Governance of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Companies
0
๐
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Generative AI, such as ChatGPT, has rapidly entered organizations without adequate governance
- This poses both opportunities and risks, and limited research addresses organizational governance from technical and business perspectives
- This review paper aims to develop a framework for Generative AI (GenAI) governance within companies to harness business opportunities and mitigate risks
Plain English Explanation
Generative AI, like the popular ChatGPT, has become widespread in organizations without proper rules and procedures in place to manage its use. While this powerful technology offers many benefits, it also carries significant risks that need to be addressed.
The paper seeks to create a framework to help companies govern their use of Generative AI. This framework would outline the scope, objectives, and specific mechanisms companies can use to take advantage of the opportunities provided by Generative AI, while also mitigating the associated risks. The goal is to provide practical guidance for organizations navigating the challenges of adopting and integrating Generative AI into their operations.
Technical Explanation
The review paper surveys recent research on the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in organizations, with the aim of developing a comprehensive framework for governing its implementation. This framework addresses both the technical and business considerations of GenAI integration, outlining the scope, objectives, and specific governance mechanisms companies can employ.
The proposed framework is designed to help organizations harness the benefits of GenAI, such as increased productivity and innovation, while also mitigating the potential risks, such as data privacy violations, algorithmic bias, and the displacement of human workers. The review examines existing research on the opportunities and risks associated with GenAI, as well as emerging regulatory approaches and industry best practices for governing its use.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a valuable contribution by addressing the critical gap in research on Generative AI governance within organizations. By synthesizing insights from various sources, the authors have developed a comprehensive framework that can help companies navigate the complex challenges of GenAI adoption.
However, the paper does not delve deeply into the specific technical and legal considerations that may vary across different industries and regulatory environments. Additionally, the framework may require further refinement and validation through empirical studies to ensure its effectiveness in real-world business settings.
Future research could explore the implementation of the proposed GenAI governance framework in various organizational contexts, as well as investigate the evolving regulatory landscape and its impact on GenAI adoption and governance.
Conclusion
This review paper offers a timely and focused approach to addressing the critical need for Generative AI governance within organizations. By providing a framework that balances the business opportunities and risks associated with GenAI, the authors have laid the groundwork for companies to make more informed decisions and develop effective strategies for integrating this transformative technology into their operations. The insights and recommendations presented in this paper can serve as a valuable resource for organizations seeking to harness the power of Generative AI while prioritizing responsible and ethical practices.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
๐
0
Governance of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Companies
Johannes Schneider, Rene Abraham, Christian Meske
Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI), specifically large language models like ChatGPT, has swiftly entered organizations without adequate governance, posing both opportunities and risks. Despite extensive debates on GenAI's transformative nature and regulatory measures, limited research addresses organizational governance, encompassing technical and business perspectives. Our review paper fills this gap by surveying recent works with the purpose of developing a framework for GenAI governance within companies. This framework outlines the scope, objectives, and governance mechanisms tailored to harness business opportunities as well as mitigate risks associated with GenAI integration. Our research contributes a focused approach to GenAI governance, offering practical insights for companies navigating the challenges of GenAI adoption and highlighting research gaps.
Read more6/11/2024
๐ค
0
Generative AI Needs Adaptive Governance
Anka Reuel, Trond Arne Undheim
Because of the speed of its development, broad scope of application, and its ability to augment human performance, generative AI challenges the very notions of governance, trust, and human agency. The technology's capacity to mimic human knowledge work, feedback loops including significant uptick in users, research, investor, policy, and media attention, data and compute resources, all lead to rapidly increasing capabilities. For those reasons, adaptive governance, where AI governance and AI co-evolve, is essential for governing generative AI. In sharp contrast to traditional governance's regulatory regimes that are based on a mix of rigid one-and-done provisions for disclosure, registration and risk management, which in the case of AI carry the potential for regulatory misalignment, this paper argues that generative AI calls for adaptive governance. We define adaptive governance in the context of AI and outline an adaptive AI governance framework. We outline actors, roles, as well as both shared and actors-specific policy activities. We further provide examples of how the framework could be operationalized in practice. We then explain that the adaptive AI governance stance is not without its risks and limitations, such as insufficient oversight, insufficient depth, regulatory uncertainty, and regulatory capture, and provide potential approaches to fix these shortcomings.
Read more6/10/2024
๐ค
0
Navigating Governance Paradigms: A Cross-Regional Comparative Study of Generative AI Governance Processes & Principles
Jose Luna, Ivan Tan, Xiaofei Xie, Lingxiao Jiang
As Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies evolve at an unprecedented rate, global governance approaches struggle to keep pace with the technology, highlighting a critical issue in the governance adaptation of significant challenges. Depicting the nuances of nascent and diverse governance approaches based on risks, rules, outcomes, principles, or a mix across different regions around the globe is fundamental to discern discrepancies and convergences and to shed light on specific limitations that need to be addressed, thereby facilitating the safe and trustworthy adoption of GenAI. In response to the need and the evolving nature of GenAI, this paper seeks to provide a collective view of different governance approaches around the world. Our research introduces a Harmonized GenAI Framework, H-GenAIGF, based on the current governance approaches of six regions: European Union (EU), United States (US), China (CN), Canada (CA), United Kingdom (UK), and Singapore (SG). We have identified four constituents, fifteen processes, twenty-five sub-processes, and nine principles that aid the governance of GenAI, thus providing a comprehensive perspective on the current state of GenAI governance. In addition, we present a comparative analysis to facilitate the identification of common ground and distinctions based on the coverage of the processes by each region. The results show that risk-based approaches allow for better coverage of the processes, followed by mixed approaches. Other approaches lag behind, covering less than 50% of the processes. Most prominently, the analysis demonstrates that among the regions, only one process aligns across all approaches, highlighting the lack of consistent and executable provisions. Moreover, our case study on ChatGPT reveals process coverage deficiency, showing that harmonization of approaches is necessary to find alignment for GenAI governance.
Read more9/2/2024
๐งช
0
Securing the Future of GenAI: Policy and Technology
Mihai Christodorescu, Ryan Craven, Soheil Feizi, Neil Gong, Mia Hoffmann, Somesh Jha, Zhengyuan Jiang, Mehrdad Saberi Kamarposhti, John Mitchell, Jessica Newman, Emelia Probasco, Yanjun Qi, Khawaja Shams, Matthew Turek
The rise of Generative AI (GenAI) brings about transformative potential across sectors, but its dual-use nature also amplifies risks. Governments globally are grappling with the challenge of regulating GenAI, balancing innovation against safety. China, the United States (US), and the European Union (EU) are at the forefront with initiatives like the Management of Algorithmic Recommendations, the Executive Order, and the AI Act, respectively. However, the rapid evolution of GenAI capabilities often outpaces the development of comprehensive safety measures, creating a gap between regulatory needs and technical advancements. A workshop co-organized by Google, University of Wisconsin, Madison (UW-Madison), and Stanford University aimed to bridge this gap between GenAI policy and technology. The diverse stakeholders of the GenAI space -- from the public and governments to academia and industry -- make any safety measures under consideration more complex, as both technical feasibility and regulatory guidance must be realized. This paper summarizes the discussions during the workshop which addressed questions, such as: How regulation can be designed without hindering technological progress? How technology can evolve to meet regulatory standards? The interplay between legislation and technology is a very vast topic, and we don't claim that this paper is a comprehensive treatment on this topic. This paper is meant to capture findings based on the workshop, and hopefully, can guide discussion on this topic.
Read more7/19/2024