A Comprehensive Guide to Stakeholder Analysis in AI Governance (Part?2)
[Jayce] Lye Jia Jun
US Outreach Lead @ LKYGBPC | AI Safety Researcher | SMU Information Systems Undergraduate | NYP Top Cybersecurity Graduate | Former Google DSC Lead | Tech Founder
Understanding Interests, Influences, and Impacts for Key Stakeholders in AI Governance
*Author Note: This article is written as part two of the Comprehensive Guide to Stakeholder Analysis in AI Governance. Read Part 1 here.
Welcome back to the continuation of our ‘A Comprehensive Guide to Stakeholder Analysis in AI Governance.’ If you’re just tuning in, I highly recommend starting with the first part of this two-part series to understand the key stakeholders we’ve identified in the space of AI Governance.
?? Stay tuned to the end of this article for practical, actionable takeaways from this comprehensive AI Governance stakeholder analysis guide!
Brief Recap of Part 1 of The?Guide
In Part 1, we explored the following
1. The foundations of stakeholder analysis, its significance, and methodologies.
2. The SCIM framework for the Stakeholder Analysis Process.
3. Stakeholder Analysis application in AI Governance by identifying the key stakeholders in the space, step “S” in the SCIM framework.
In Part 2, we will continue with the subsequent steps of the stakeholder analysis?process
Table of?Content
Part 1
(ICYMI: part 1 of the guide is available here)
Part 2
Recap that we have a total of 9 stakeholders in AI Governance belonging to four distinct categories.
After our identification of the key stakeholders in AI Governance, we need to categorize the stakeholders as part of our SCIM framework.
??Remember SCIM: Stakeholder Identification; Categorize and Prioritize; Implement Engagement Strategies; Monitor and Adjust.
Analyze, Categorize, and Prioritize Stakeholders:
Group stakeholders based on their influence, interest, or impact on the project. Common categories include internal, external, primary, and secondary stakeholders.
Determine which stakeholders have the most significant impact or influence, and consider tools like power/interest grids or stakeholder maps to visualize this information.
Power-interest Grid
The power-interest grid is a tool used in stakeholder management to categorize stakeholders based on their influence and interest in a project.
High Power, High Interest (Manage Closely):
High Power, Low Interest (Keep Satisfied):
Low Power, High Interest (Keep Informed):
Low Power, Low Interest (Monitor):
Categorizing Stakeholders in AI Governance
Given our 9 core stakeholders, we can create a Power-Interest Grid as follows:
Let us explore the process of categorizing and prioritizing these stakeholders.
High Power, High Interest (Manage Closely):
The three core stakeholders in AI Governance placed in the Manage Closely basket are the key international and governmental bodies because these entities often have high power and high interest in AI governance; they are directly responsible for setting standards and regulations and have vested interests in doing so.
Overall, Their decisions can significantly impact the development and application of AI.
Governments/Regulatory Bodies: Possessing the power to legislate and regulate, these bodies exert direct control over actions within their jurisdiction. Their influence on AI Governance is immediate and broad within their territories.
International Bodies: Influencing global norms, these bodies can impact numerous nations and corporations in the AI Governance space. Their broad scope and need for consensus among member nations sometimes mean they operate at a powerful, albeit slower pace.
Other Industry Associations and Professional Bodies: They set industry standards and have a collective voice that impacts practices, such as those in the field of AI safety. They are driven by the interests of their members and often have a more specialized focus than broader entities.
High Power, Low Interest (Keep Satisfied):
In the Keep Satisfied bracket, we have research and academic institutions They are crucial for advancing AI knowledge and informing policy through research. While they may not directly enforce regulations, their insights and research can significantly influence the field’s direction.
Given their strong focus on advancing technologies and science, however, their direct interest in AI Governance may not be high.
领英推荐
Research and Academic Institutions: These entities are centers of knowledge and innovation. Their influence is based on their academic credibility, and they often prioritize knowledge dissemination and research over commercial, political interests, or AI Governance.
Low Power, High Interest (Keep Informed):
End-users and ethicists are often highly interested in the safe and proper governance of AI. They are directly impacted by AI and have a vested interest in demanding AI safety.
Despite their strong interest, however, they often have low or limited power in influencing AI Governance policies.
