CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 291Ethics and Social Impacts of AICorporate Social Responsibility and SustainabilityEthics in Business and Education

Corporate digital responsibility in service firms and their ecosystems

Open access
Wirtz, Jochen, Kunz, Werner H., Hartley, Nicole, Tarbit, James·2023·Journal of Service Research
DOI 10.1177/10946705221130467
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Digitization, artificial intelligence, and service robots carry serious ethical, privacy, and fairness risks. Using the lens of corporate digital responsibility (CDR), we examine these risks and their mitigation in service firms and make five contributions. First, we show that CDR is critical in service contexts because of the vast streams of customer data involved and digital service technology’s omnipresence, opacity, and complexity. Second, we synthesize the ethics, privacy, and fairness literature using the CDR data and technology life-cycle perspective to understand better the nature of these risks in a service context. Third, to provide insights on the origins of these risks, we examine the digital service ecosystem and the related flows of money, service, data, insights, and technologies. Fourth, we deduct that the underlying causes of CDR issues are trade-offs between good CDR practices and organizational objectives (e.g., profit opportunities versus CDR risks) and introduce the CDR calculus to capture this. We also conclude that regulation will need to step in when a firm’s CDR calculus becomes so negative that good CDR is unlikely. Finally, we advance a set of strategies, tools, and practices service firms can use to manage these trade-offs and build a strong CDR culture.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/10946705221130467

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Wirtz et al. argue that service firms engage in a "corporate digital responsibility calculus" and weigh the benefits and costs of following ethical principles to determine their level of engagement in digital responsibility.

    “Similarly, Wirtz et al. (62) argue that service firms engage in a “corporate digital responsibility calculus” and weigh the benefits and costs of following ethical principles to determine their level of engagement in digital responsibility.”

    From The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making (2024) · cites this paper as [62]

  • If the costs of adopting responsible practices is too high, firms may be less likely to engage in good practices and regulatory enforcement may be necessary.

    “However, if the costs of adopting responsible practices is too high, firms may be less likely to engage in good practices and regulatory enforcement may be necessary (62).”

    From The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making (2024) · cites this paper as [62]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wirtz, J., Kunz, W. H., Hartley, N., & Tarbit, J.
Affiliations
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • University of Massachusetts Boston (US)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Hartley, Nicole
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Service Research
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2022-10-05
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
173-190
ISSN
  • 1094-6705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7379
DOI
10.1177/10946705221130467
OpenAlex
W4302029122
Semantic Scholar
d11aba4c1c4400e7a279b5e51a9d2b95239add9a
Cited by
291
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 84 · 2025: 106 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 3
FWCI
60.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Service Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
Keywords
corporate digital responsibility, service companies, ethics, privacy, fairness, artificial intelligence, service robots, customer data, technology life cycle, regulation, risk mitigation

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