“AI crash not here yet – but the risk is there”
“Pilots can show that the technology works, but they rarely lead to real change,” says Pär Ågerfalk, Professor of Computer and Systems Science. Photo: Daniel Olsson
Many Swedish organisations are investing in artificial intelligence (AI). Yet significant effects are notably absent. Professor Pär Ågerfalk at Uppsala University argues that the problem is not the technology but the way it is used.
In an opinion piece in the Swedish newspaper Dagens industri, you and other researchers warn about a Swedish AI crash. What do you mean by that?
“It’s important to say that there is no crash yet. What we point out is the risk that AI will never become a natural part of operations. Many organisations talk a lot about AI and try a few things out but the technology is not being incorporated in the central working procedures that actually govern the way things are done. As a result, very little is happening in practice.”
Why isn’t it enough to try out AI in pilot projects?
“Pilots can show that the technology works, but they rarely lead to real change. When the time comes to move on and introduce AI on a broad front, there’s often a lack of responsibility, structure and decisiveness. Studies show that while staff can feel more effective using AI, at organisation level you rarely see a clear impact on results or profitability. It can easily turn into what we call ‘pilot theatre’.”
What is needed for AI to yield real benefits?
“The focus needs to shift from just risks to include conditions as well. How can we use AI in a legally certain manner? One example is regulatory sandpits, where organisations can try out AI within clear legal frameworks. Joint infrastructure is also needed so that people know what tools are in use, what data they manage and how quality is assured.”
Are there any other challenges?
“Yes, one major barrier is something we call ‘efficiency shame’. When someone uses AI and the work goes more quickly, it can awaken suspicion, both in the user and in others. You can feel that you haven’t ‘made a proper effort’. But professionalism is not about how long it takes to do something, it’s about results maintaining high quality and complying with the requirements of professional ethics. If shame is an impediment to use, we risk saying no to a tool that can actually improve both the work environment and quality.”
Daniel Olsson