Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are typically first adopted as embodiments of rationality and neutrality, and only later do their moral implications receive public scrutiny. This temporal gap between adoption and moral recognition has been widely observed, yet how organizations actively sustain it remains undertheorized. This study theorizes strategic delayed moralization as the process through which organizations actively shape the timing and trajectory of AI transition from technical artifacts to morally recognized objects. We focus on ShotSpotter, an AI-powered gunshot detection system used in law enforcement, analyzing a decade of organizational communications and public discourse. Combining issue management and strategic ambiguity theory, we develop a process model showing how organizations deploy evolving forms of strategic ambiguity to delay moral recognition, and how this process is ultimately constrained by societal moralization that progressively narrows the space for ambiguity. This research contributes to research on AI in society by showing how business and society interact in shaping the moral trajectory of AI.
AbdallahC.LangleyA. (2014). The double edge of ambiguity in strategic planning. Journal of Management Studies, 51(2), 235–264.
2.
AshforthB. E.GibbsB. W. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization Science, 1(2), 177–194.
3.
BenfordR. D.SnowD. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639.
4.
BerkR. A. (2021). Artificial intelligence, predictive policing, and risk assessment for law enforcement. Annual Review of Criminology, 4(1), 209–237.
5.
BigelowB.FaheyL.MahonJ. F. (1993). A typology of issue evolution. Business & Society, 32(1), 18–29.
6.
BrownA. (2023). Ethics, autonomy, and killer drones: Can machines do right?. Comparative Strategy, 42(6), 731–746.
7.
BuchholzR. A. (1988). Public policy issues for management. Prentice Hall.
8.
BundyJ.ShropshireC.BuchholtzA. K. (2013). Strategic cognition and issue salience: Toward an explanation of firm responsiveness to stakeholder concerns. Academy of Management Review, 38(3), 352–376.
9.
BurrellJ. (2016). How the machine “thinks”: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society, 3(1), 1–12.
10.
CappellaroG.CompagniA.VaaraE. (2021). Maintaining strategic ambiguity for protection: Struggles over opacity, equivocality, and absurdity around the Sicilian Mafia. Academy of Management Journal, 64(1), 1–31.
11.
CarlosW. C.LewisB. W. (2018). Strategic silence: Withholding certification status as a hypocrisy avoidance tactic. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), 130–169.
12.
CoombsW. T. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), 163–176.
13.
CorbinJ.StraussA. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publications.
14.
CrableR. E.VibbertS. L. (1985). Managing issues and influencing public policy. Public Relations Review, 11, 3–16.
15.
CrillyD.ZolloM.HansenM. T. (2012). Faking it or muddling through? Understanding decoupling in response to stakeholder pressures. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1429–1448.
16.
DearingJ. W.RogersE. M. (1996). Agenda-setting. Sage.
17.
den HondF.MoserC. (2022). Useful servant or dangerous master? Technology in business and society debates. Business & Society, 62(1), 87–116.
18.
DesaiV. M. (2011). Mass media and massive failures: Determining organizational efforts to defend field legitimacy following crises. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 263–278.
19.
de SwarteT.BoufousO.EscalleP. (2019) Artificial intelligence, ethics and human values: The cases of military drones and companion robots. Artificial Life Robotics, 24, 291–296.
20.
EisenbergE. M. (1984). Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication. Communication Monographs, 51(3), 227–242.
21.
FergusonA. G. (2017). The rise of big data policing: Surveillance, race, and the future of law enforcement. NYU Press.
22.
FunkR. J.HirschmanD. (2014). Derivatives and deregulation: Financial innovation and the demise of Glass–Steagall. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(4), 669–704.
23.
GioiaD. A.NagR.CorleyK. G. (2012). Visionary ambiguity and strategic change: The virtue of vagueness in launching major organizational change. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21(4), 364–375.
24.
