An important question confronting many organizations today is how to harness the power of Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms to increase firm profits while promoting a culture of equity and diversity among workers and management. Algorithms are used for many organizational decisions today, such as screening job applicants and hiring. It is also well-known that bias pervades all aspects of organizational decision-making, from hiring, to evaluation and promotions. One of the open questions in this context pertains to whether the use of algorithms mitigates or exacerbates innate human biases within organizations. Extant literature does not provide deep insights into how individuals’ backgrounds influence their propensity to engage with algorithms and shape their bias. We propose to examine these questions in the context of recruitment through a series of randomized controlled trials. Insights from our study can provide valuable information on how organizations can facilitate human-technology interactions in ways that reduce sub-optimal hiring choices arising from bias.

An important question confronting many organizations today is how to harness the power of Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms to increase firm profits while promoting a culture of equity and diversity among workers and management. Algorithms are used for many organizational decisions today, such as screening job applicants and hiring. It is also well-known that bias pervades all aspects of organizational decision-making, from hiring, to evaluation and promotions. One of the open questions in this context pertains to whether the use of algorithms mitigates or exacerbates innate human biases within organizations. Extant literature does not provide deep insights into how individuals’ backgrounds influence their propensity to engage with algorithms and shape their bias. We propose to examine these questions in the context of recruitment through a series of randomized controlled trials. Insights from our study can provide valuable information on how organizations can facilitate human-technology interactions in ways that reduce sub-optimal hiring choices arising from bias.

Unicorn Leaders as Legitimate Troublemakers:

Evaluations of the Founders’ Ambiguous Wrongdoings in Entrepreneurship Ventures

In recent incidents, founders of some unicorn companies faced charges of bluffing their ventures’ potentials. They pitched their disruptive ideas with underdeveloped products or technologies (if exist). Long before their realities were disclosed, however, some norm violations were observed but not visited seriously, mainly because they were ambiguous to judge. Then why do people often see no evil from those founders? Prior research found that, when making sense of ambiguous wrongdoings, stakeholders are influenced by cues or frames (e.g., authenticity or reputation), established through the actor’s historical records and long-held social relationships. The remaining question is whether any cues and frames exist in the context of entrepreneurial ventures and how they influence people’s evaluations of the leader’s ambiguous norm violations. To examine this question, I conducted a qualitative study with employees of a venture that has grown fast but faced scandal around its founder. My preliminary analysis reveals that employees’ evaluations vary across how they framed the entrepreneurship founder (i.e., an archetype of entrepreneurship leader, a character, or an organization leadership) and how they described the venture’s identity (i.e., vision-focused, mission-focused, or inconsistent). For instance, stakeholders who perceived the leader as a typical young unicorn founder understood that the rules of the game are different in this “tech world” and discounted the leader’s questionable behaviors. My research calls for more research on the nature of wrongdoings in entrepreneurial ventures distinguished from large and established organizations. This study also adds to the recent scholarly discussion around the myths of radical founders and their novel ideas.

PhD Student Business Administration

Faculty Sponsor: Ravi Mehta, Associate Professor Business Administration 

Abstract: The current research investigates the paradoxes associated with engaging in prosocial behavior. Specifically, this research asks two questions to understand why individuals engage in prosocial behavior and what consequences prosocial behavior might have. First, on the bright side, we argue how feeling unique and different from others can, in fact, help one better understand others’ circumstances, thereby leading to higher motivation to engage in prosocial behavior. Second, on the dark side, we argue that belief in karma can induce self-serving altruism, which then while leading to seemingly higher prosocial behavior can, in fact, paradoxically encourage unethical behavior. The current work thus identifies factors that lead to paradoxical consequences associated with prosocial behavior and provides intriguing insights for professional responsibilities. 

