Brave New World: AI takes over company management
Say 100011100010101 to your new Boss!
Meet Tan Yu, the new Chief Executive Officer of Chinese tech specialist NetDragon Websoft. This online gaming and metaverse company announced in October that it has appointed a “virtual humanoid robot powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI) “as CEO.
There has not been a substantial press coverage of this news which magnitude could entail changes in the world of work -and HR- of a telluric scope.
According to the press statement from the company, the new CEO will boost the speed of execution, improve the quality of job activities and optimise processes.
Tang Yu will handle the organisational and operational aspects for the company, which is worth nearly $10 billion.
It also said that the robot will act as a real-time data hub and analytical tool, which will enable logical decision-making in everyday operations.
Dr Dejian Liu, Chairman of NetDragon, is convinced that the algorithms behind the CEO’s decision process can only increase fairness and transparency, including in the recruitment and handling of staff.
In an enthusiastic statement, Dr Liu underscores that: 'We believe AI is the future of corporate management, and our appointment of Ms. Tang Yu represents our commitment to truly embrace the use of AI to transform the way we operate our business, and ultimately drive our future strategic growth.'
One cannot help but being reminded of the famous question asked by Juvenal in his Satires: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" Or: who will guard the guardians?
In other words, what are the guarantees around the programming and use of algorithms? Who is ultimately responsible -legally- for the choices made and decisions taken? Can more fairness and transparency be achieved with little or no capacity to know the basis of criteria for choices coded or programmed in a dark room?
And if the next step of AI is to fill in positions of management or decisions in health insurance organizations, what would be the consequences for end users? What would be the actual means to appeal against decisions?
Open questions, naturally.