HagtvedtL. P.HarveyS.Demir-CaliskanO.HagtvedtH. (2024). Bright and dark imagining: How creators navigate moral consequences of developing ideas for artificial intelligence. Academy of Management Journal, 68(1), 19–49.
25.
HilgartnerS.BoskC. L. (1988). The rise and fall of social problems: A public arenas model. American Journal of Sociology, 94(1), 53–78.
26.
KangM.HudsonK. (2024). Audible crime scenes: ShotSpotter as diagnostic, policing, and space-making infrastructure. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 49(3), 646–672.
27.
KrippendorffK. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage Publications.
28.
KundroT. G. (2023). The benefits and burdens of work moralization on creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 66, 1183–1208.
29.
LangleyA. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.
30.
LeP. D.TeoH.PangA.LiY.GohC. (2019). When silence is golden: The use of strategic silence in crisis management. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 24(1), 162–178.
31.
LeifeldP. (2017). Discourse network analysis. In VictorJ. N.MontgomeryA. H.LubellM. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political networks (pp. 301–326).
32.
LindebaumD.VesaM.den HondF. (2020). Insights from “the machine stops” to better understand rational assumptions in algorithmic decision making and its implications for organizations. Academy of Management Review, 45(1), 247–263.
33.
MahonJ. F.WaddockS. A. (1992). Strategic issues management: An integration of issue life cycle perspectives. Business & Society, 31(1), 19–32.
34.
MarcusA. A.GoodmanR. (1991). Victims and shareholders: The dilemmas of presenting corporate policy during a crisis. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 281–305.
35.
MenaS.RintamäkiJ.FlemingP.SpicerA. (2016). On the forgetting of corporate irresponsibility. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 720–738.
36.
MetcalfJ.CrawfordK. (2016). Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3, 2053951716650211.
37.
MillerS.SelgelidM. J. (2008). Ethics and the dual-use dilemma in the life sciences. In AllhoffF. (Ed.), Physicians at war: the dual-loyalties challenge (pp. 195–211). Springer.
38.
MittelstadtB. D.AlloP.TaddeoM.WachterS.FloridiL. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 1–21.
39.
Molas-GallartJ. (1997). Which way to go? Defence technology and the diversity of “dual-use” technology transfer. Research Policy, 26(3), 367–385.
40.
MoserC.den HondF.LindebaumD. (2022). Morality in the age of artificially intelligent algorithms. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 20(3), 410–435.
41.
OliverC. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–179.
42.
ReinmöllerP.AnsariS. (2016). The persistence of a stigmatized practice: A study of competitive intelligence. British Journal of Management, 27(1), 116–142.
43.
ReuterE.UeberbacherF. (2019). Corporate strategies to defend social irresponsibility: A typology of symbolic and substantive tactics. In SalesA. (Ed.), Corporate social irresponsibility and corporate change: Institutional and organizational perspectives (pp. 221–239). Cham. Springer International Publishing.
44.
SeidelV. P.HanniganT. R.PhillipsN. (2020). Rumor communities, social media, and forthcoming innovations: The shaping of technological frames in product market evolution. Academy of Management Review, 45(2), 304–324.
45.
SillinceJ.JarzabkowskiP.ShawD. (2012). Shaping strategic action through the rhetorical construction and exploitation of ambiguity. Organization Science, 23(3), 743–757.
SwierstraT.RipA. (2007). Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics: Patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. NanoEthics, 1, 3–20.
48.
VergneJ. P. (2012). Stigmatized categories and public disapproval of organizations: A mixed-methods study of the global arms industry, 1996–2007. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1027–1052.
49.
VesaM.TienariJ. (2022). Artificial intelligence and rationalized unaccountability: Ideology of the elites?. Organization, 29(6), 1133–1145.
50.
VidalN. G.Van BurenH. J.III (2022). Corporate responsibility coalitions and the sustainability issues management capabilities of firms. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(5), 1109–1131.
