The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Human–AI collaborative decision-making as an organization design problem
Open accessAbstract
The promise of collaboration between humans and algorithms in producing good decisions is stimulating much experimentation. Drawing on research in organization design can help us to approach this experimentation systematically. I propose typologies for considering different forms of division of labor between human and algorithm as well as the learning configurations they are arranged in, as basic building blocks for this endeavor.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Embracing the vision of multiplying diverse expertise, many scholars describe human-AI augmentation as humans and machines 'collaborating' together (e.g., Boyaci et al. 2020, Gao et al. 2021, Khadpe et al. 2020, Puranam 2021, Wilson and Daugherty 2018).”
From To Engage or Not to Engage with AI for Critical Judgments: How Professionals Deal with Opacity When Using AI for Medical Diagnosis (2022) · cites this paper as Puranam 2021
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- Aggarwal VA, Posen HE, Workiewicz M (2017) Adaptive capacity to technological change: a microfoundational approach. Strateg Manag J 38(6):1212–1231. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2584 · DOI
- Argote L (2013) Organizational learning: creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Springer US, New York · DOI
- Bandura A (1977) Social learning theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood cliffs
- Broussard M (2018) Artificial unintelligence: how computers misunderstand the world. MIT Press, Cambridge · DOI
- Christensen M, Knudsen T (2013) How decisions can be organized- and why it matters. J Organ Des 2(3):41–50
- Christensen M, Knudsen T (2020) Division of roles and endogenous specialization. In: Industrial and Corporate Change, pp 105–124 · DOI
- Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A behavioural theory of the firm. Wiley, Hoboken
- Denrell J, Fang C, Levinthal DA (2004) From T-mazes to labyrinths: learning from model-based feedback. Manage Sci 50(10):1366–1378. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0271 · DOI
- Dougherty D (2001) Reimagining the differentiation and integration of work for sustained product innovation. Organ Sci 12(5):612–631. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.5.612.10096 · DOI
- Emerson RM (1962) Power-dependence relations. Am Sociol Rev 27(1):31–41 · DOI · Paper page
- Kelley HH, Thibaut JW (1978) Interpersonal relations: a theory of interdependence. Wiley, Hoboken
- Knudsen T, Srikanth K (2014) Coordinated exploration: organizing joint search by multiple specialists to overcome mutual confusion and joint myopia. Adm Sci Q 59(3):409–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839214538021 · DOI
- Larrick RP, Soll JB (2006) Intuitions about combining opinions: misappreciation of the averaging principle. Manage Sci 52(1):111–127 · DOI · Paper page
- Lave CA, March JG (1993) An introduction to models in the social sciences. The University Press of America, Lanham
- Lounamaa PH, March JG (1987) Adaptive coordination of a learning team. Manage Sci 33(1):107–123 · DOI
- Milgrom P, Roberts J (1990) The economics of modern manufacturing: technology, strategy, and organization. Am Econ Rev 80(3):511–528
- Mintzberg H (1983) Structure in fives: designing effective organizations. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River
- Pfeffer J, Salancik GR (1978) The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto
- Piezunka H, Aggarwal VA, Posen HE (2020) Learning-by-participating: the dual role of structure in aggregating information and shaping learning. Organ Sci (forthcoming) · DOI
- Puranam P (2018) The microstructure of organizations. Oxford University Press, Oxford · DOI
- Puranam P, Swamy M (2016) How initial representations shape coupled learning processes. Organ Sci 27(2):323–335. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.1033 · DOI
- Puranam P, Raveendran M, Knudsen T (2012) Organization design: the epistemic interdependence perspective. Acad Manag Rev 37(3):419–440. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0535 · DOI
- Raj M, Seamans R (2019) Primer on artificial intelligence and robotics. J Organ Des 8(11):1–14
- Raveendran M, Puranam P, Warglien M (2015) Object salience in division of labor: experimental evidence. Manage Sci 9:337–392
- Raveendran M, Silvestri L, Gulati R (2020) The role of interdependence in the micro-foundations of organization design: task, goal, and knowledge interdependence. Acad Manag Ann 14(2):828–868 · DOI
- Rokach L (2010) Ensemble-based classifiers. Artif Intell Rev 33(1–2):1–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-009-9124-7 · DOI · Paper page
- Samek W, Montavon G, Vedaldi A, Hansen LK, Müller KR (eds) (2017) Explainable AI: interpreting, explaining and visualizing deep learning. Springer Nature, New York
- Surowiecki J (2004) The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations. Doubleday & Co, New York
- Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in action: social science bases of administrative theory. Transaction Publisher, Piscataway
- von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (2007) Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dell’Acqua, F., McFowland, E., Mollick, E., Lifshitz, H., Kellogg, K. C., Rajendran, S., Krayer, L., Candelon, F., & Lakhani, K. R. (2026) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2025.21838 · Cited by 1,189
Dell'Acqua, F., McFowland III, E., Mollick, E. R., Lifshitz-Assaf, H., Kellogg, K., Rajendran, S., Krayer, L., Candelon, F., & Lakhani, K. R. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4573321 · Cited by 794
Lebovitz, S., Lifshitz-Assaf, H., & Levina, N. (2022) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2021.1549 · Cited by 632
Wan, Q., Hu, S., Zhang, Y., Wang, P., Wen, B., & Lu, Z. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3637361 · Cited by 88
Effective human–AI work design for collaborative decision-making
Jain, R., Garg, N., & Khera, S. N. (2023) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-04-2022-0548 · Cited by 85
Metadata
- Authors
- Puranam, P.
- Affiliations
- INSEAD (SG)
- Corresponding author
- Puranam, Phanish
- ORCID
- Puranam, Phanish
- Venue
- Journal of Organization Design
- Published
- 2021-02-16
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 75-80
- ISSN
- 2245-408X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3131976765
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 72 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 9.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2021-03-25)
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Organization Design (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Keywords
- human-AI collaboration, collaborative decision-making, organizational design, division of labor, human-algorithm collaboration, typology
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Human–AI collaborative decision-making as an organization design problem. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s41469-021-00095-2
- The paper
- Puranam, P. (2021). Human–AI collaborative decision-making as an organization design problem. Journal of Organization Design. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41469-021-00095-2
