Open AccessRESPONSIBILITY ATTRIBUTION PROBLEMS IN COMPANIES: COULD AN ARTIFICIAL MORAL ADVISOR SOLVE THIS?
Author(s) -
Radu Uszkai,
AUTHOR_ID,
Cristina Voinea,
Toni GIBEA,
AUTHOR_ID,
AUTHOR_ID
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
proceedings of the ... international management conference
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Conference proceedings
eISSN - 2783-9214
pISSN - 2286-1440
DOI - 10.24818/imc/2021/05.12
Subject(s) - argument (complex analysis) , outsourcing , business ethics , attribution , moral responsibility , field (mathematics) , task (project management) , moral reasoning , moral dilemma , psychology , sociology , engineering ethics , epistemology , business , public relations , management , social psychology , marketing , political science , economics , philosophy , engineering , biochemistry , chemistry , mathematics , pure mathematics
The main claim of our paper is that managers should not outsource moral decision-making to Artificial Moral Advisors (AMAs) and that such devices should not be used as a way of offloading moral responsibility for business decisions. In other words, in the wake of the rise of Artificial Intelligence advisors, Chief Ethics Officers or business ethics consultants still have an integral role to play. In the first part of our paper we provide a brief overview of various examples of unethical behavior in business, followed by some hypotheses regarding why unethical behavior seems to be inescapable. We then proceed to present how AMAs could be used for the purpose of moral enhancement and analyze whether moral decisions could be outsourced towards them. Our main argument is that such a task is doomed to fail since AMAs are not responsible for their decisions/actions. We conclude by providing a positive agenda for the use of AI in the field of business ethics, by fleshing out how AMAs could be used as moral enablers.