CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 348Ethics and Social Impacts of AIAI and HR TechnologiesLegal and Labor Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 148 of the 151 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Challenges of Algorithm-Based HR Decision-Making for Personal Integrity

Open access
Leicht-Deobald, Ulrich, Busch, Thorsten, Schank, Christoph, Weibel, Antoinette, Schafheitle, Simon, Wildhaber, Isabelle, Kasper, Gabriel·2019·Journal of Business Ethics
DOI 10.1007/s10551-019-04204-wPMC PMC6868110
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Organizations increasingly rely on algorithm-based HR decision-making to monitor their employees. This trend is reinforced by the technology industry claiming that its decision-making tools are efficient and objective, downplaying their potential biases. In our manuscript, we identify an important challenge arising from the efficiency-driven logic of algorithm-based HR decision-making, namely that it may shift the delicate balance between employees' personal integrity and compliance more in the direction of compliance. We suggest that critical data literacy, ethical awareness, the use of participatory design methods, and private regulatory regimes within civil society can help overcome these challenges. Our paper contributes to literature on workplace monitoring, critical data studies, personal integrity, and literature at the intersection between HR management and corporate responsibility.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10551-019-04204-w

Cites

148 of 148 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. ACM. (2018). ACM code of ethics and professional conduct. https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics . Accessed September 23, 2018.
  2. Angwin, J. (2016). Make algorithms accountable. The New York Times (Vol. 2018).
  3. Davenport, T. H. (2013). Analytics 3.0. Harvard Business Review,91(12), 64–72.
  4. Delle Donne, B. (2017). Guiding talent acquisition technology into the future 2017 State of Talent Acquisition Technology (pp. 5–23). New York: Talent Tech Labs.
  5. IEEE. (2017). Prioritizing human well-being in the age of artificial intelligence. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE-Standards Association.
  6. Konrad, A. (2013). Meet orion, software that will save ups millions by improving drivers’ routes. Forbes (Vol. 2018).
  7. Legge, K. (1996). Morality bound. People Management,2(25), 34.
  8. Morozov, E. (2013). The perils of perfection. The New York Times (Vol. 2018).
  9. Nijhuis, M. (2017). How to call B.S. on big data: A practical guide The New Yorker (Vol. 2018).
  10. O’Heigeartaigh, S. (2013). Would you hand over a moral decision to a machine? Why not? Moral outsourcing and artificial intelligence. In Practical ethics. Oxford: University of Oxford.
  11. Peck, D. (2013). They’re watching you at work. The Atlantic,312(5), 72–84.
  12. Simonite, T. (2012). Microsoft’s workplace social network becomes emotionally aware. MIT Technology Review (Vol. 2018).
  13. Tarnoff, B. (2017). Silicon Valley siphons our data like oil. But the deepest drilling has just begun. The Guardian (Vol. 2018).
  14. Thorp, J. (2012). Big data is not the new oil. Harvard Business Review (Vol. 2018).
  15. Vara, V. (2015). Can Intel make silicon valley more diverse. The New Yorker (Vol. 2018).
  16. Watson, R. (2016). In silicon valley, young white males are stealing the future from everyone else. The Guardian (Vol. 2018).
  17. Weibel, A., Wildhaber, I., Leicht-Deobald, U., Schank, C., & Busch, T. (2016). Big data or big brother?—Big data hr control practices and employees’ trust in the employer. In U. O. S. Gallen (Ed.), Unpublished grant proposal. Berne: Swiss National Science Foundation.
  18. Why, M. (2018). 4 reasons why an automated hiring process will help your company. Select International, a psi business (Vol. 2018). Pittsburg, PA: Select International.
  19. Zax, D. (2013). Brown down: UPS drivers vs. The UPS algorithm. FastCompany (Vol. 2019).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 348

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Leicht-Deobald, U., Busch, T., Schank, C., Weibel, A., Schafheitle, S., Wildhaber, I., & Kasper, G.
Affiliations
  • University of St.Gallen (CH)
  • University of Vechta (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Business Ethics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-06-07
Volume
160
Issue
2
Pages
377-392
ISSN
  • 0167-4544 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-0697
DOI
10.1007/s10551-019-04204-w
PMC
PMC6868110
OpenAlex
W2948100573
Cited by
347
References
151
Citations by year
2026: 82 · 2025: 73 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 53 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 1
FWCI
43.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Business Ethics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (acceptedVersion)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
  • Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften digital collection (Zurich University of Applied Sciences) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Swiss National Science Foundation (407540_167208)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › AI and HR Technologies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Legal and Labor Studies
Keywords
algorithmic decision-making, human resource management, personal integrity, workplace monitoring, employee compliance, algorithmic bias, critical data literacy, moral consciousness, participatory design, corporate social responsibility, critical data studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review