The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
AI in knowledge sharing, which ethical challenges are raised in decision-making processes for organisations?
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: This study aims to identify and assess the key ethical challenges associated with integrating artificial intelligence (AI) in knowledge-sharing (KS) practices and their implications for decision-making (DM) processes within organisations. Design/methodology/approach: The study employs a mixed-methods approach, beginning with a comprehensive literature review to extract background information on AI and KS and to identify potential ethical challenges. Subsequently, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is conducted using data collected from individuals employed in business settings to validate the challenges identified in the literature and assess their impact on DM processes. Findings: The findings reveal that challenges related to privacy and data protection, bias and fairness and transparency and explainability are particularly significant in DM. Moreover, challenges related to accountability and responsibility and the impact of AI on employment also show relatively high coefficients, highlighting their importance in the DM process. In contrast, challenges such as intellectual property and ownership, algorithmic manipulation and global governance and regulation are found to be less central to the DM process. Originality/value: This research contributes to the ongoing discourse on the ethical challenges of AI in knowledge management (KM) and DM within organisations. By providing insights and recommendations for researchers, managers and policymakers, the study emphasises the need for a holistic and collaborative approach to harness the benefits of AI technologies whilst mitigating their associated risks.
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
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 check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, consumers lose agency over how they are represented in data (Rawas, 2024;Rezaei et al., 2024;Samara et al., 2024).”
From Surveillance Capitalism, Consumer Subjectivity and Marketing in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (2025) · cites this paper as Rezaei et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., Duan, Y., Dwivedi, R., Edwards, J., Eirug, A., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.002 · Cited by 4,611
Edge Intelligence: Paving the Last Mile of Artificial Intelligence With Edge Computing
Zhou, Z., Chen, X., Li, E., Zeng, L., Luo, K., & Zhang, J. (2019) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2019.2918951 · Cited by 2,455
Understanding and managing the threat of common method bias: Detection, prevention and control
Kock, F., Berbekova, A., & Assaf, A. G. (2021) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104330 · Cited by 1,692
Artificial intelligence for sustainability: Challenges, opportunities, and a research agenda
Nishant, R., Kennedy, M., & Corbett, J. (2020) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102104 · Cited by 1,203
Knowledge management, decision-making style and organizational performance
Abubakar, A. M., Elrehail, H., Alatailat, M., & Elçi, A. (2017) · Journal of Innovation & Knowledge · doi:10.1016/j.jik.2017.07.003 · Cited by 1,093
Privacy and artificial intelligence: challenges for protecting health information in a new era
Murdoch, B. (2021) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-021-00687-3 · Cited by 991
Rulers of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of artificial intelligence
Kaplan, A., & Haenlein, M. (2020) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2019.09.003 · Cited by 718
Raji, I. D., & Buolamwini, J. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society · doi:10.1145/3306618.3314244 · Cited by 651
Artificial intelligence and knowledge sharing: Contributing factors to organizational performance
Olan, F., Arakpogun, E. O., Suklan, J., Nakpodia, F., Damij, N., & Jayawickrama, U. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.008 · Cited by 636
Artificial intelligence and knowledge management: A partnership between human and AI
Jarrahi, M. H., Askay, D., Eshraghi, A., & Smith, P. (2023) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2022.03.002 · Cited by 604
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Brodie, 2012, On Knowledge Base Management Systems: Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Database Technologies
- Dignum, 2020, The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of AI, 215
- Field, 2013, Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics
- IBM Data and AI Team, 2023, IBM Blog
- Magyar, 2018, Can AI drive more ethical retail?, Forbes
- Mojtaba, 2022, Sustainable Business Concepts and Practices, 1298
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Neiroukh, S., Emeagwali, O. L., & Aljuhmani, H. Y. (2024) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/md-10-2023-1946 · Cited by 224
Rezaei, M. (2025) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124183 · Cited by 80
Self-citationAli, I., Nguyen, K., Ali, A. M., & Cui, T. (2025) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-03-2025-0431 · Cited by 48
Ali, M., Khan, T., & Sener, I. (2025) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-04-2024-0261 · Cited by 24
Hao, X., Demir, E., & Eyers, D. R. (2025) · Sustainable Futures · doi:10.1016/j.sftr.2025.101152 · Cited by 44
Metadata
- Authors
- Rezaei, M., Pironti, M., & Quaglia, R.
- Affiliations
- Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (IT)
- University of Turin (IT)
- ESCP Business School (GB)
- Venue
- Management Decision
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2024-04-25
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 3369-3388
- ISSN
- 0025-1747 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-6070
- OpenAlex
- W4395071526
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 69 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 51.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Management Decision (publishedVersion)
- Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Knowledge Management and Technology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Impact of AI and Big Data on Business and Society
- Keywords
- AI ethics, knowledge sharing, knowledge management, organizational decision-making, privacy and data protection, algorithmic bias, transparency and explainability, accountability and responsibility, AI and employment, intellectual property, algorithmic manipulation, AI regulation
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
