Cited by 167Robotic Process Automation ApplicationsImpact of AI and Big Data on Business and SocietyArtificial Intelligence Applications

Will COVID-19 be the tipping point for the intelligent automation of work? A review of the debate and implications for research

Open access
Coombs, Crispin·2020·International Journal of Information Management

Abstract

As part of the urgent need to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, governments, healthcare providers, and businesses have looked to applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to compensate for the unavailability of human workers. This interest has renewed the debate regarding the use of AI for the automation of work, which has been described as Intelligent Automation (IA). A new dimension to this debate is whether COVID-19 will be the catalyst for higher IA adoption levels. This article reviews arguments in favour of COVID-19 increasing the level of IA adoption and possible counter-arguments. Key arguments in favour of increased IA adoption include consumer preferences changing to favour IA, increasing familiarity of IA technologies, and increased business confidence in IA. Counter-arguments include big data availability and reliability limitations, many tasks still favouring human skills over IA, the narrow capabilities of IA technologies, and a high availability of human workers. The article also discusses the implications of this debate for information management research and practice.

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 · 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102182

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bullock J. Luccioni A. Hoffmann Pham K. Sin Nga Lam C. Luengo-Oroz M. Mapping the landscape of Artificial Intelligence applications against COVID-19 Retrieved from 2020 ArXiv https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.11336.pdf · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Coombs, C.
Affiliations
Loughborough University (GB)
Corresponding author
Coombs, Crispin
Venue
International Journal of Information Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-12
Volume
55
Pages
102182
ISSN
0268-4012 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3042364026
Cited by
167
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 6
FWCI
21.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Information Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Robotic Process Automation Applications
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Impact of AI and Big Data on Business and Society
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, intelligent automation, artificial intelligence adoption, workplace automation, human-AI comparison, information management research

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