PhD Student Business Administration

Faculty Sponsor: Olga M. Khessina, Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior 

Abstract: State of the art house: How mission-driven organizations stay true to their commitment

Organizational authenticity, or the consistency between an organization’s internal values and espoused commitment, is a rising topic in management studies. However, in the daily operations of an organization, there are many factors, including both pressure and temptations, that can erode organizational authenticity and induce mission drift. Therefore, understanding how organizations maintain authenticity becomes an acute scholarly topic, especially considering that there are increasing findings of mission-driven organizations that aspire to put financial pursuit secondary but constantly find themselves struggling to sustain survival. Through a qualitative study of U.S. art house movie theaters whose mission is to enrich people’s cultural lives by offering socially engaging and intellectually stimulating movies as opposed to commercial films for pure entertainment purposes, I uncover the practices that art houses adopt to stay true to this commitment. One of my preliminary findings reveal that successful authenticity work is more generative than restrictive, which means that maintaining authenticity is more than conforming to the minimal requirement of belonging to a self-imposed niche market. Instead, art houses are creative. They transcend their identity as a simple film-showing space by developing a series of special events that inspire discussions of real community lives, such as inequality and education, and thus become a community institution.

PhD Student Business Administration

Faculty Sponsor: Olga M. Khessina, Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior 

Abstract: State of the art house: How mission-driven organizations stay true to their commitment

Organizational authenticity, or the consistency between an organization’s internal values and espoused commitment, is a rising topic in management studies. However, in the daily operations of an organization, there are many factors, including both pressure and temptations, that can erode organizational authenticity and induce mission drift. Therefore, understanding how organizations maintain authenticity becomes an acute scholarly topic, especially considering that there are increasing findings of mission-driven organizations that aspire to put financial pursuit secondary but constantly find themselves struggling to sustain survival. Through a qualitative study of U.S. art house movie theaters whose mission is to enrich people’s cultural lives by offering socially engaging and intellectually stimulating movies as opposed to commercial films for pure entertainment purposes, I uncover the practices that art houses adopt to stay true to this commitment. One of my preliminary findings reveal that successful authenticity work is more generative than restrictive, which means that maintaining authenticity is more than conforming to the minimal requirement of belonging to a self-imposed niche market. Instead, art houses are creative. They transcend their identity as a simple film-showing space by developing a series of special events that inspire discussions of real community lives, such as inequality and education, and thus become a community institution.

PhD Student Business Administration

Faculty Sponsor: Goffrey Love, Associate Professor Business Administration 

Abstract: An eye for AI – Insights into Governance of Artificial Intelligence and Potential Oversights

In a rapidly transforming digital landscape, it is hard to deny that algorithms are all-pervasive. They impact us as consumers, employees, leaders and most importantly as citizens. While there is increasing use of big data technology in our personal and professional spheres, the implications of using such technology are not yet perfectly clear. Since data (aka, oil of the 21st century) is viewed by most B2C firms as a key invisible and renewable resource, we will need a keen eye and a deliberate effort by various stakeholders to prevent opportunistic behavior of this resource. We discuss what risks do AI technologies pose, for whom and how can enhanced corporate governance measures buffer such risks. We attempt to synthesize existing literature on opportunities and challenges of algorithms, artificial intelligence and big-data technologies in our society and offer a governance framework. The future of businesses and mankind may well depend on how humans of today lay guidelines to govern the machines of tomorrow.

PhD Student Business Administration

Faculty Sponsor: Yunchuan Liu, Associate Professor Business Administration 

Abstract: Most of the financial service firms, such as Schwab Intelligent Portfolios and Vanguard personal advisor services, introduced robo advisors, who offer financial advises based on algorithm rather than human recommendations. Financial service firms strategically allocate the resources to different divisions: robo advisors and human advisors. Robo advisors can reduce information asymmetry and save costs for the firm. It does not have the flexibility to adjust the effort accordingly. Typically, it requires high volume to cover the large investment in the very beginning. Human advisors, on the other hand, can be incentivized by higher compensation rate. In this research, I am interested in why firms introduce robo advisors and how firms will set compensation rate and allocate resources for both human and robo advisors.

