Watson 1

Michael Watson  
CST 300 Writing Lab
October 10, 2021

The Impact and Ethics of Prioritizing AI in Technology

Since artificial intelligence (AI) was first used in 1967 to automate a teller booth, the

emerging field has grown dramatically (Hamacher, 2017). Today, it is hard to find a field that

does not utilize some form of AI, especially given how effectively AI has expanded to address

and automate mundane tasks to increase productivity. Many companies have examined ways to

move in this direction to improve product quality, efficiency, and increase customer satisfaction.

However, as the implementation of AI in industry has increased, ethical concerns have come to

light regarding the replacement of jobs once held by humans with technology. Therefore, a

crucial question that arises is whether corporations should prioritize the integration of AI

advancements into industry as much as possible despite the impact this will have on the

number of jobs available? 

As advances in AI have skyrocketed, companies have been able to mass produce

products at lower costs with lower overhead (Hamacher, 2017). Including AI also allows

companies to streamline employee workload so that workers can focus on higher order tasks

rather than mundane, time-consuming tasks (ex. Using statistical software vs calculating data

set statistics by hand). However, this also means AI has gradually absorbed jobs previously

held by people. For example, at supermarkets, it is not uncommon to have one or two cashiers

manning a fraction of the store’s checkout stations and three to five self-checkout stations. A

decade ago every checkout station would have been filled by a human cashier. In some

industries, AI has completely pushed out all human employees such as in certain factories

where machines assemble, package, and quality check products. Even in medical centers, self-

check-in kiosks are not uncommon when before, you would interact with a receptionist.

However, despite AI expanding, laws protecting worker’s rights and jobs have largely remained
 Watson 2

the same. As a result, workers are left unprotected from job loss as the integration of AI into the

workforce is unregulated. There is also the question of equitability, given many of the jobs being

replaced are blue collar positions and positions primarily held by marginalized groups. The

conflict arises where companies have access to AI advances that could reduce costs while

improving productivity and customer experience but decrease the number of available jobs for

entry level and blue-collar workers.   

Stakeholder Analysis 

Stakeholder #1: Corporations 

Values. Companies value productivity. In general, most companies (excluding luxury

brand companies) value providing customers with a lower cost product since this increases their

customer base and boosts sales. Therefore, if a company can reduce production cost, then they

can also reduce the price that product sells for while still making a profit. With a lower selling

price, the customer base is expanded, and more items can be sold. This will increase sales and

profit.

Position. Companies view advances in AI as a way to increase productivity, profit, and

customer satisfaction. AI would allow companies to spend less money producing products,

which would allow them to sell products to more people at a lower price.

Claim. As per the McKenzie report, global intelligence is set to add 13 trillion dollars to

the global economy by 2030 (Pedamkar, n.d.). In addition to benefiting everyone by adding to

the economy, AI would also benefit workers and customers directly. AIs can often work faster

and more efficiently than humans can, do not need breaks, do not get sick, and are not paid

wages or provided benefit plans. As a result, a machine could produce more products at a faster

rate and not require companies to factor worker costs into the price of a product (Artificial

intelligence in business, n.d.). This would drive down selling prices and would make products
 Watson 3

more accessible to a greater portion of the population. This could also make access more

equitable to marginalized and low-income communities.  

Employees would benefit because of AI completing tedious, mundane tasks for them. If

less time is spent on these tasks, employees can be more efficient, less engaged with “busy-

work”, and more focused on other, higher-order tasks (Ervin, 2019). This could improve

employee satisfaction and reduce stress. Additionally, integrating AI will lead to creation of jobs

that specialize in the training, creation, employment, and management of AI (Wilson, Daugherty,

& Morini-Bianzione, 2017).

Incorporating AI could also benefit customer experience. Customers could interact

through messaging with a bot to address concerns or questions instead of waiting on the phone

for a representative to become available. Automated check-in stations could decrease time

spent waiting in line to speak with a receptionist at the doctor’s office. Using AI to hold virtual

meetings instead of renting an office space would decrease costs and reduce worker and

customer travel time. 