End-Users: Consumers are directly affected by AI and their preferences and demands can shape the direction of AI. Though weak alone, their power comes from collective demand.
Ethicists and Philosophers: Offering moral and ethical perspectives, their voices can shape the broader discourse around technology and its societal implications, even if they lack the direct influence of other entities.
Low Power, Low Interest (Monitor):
The average AI Engineer typically prioritizes advancing their technical knowledge while corporations and investors are primarily interested in the monetary gain from AI.
AI Governance is often only important to them to the degree that they need to focus on compliance and regulatory requirements; a typical AI engineer, investor, or corporation generally would not have vested interests nor power to influence AI Governance.
Corporations: Driving the commercialization of technology, they have resources and market presence that can scale innovations, largely guided by profitability and market demands. AI Governance, however, is not their primary focus.
Investors: While they hold financial power, they primarily influence the direction of AI to the degree of deciding which projects get greenlit. Their primary interest is monetary return on investments, not AI Governance.
AI Engineers: The technical experts behind innovations, their power lies in their knowledge and skills, but they might lack the interest, platform, or collective voice to drive large-scale change in AI Governance.
Now that we have categorized our stakeholders based on the Power-Interest grid, we can move to the next step of developing engagement strategies.
Develop and Implement Engagement Strategies
Create tailored communication and engagement plans for each stakeholder group to address their specific needs, concerns, and expectations.
Consider the following approaches that you (or your organization) can take to engage with the various stakeholders:
High Power, High Interest (Manage Closely):
High Power, Low Interest (Keep Satisfied):
Low Power, High Interest (Keep Informed):
Low Power, Low Interest (Monitor):
Monitor and?Adjust
Finally, you need to ensure continuous monitoring of stakeholder engagement for AI Governance success.
Continually monitor stakeholders’ responses and feedback. Adapt engagement strategies as needed to ensure ongoing support and alignment.
Periodically review feedback and engagement metrics to gauge the effectiveness of communication and collaboration strategies. As the AI landscape evolves, stakeholders’ interests and concerns will inevitably shift.
Adapt engagement tactics accordingly to maintain alignment, trust, and mutual benefit, ensuring that AI governance remains responsive, inclusive, and dynamic.
If you made it this far, congratulations! ?? We have completed the Complete Stakeholder Analysis of Key Stakeholders in AI Governance.
Now that we have completed our SCIM framework, let us explore the key takeaways from our analysis.
Actionable Takeaways ??
To ensure the successful implementation of AI Governance through comprehensive stakeholder analysis, focus on the following:
Conclusion
Effective governance in the AI landscape hinges on comprehensive stakeholder management, addressing the myriad of ethical, societal, and operational challenges. Stakeholder analysis ensures that all voices are considered, risks are minimized, and collective objectives align with AI initiatives.
As AI technologies increasingly influence our world, it’s imperative to maintain robust, adaptable governance. Stakeholders, far from being mere observers, are active participants, collaboratively guiding AI towards a responsible, ethical, and universally beneficial future.
I hope you found value in this piece. Cheers!
Acknowledgement & References
Thank you for journeying with me through my introduction to “The AI Governance Journal”. As we delve deeper into the realms of AI governance, I invite you to join the conversation, challenge the status quo, and champion responsible AI. For a holistic understanding, follow me for more insightful AI Governance pieces. Stay curious and stay informed.
Assistant Director at SMU Institute of Innovation & Entrepreneurship | Adjunct Faculty at SMU School of Accountancy
1 年So impressed that you’re thinking way ahead of the rest of us :)
Assistant Director at SMU Institute of Innovation & Entrepreneurship | Adjunct Faculty at SMU School of Accountancy
1 年Who will benefit the most from this stakeholder analysis? Ie. who can’t do without? Is there a company you can bring us thru the process w a case study?
US Outreach Lead @ LKYGBPC | AI Safety Researcher | SMU Information Systems Undergraduate | NYP Top Cybersecurity Graduate | Former Google DSC Lead | Tech Founder
1 年?ICYMI: Here's part 1 of my "Comprehensive Guide to Stakeholder Analysis in AI Governance": https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/comprehensive-guide-stakeholder-analysis-ai-part1-lye-jia-jun-aphgc