PhD Student Business Administration

Faculty Sponsor: Jeffrey Loewenstein, Professor Business Administration 

Abstract:Cross Cultural Differences in Lay Theories about Morality in Leadership: A Comparative Study on United States and China

Morality in leadership has long been recognized as a critical component in management. However, little is known about how much importance people ascribe to morality (vs. ability) when evaluating leaders. Moreover, there has been a paucity of attention to morality outside of the professional domain; whether people care about the (im)morality in a leader’s personal life remains largely underexplored. Drawing upon a culturally attuned perspective on leadership, we argue that compared to North American culture (i.e., U.S.), East Asian culture (i.e., China) is more likely to prioritize considerations of a leader’s morality (vs. ability). Also, we propose that concerns with morality in leadership are largely bounded in the professional domain in Western culture, whereas in Eastern culture they are more likely to also permeate the personal domain. We propose to identify the mechanisms underlying the differences by looking at the declarative and procedural cultural knowledge that shapes (1) how people view an organization and (2) how people think. More specifically, we propose that East Asians are more likely to adopt a relational (vs. transactional) view of an organization and think more holistically (vs. analytically). Each of the two cultural factors independently predicts how much people care about (private) morality in leadership. A series of studies are conducted test the proposed relationships (N = 2067).

The Comparative Assessment of Governance in the Context of Public and Private Prisons

 Several states as well as the federal government have outsourced correctional services with the goal of reducing cost. However, we know little about the effects that prison privatization has on quality outcomes and costs. Previous literature suggests that when capabilities critical to the public interest are controlled by private individuals, agents, or organizations, the public interest might not be pursued as a consummate goal. Furthermore, when quality is difficult to measure and contracts difficult to enforce – such as in our prison context – agents with high-powered incentives are likely to engage in quality shading, which increases probity hazards. The goal of this research study is to compare two different forms of organizing prisons (public and private) from a quality perspective to unravel contradicting findings concerning the efficacy of private prisons and provide evidence- based policy recommendations. In doing so, this study empirically examines governance modes of prisons in the United States and their effects on recidivism rates. This research study posits that the extant literature on public entrepreneurship and privatization needs to be more sensitive to contexts because there are differential probity hazards. Accountability, transparency, and probity are especially crucial in the prison context for serving the public interest.

Several states as well as the federal government have outsourced correctional services with the goal of reducing cost. However, we know little about the effects that prison privatization has on quality outcomes and costs. Previous literature suggests that when capabilities critical to the public interest are controlled by private individuals, agents, or organizations, the public interest might not be pursued as a consummate goal. Furthermore, when quality is difficult to measure and contracts difficult to enforce – such as in our prison context – agents with high-powered incentives are likely to engage in quality shading, which increases probity hazards. The goal of this research study is to compare two different forms of organizing prisons (public and private) from a quality perspective to unravel contradicting findings concerning the efficacy of private prisons and provide evidence- based policy recommendations. In doing so, this study empirically examines governance modes of prisons in the United States and their effects on recidivism rates. This research study posits that the extant literature on public entrepreneurship and privatization needs to be more sensitive to contexts because there are differential probity hazards. Accountability, transparency, and probity are especially crucial in the prison context for serving the public interest.

Competition Policy as an FDI Deterrent: U.S. Antitrust Enforcement and Inward-FDI Flows

Motivated by the potential for competition policy to be used in a protectionist manner, we formulate the theoretical prior that the enforcement of competition policy deters inward-FDI activity. We test this prior by employing sector-level data on U.S. antitrust enforcement and FDI inflows over the 2002–2014 period. The U.S. represents a hard case to establish protectionism as it has been considered to be open to foreign investment and the paragon of exemplary competition policy. Our panel-data empirical results indicate U.S. antitrust enforcement deters inward-FDI activity.

recidivism rates. This research study posits that the extant literature on public entrepreneurship and privatization needs to be more sensitive to contexts because there are differential probity hazards. Accountability, transparency, and probity are especially crucial in the prison context for serving the public interest.

Kim’s research investigates biases that can work against selecting moral people during hiring processes. Using lab experiments, surveys, and field studies with multiple populations, Kim examines whether and why individuals fail to actively seek signs of morality in candidates, tend to reject particularly moral candidates, and tend to select morally compromised candidates. Identifying these issues provides new insights into how to support ethical organizations.