Outcome. Prioritizing AI integration into industry would benefit customers, workers, and

companies. These outcomes outweigh the costs and should therefore be a priority. 

Stakeholder #2: Workers/The General Public 

Values. Worker’s value having employment opportunities protected. The public values

interaction with other humans as this is more familiar than interacting with a machine.

Position. Prioritizing advances in AI would have a greater negative impact on workers

and the general population because they would remove available jobs (John, n.d.), increase

inequality through fewer entry level jobs available, and have a negative impact on customer

experience.

Claim. Many of the jobs AI would replace would be entry level jobs (John, n.d.). These

jobs are accessible options for individuals without a college education or for those first entering
 Watson 4

the workforce. Many marginalized communities rely on these jobs because the education

system creates significant obstacles for acquiring the degrees needed to secure white-collar

positions. If AI replaces these positions, many workers will be left with fewer options for

employment, and the equality gap will widen. A greater number of individuals would be left

without a stable income, which would mean they would not be able to afford the products

companies argue AI would allow them to sell at a lower cost. While companies might profit,

workers and the public would be harmed. 

Relying heavily on AI would also negatively impact consumer experiences. All too often,

AI is not helpful for customers trying to address a problem when interacting with a chat bot. AI

can be frustrating because it is often not flexible or able to solve simple to more complex issues

that are not pre-programmed (Elliott, 2018). When this happens, customers are left frustrated

and often end up calling the company to speak with a representative instead. However, if

companies reduce the number of human agents in order to rely more heavily on AI, customers

will have to wait in queues for longer periods of time without support. When customers are left

waiting, it is more likely that their frustration will be felt by the worker answering the phone,

which would have a negative impact on the employee. 

Additionally, individuals who are hard of hearing or speak with thick accents are not

accounted for in voice recognition programs. As a result, these individuals are more likely to

experience frustrating and unhelpful interactions. This also creates inequality as AI programs

are designed for English speakers without disabilities. Furthermore, older generations who are

not as comfortable with AI would not be taken into account and would be subjected to greater

difficulty seeking services. 

When the inflexibility of AI creates difficulty for customers, companies will also be

negatively impacted. For example, a common complaint grocery stores experience with

automated check-out stations is when the machine does not allow a customer to finish their
 Watson 5

transaction due to an “unexpected item in the bagging area”. When AI is hard to use, customers

can become angry. Shoplifting rates have been found to have increased as a result of customer

frustration with such stations.  

It is also in the best interest of the customer to be able to interact with another human

when receiving sensitive information. For example, when receiving difficult medical results,

customers would be better served by a human relaying this information than AI, because they

would have the opportunity to ask questions and receive immediate support.

Outcome. Prioritizing AI in industry would only benefit the corporation and would result

in significant harm for both workers and the general population. 

Arguments  

Should corporations prioritize the integration of AI advancements into industry as much

as possible despite the impact this will have on the number of jobs available? 

Stakeholder 1: Companies  

Companies view this issue through a Deontological lens. The Deontological Ethical

Framework branches off the Duty-Based Approach by philosopher Immanuel Kant and argues

that doing what is right is not about the consequences of an action, but instead about the

intention of the performer of the action (Bonde & Firenze, 2013). Through this perspective, the

intention of companies is to prioritize the integration of AI into industry in order to benefit

corporate profit by decreasing production cost and increasing employee and customer

satisfaction through automation of time-consuming tasks and lower selling prices. The intention

of the company is not one of harm, but rather helping. Therefore, based on this ethical

framework, companies are making the right choice in prioritizing AI integration. While there may

be some negative impact, their intent is benevolent. This means they are doing what is right and

ethical.

Stakeholder 2: Workers/General Public  

 Watson 6

Workers and the general public view this issue from a Utilitarianism perspective. The

Utilitarianism Ethical Framework, created by Jeremy Bentham, argues that ethical decisions

should be made with the goal of benefiting and maximizing happiness for the greatest number

of people (Bonde & Firenze, 2013). Incorporating advances of AI in industry may have a positive

impact for corporations and on the price of goods, but it would have a greater negative impact

on communities and employees. Marginalized communities already face significant

discrimination and inequality and removing entry level jobs would result in less being available

for individuals without college degrees. It is also hard to program AI in a way that would not be

preferential to native English speakers and those without hearing disabilities. As a result,

individuals who speak with accents or have a hearing disability would be discriminated against.

