This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Generative artificial intelligence (Gen-AI) has become a routine part of working life, but overreliance on the technology may erode managers' ability to build moral insights, contextual understanding and know-how to get a job done, according to a new study from the University of Bath. The research, published in the Academy of Management Review, explores how tools such as ChatGPT may affect what academics call "managerial phronesis"—the practical wisdom managers develop through real-world experience, reflection and human interaction.
"Gen-AI appeals because it can help people complete tasks more quickly. However, Gen-AI cannot replace the lessons learned through firsthand experience. Unlike humans, AI does not experience the world, understand the consequences of decisions or grasp the social and emotional complexities in our workplaces.
Instead, it produces responses based on patterns found in existing data," said Professor Dirk Lindebaum of the university's School of Management. "This creates a significant risk for organizations—as managers increasingly outsource their thinking to Gen-AI for idea generation or when a practical problem arises at work, they may rely less on their own judgment. Over time, this could reduce their ability to learn from experience, think critically and anticipate what kinds of actions are needed now to meet future goals," he said.
The team of researchers from the University of Bath, Ohio State University, the University of Lausanne and Cardiff University identified the concept of "epistemic deskilling"—a process in which people gradually lose knowledge-related capabilities because they outsource too much thinking to Gen-AI. They suggested this was most likely to happen when managers are under intense time pressure and use Gen-AI as a shortcut rather than engaging deeply with a problem themselves. "In these situations, managers may stop asking important questions, seeking different perspectives or learning from real-world interactions.
Instead of developing a nuanced understanding of employees, customers or organizational challenges, they may come to depend on AI-generated answers that lack the context and moral judgment needed for complex decisions," Lindebaum said. The team also developed the idea of how Gen-AI may be used to develop managers' judgment, although this is likely to prove more challenging. Specifically, the researchers noted that Gen-AI can strengthen managerial judgment when it is used as a tool for reflection rather than a replacement for thinking.
The researchers dubbed this process "epistemic upskilling." "Rather than accepting AI outputs at face value, managers can use them to challenge assumptions, explore alternative scenarios and test the reasoning behind their own decisions. Because AI systems often struggle to explain why they produce particular answers, the gaps in those explanations can encourage people to think more deeply about their choices and the consequences of their actions," Lindebaum said, adding that "this requires persistent effort on the part of managers to fill these explanatory gaps themselves." The study suggested that this beneficial outcome is most likely when managers know they will be held accountable for their decisions. In workplaces where individuals must justify their actions and explain their reasoning, Gen-AI can become a trigger for deeper reflection instead of a substitute for judgment.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
