Cited by 330Information Systems Theories and ImplementationAI and HR TechnologiesEthics and Social Impacts of AI

When the Machine Meets the Expert: An Ethnography of Developing AI for Hiring

van den Broek, Elmira, Sergeeva, Anastasia, Huysman, Marleen·2021·MIS Quarterly

Abstract

The introduction of machine learning (ML) in organizations comes with the claim that algorithms will produce insights superior to those of experts by discovering the “truth” from data. Such a claim gives rise to a tension between the need to produce knowledge independent of domain experts and the need to remain relevant to the domain the system serves. This two-year ethnographic study focuses on how developers managed this tension when building an ML system to support the process of hiring job candidates at a large international organization. Despite the initial goal of getting domain experts “out the loop,” we found that developers and experts arrived at a new hybrid practice that relied on a combination of ML and domain expertise. We explain this outcome as resulting from a process of mutual learning in which deep engagement with the technology triggered actors to reflect on how they produced knowledge. These reflections prompted the developers to iterate between excluding domain expertise from the ML system and including it. Contrary to common views that imply an opposition between ML and domain expertise, our study foregrounds their interdependence and as such shows the dialectic nature of developing ML. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings for the literature on information technologies and knowledge work, information system development and implementation, and human–ML hybrids.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.25300/misq/2021/16559

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Brynjolfsson, 2014, The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies
  2. Davenport, 2016, Only Humans Need Apply: Winners and Losers in the Age of Smart Machines
  3. Domingos, 2015, The Master Algorithm: How the Quest for the Ultimate Learning Machine Will Remake Our World
  4. Ford, 2018, Architects of Intelligence: The Truth About AI from the People Building It
  5. Lehr, 2017, Playing with the Data: What Legal Scholars Should Learn About Machine Learning, U.C. Davis Law Review, 51, 653
  6. McCarthy, 1969, Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence, 431
  7. Miles, 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook
  8. Siegel, 2013, Predictive Analytics: The Power to Predict Who Will Click, Buy, Lie, or Die

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van den Broek, E., Sergeeva, A., & Huysman, M.
Affiliations
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Venue
MIS Quarterly
Publisher
MIS Quarterly
Published
2021-09-01
Volume
45
Issue
3
Pages
1557-1580
ISSN
  • 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-9730
OpenAlex
W3181262202
Cited by
330
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 94 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2
FWCI
57.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • MIS Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of the Association for Information Systems (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › AI and HR Technologies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
machine learning, personnel selection, domain knowledge, human-AI collaboration, hybrid practices, mutual learning, knowledge work, information system development, algorithmic decision support

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