Customers would also be subjected to frustrating AI interactions as a result of the variety and

nuances of everyday life that cannot be accounted for in their inflexible and rigid programing.

This frustration can then trickle down to employees, decreasing satisfaction for both parties.

Overall, prioritizing AI in industry would benefit only a few and harm the majority.

Student Position 

Both stakeholders pose important and valid arguments. For companies, visions should

revolve around constantly improving and consistently working to decrease effort and cost.

Without utilizing the benefit of AI, companies would stunt their growth and lose competitive

advantage to companies employing AI. On the other hand, when thinking of workers whose jobs

are being replaced and the general public who is forced to interact with AI, prioritizing AI in

industry would have a negative impact on worker livelihood and customer quality of service.

While both arguments are salient, I would argue that at the current moment, the stance of

workers and the general public should be prioritized but with the goal of gradually integrating AI

in order to transition into a world where AI is prioritized as a means of improving overall quality

of life. Many companies are working to push AI integration at a fast rate, but this comes at the
 Watson 7

cost of the majority. In doing so, stakeholders become polarized as rapid change creates

extreme impacts.  

While I would not argue that the Deontological framework used by companies is

inherently wrong since their intent is not malicious, I would however argue that if the intent is to

benefit, there are better ways to reach this intent. Working to integrate AI in a gradual, long-term

approach would better fulfill this intent and benefit all parties. Humans do not take well to

change and changing a society rapidly would likely result in greater conflict. 

In order to benefit the most people and most effectively honor this intent, it would be

advantageous to integrate AI at a gradual rate to allow for long-term planning, familiarization,

and security to be established. If the public is given time to prepare, transitioning to AI would

likely be more beneficial to companies, workers, and the general public.   

Summary 

Advances in AI serve as a powerful tool but raise the question of how ethical prioritizing

AI integration in industry truly is. Examining how companies, workers, and the general public

might view this issue, it is clear that the problem is complex. While prioritization may have

positive impacts on all parties involved, it can also have negative ones. In order to benefit all

parties involved to the greatest extent both now and in the future, taking a long-term, gradual

approach to prioritization would be the most advantageous. This would allow for companies to

improve and provide products at a lower cost while also allowing customers and workers time to

familiarize themselves with AI and prepare for this transition.

 Watson 8

References

Artificial intelligence in business. (n.d.). Nibusiness info.co.uk. Retrieved October 2021 from

https://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/content/business-benefits-artificial-intelligence

Bonde, S., & Firenze, P. (2013). A framework for making ethical decisions. Brown University.

https://www.brown.edu/academics/science-and-technology-studies/framework-making-

ethical-decisions

Elliot, C. (2018). Chatbots are killing customer service. Here’s why. Forbes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherelliott/2018/08/27/chatbots-are-killing-customer-

service-heres-why/?sh=38aeb01d13c5

Ervin, J. (2019). How artificial intelligence will be beneficial for overall humanity and technology

in the digital age. Colocation America. https://www.colocationamerica.com/blog/how-ai-

will-benefit-humanity

John, A. (n.d.). Top 10 jobs artificial intelligence will replace in your lifetime. Wonderlist.

Retrieved September 2021 from https://www.wonderslist.com/jobs-artificial-intelligence-

will-replace/

Hamacher, A. (2019). The unpopular rise of self-checkouts (and how to fix them). BBC Future.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20170509-the-unpopular-rise-of-self-checkouts-and-

how-to-fix-them

Pedamkar, P. (n.d.). Artificial intelligence problem. Educaba. Retrieved October 2021 from
 Watson 9

https://www.educba.com/artificial-intelligence-problems/

Wilson, H. J., Daugherty, P. R., & Morini-Bianzino, N. (2017). The jobs that artificial intelligence

will create. MIT Sloan Management Review. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/will-ai-

create-as-many-jobs-as-it-eliminates/