Featured Product
This Week in Quality Digest Live
Innovation Features
Dario Lirio
Modernization is critical to enhance patient experience and boost clinical trial productivity
Drawing lessons from the compound eyes of trilobites, NIST researchers fabricate tiny lenses that see both near and far.
Gary Shorter
Pharma needs to adapt and evolve with the changing environment of life science data
Can using RNA like a circuit breaker make it a computer?

More Features

Innovation News
SynthAI service solves the challenge of training machine vision systems
Appointments are the first for recently established committee to advise the President
For the correlative analysis of Raman, AFM, AFM-Raman, cathodoluminescence, and fluorescence data and microscopy images
Xcelerator enables Saildrone to easily integrate mechanical and electronic design information
Vibroseis trucks better equipped to tell what’s shaking
Twice as powerful, more accurate, and more user-friendly than ever
Apex Skating raises the bar in athletic performance coaching
Attending Aviation Week’s show in Dallas, April 26–28, 2022

More News

Phanish Puranam


How Should Humans Collaborate With AI?

Take the Bionic Readiness Survey and help answer that question

Published: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 - 12:01

As businesses increasingly adopt AI-driven decision making, experts agree that the most interesting questions are not about whether humans can beat machines or vice versa, but how the two forms of intelligence can most fruitfully collaborate—and how organizations can best facilitate those collaborations.

In a recent essay published in the Journal of Organization Design, I pointed out that there are at least four distinct forms of division of labor between humans and AI when it comes to decision-making tasks. Humans and AI can either specialize to perform different tasks or not, either in sequence or in parallel. Specialization seems the way to go when there is a clear advantage for one type of intelligence at some portions of a task. For example, activities such as leading a meeting or conducting sales calls are best left in human hands, while a number-based assessment of the relative financial performance of companies in a portfolio clearly plays to algorithmic strengths.

However, even when there is no clear advantage, one might still gain from the diversity in how humans and algorithms solve the same problem. For instance, we might pool estimates of profitability generated in parallel to improve investment decisions, or use one intelligence to act as a check—a “second opinion”—in medical diagnosis. This approach was meant to stimulate exploration for the configuration that might produce the best results for any given decision task.

But shouldn’t it matter in what configurations humans are most comfortable working alongside AI? For instance, given their relative skills, even if specialization in sequence may technically be the better configuration, if humans inherently distrust such a configuration, parallel work without specialization may be easier to implement between humans and algorithms. We know that humans have trust issues (often well-justified) with new technologies in general, and AI algorithms have not proved to be an exception. It may be not only consistent with humanistic values but also good for business to respect rather than ignore such concerns. 

So are there configurations of collaboration with AI algorithms that humans are more or less likely to trust? Do such preferences vary across countries and sectors? To explore this idea, research associate Ruchika Mehra and I recently launched “The Bionic Readiness Survey,” the first step on what we hope will be a comprehensive and fascinating journey to help organizations learn more about how humans and AI can work together effectively. Should you wish to participate, it should take you between six and 12 minutes to answer the questions, depending on which of our randomly selected surveys you receive. (All participants who finish the survey get a one-page downloadable “cheat sheet” of cutting-edge curated content—links to articles/videos about how AI is affecting organizations.)

With the data from this survey—that has already gathered hundreds of responses from around the world—we hope to offer reliable insight on which configurations people may systematically prefer or dislike. The survey also gives an overall picture of how ready respondents are for the bionic future—one in which humans and algorithms work together. We can also slice the data to compare your organization’s responses to the overall sample. Just drop us a line in advance to arrange it.

There is little doubt that human-AI collaboration will play a significant role going forward. Organization designers have the responsibility of making sure humans like the terms on which this occurs. 

First published July 5, 2021 on INSEAD's Knowledge blog.


About The Author

Phanish Puranam’s picture

Phanish Puranam

Phanish Puranam is the Roland Berger chaired professor of strategy and organization design at INSEAD. He is also the academic director of INSEAD’s Ph.D. program.