When a Hong Kong-based firm appointed an algorithm to its board in 2014, the act may have been brushed off as gimmicky, yet it was a harbinger of the evolving role of AI in the corporate sphere. As reported by the University of Denver, today, artificial intelligence isn’t just a cutting-edge gadget but a mainstay, a force altering the fabric, mechanisms of industries, and the daily rituals of society, with its tendrils firmly woven into the decision-making processes of corporations, a whopping 97% of large firms are utilizing AI to amplify business outcomes.
But the adoption of AI in business raises questions about transparency and inclusiveness in corporate governance, precisely how do we ensure that decisions influenced by artificial cognition are made with a complete spectrum of stakeholder interests in the balance? Michael Siebecker, a law professor at the Sturm College of Law, explores this conundrum, leaning on years of research and insights gleaned from his multidisciplinary academic background, in his scholarly work, Siebecker interrogates the core of corporate decision-making, weighed against the reality that these AI-augmented determinations could drift away from genuinely representing those they serve.
The backbone of the issue, as Siebecker posits in his paper, "Democracy, Discourse, and the Artificially Intelligent Corporation," stems from the traditional fiduciary structure that ostensibly mandates corporate leaders to favor the best interests of the corporation and its shareholders, but does this structure hold up in an era where bytes play a part in board decisions? "It gives corporate managers unbelievable leeway in running the corporation in a way that really seems to detach their decision making from consideration, or at least robust consideration, of shareholder interests," Siebecker said, as per the University of Denver.
Siebecker’s answer, may not appear radical but pivots on a principle shift, he suggests reworking the fiduciary fabric through the mechanism of discourse theory, this lens, inspired by political philosopher Jürgen Habermas, treats language not solely as a vehicle for information but as a means to construct societal truths and exert influence, therefore, Siebecker's proposed shift calls for rules that foster independent thought, equitable participation, and acknowledgment of diverse perspectives within the corporate machine, a shift not merely for those ensconced in the echelons of power, but one that echoes through to customers, communities, et al.
