一转变引发了人们对确定员工如何看待人工智能提供的绩效反馈并对其做出反应的日益浓厚的兴趣。设计/方法/途径采用 2 x 2 主体间实验设计,分为四种实验条件:人工智能算法、人工智能数据、高经验人类监督员和低经验人类监督员条件。研究结果我们的研究结果表明,与经验丰富的人类主管相比,采用预定义固定公式进行绩效反馈时,员工对人工智能算法表现出更高的信任度,对绩效有更高的期望,并表现出更强烈的向人工智能算法寻求绩效反馈的意愿。相反,与人工智能数据提供的类似反馈相比,由人类主管(即使是经验较少的人类主管)酌情提供绩效反馈时,员工的看法更高。此外,额外的分析结果表明,与仅由人工智能或人类提供的绩效反馈相比,人工智能与人类联合提供的绩效反馈会使员工的感知水平更高。