Abstract
How will current developments in artificial intelligence (AI) affect organizations? Renowned figures such aslike Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Rishi Sunak have highlighted AI's potential dangers, sparking discussions on its implications (Zhu, Corbett, & Chiu, 2021). Beyond general concerns for humanity, there is the immediate issue of AI’s impact on the workforce, with concerns ranging from the introduction of discriminatory bias into decision-making processes to existential fears of job displacement.
Although, in particular, the fear of displacement due to technological advancement is historically familiar, AI stands out by integrating its functionality with human-like capabilities (Choung, David, & Ross, 2023). This differentiates it from previously known factory machines, allowing it to autonomously perform non-routine, cognitive and sometimes even emotional tasks, potentially replacing individual activities or skills altogether (Fleming, 2019). Unlike traditional technologies where humans are in full control, this autonomy means that AI’s ability to function independently introduces risks and uncertainties that can make employees more apprehensive and hesitant to adopt AI technologies. As society in general, and organizational members in particular, navigate the complexities and potential risks associated with AI implementation and decision-making, the need for trust will increase (Choung et al., 2023). However, this begs the question: Who or what do we trust? The technology itself, those who created it, or the regulations we and others have put in place? The answer involves all three, as we try to show in this critical reading of the film The Creator.
Given the uncertainty, lack of experience and lack of interaction in everyday life to determine trust or distrust, people often turn to popular culture, such as films like The Creator, to form an opinion. Set in the near future, The Creator begins with a utopian view of AI. However, an AI-triggered nuclear explosion sparks a war for human survival. While the current state of AI does not match the advanced depiction in fictional narratives such as The Creator (Glikson & Woolley, 2020), art often reflects life. Debates about the dangers of AI significantly shape popular culture, making cinematic representations of AI both cognitively accessible and seemingly realistic (Fleming, 2019). The dystopian storyline in The Creator emphasizes tensions between trust and control in the technology itself as well as in the motives of those who created it. In doing so, the film raises questions about who should be in control of AI as these systems become even more powerful and human-like. In our everyday lives, exposure to dystopian narratives such as that portrayed in The Creator can lead to heightened anxiety and reluctance to engage with AI technologies in organizational settings (Torresen, 2018). Nevertheless, it is evident that organizations are actively seeking to incorporate AI as an integral technological component, recognizing its potential power as a sociotechnical system (Choung et al., 2023) and as a likely necessity for strategic alignment and competitive positioning in anticipation of future developments (Zhu et al., 2021).
The Journey of Trust
Gareth Edwards’ film reflects contemporary debates about the governance of AI and the politics of control versus trust in the technology itself and those who develop it. Against this backdrop, the film depicts two factions, represented by the western hemisphere, which sees AI as an existential threat, while the eastern hemisphere fully embraces AI and establishes a protective coexistence. The film closely follows the protagonist’s journey with a childlike AI, which can be seen as a parable of how society in general, and organizational members in particular, interact with emerging technologies such as AI. It shows how the western hemisphere’s insecurities, fears and general lack of understanding of an emerging technology leads to increasingly extreme attempts to control it, with negative consequences for its development and application. In addition to the violent global conflict surrounding the control of AI, the film focuses on the main characters’ transformative journey. At the beginning, the protagonist is highly suspicious of autonomous forms of AI, illustrating a common perception among employees in today’s organizations, where AI is often seen as just another technology that needs to be tightly controlled and limited in its autonomous decision-making capabilities (Glikson & Woolley, 2020).
The film distinguishes between two forms of AI: the most advanced, autonomous, self-aware robotic AI, and the highly developed but non-self-aware AI. The latter is also used by soldiers in the western hemisphere, even though they have officially banned AI. This suggests that the problem is not necessarily technological development in general, but rather the uncertainties associated with it. As the decision-making processes underlying AI are often difficult to understand and therefore challenging to monitor (Choung et al., 2023), organizational members are potentially exposed to risks and develop a sense of loss of control. This perceived loss of control could, in turn, be the source of resistance (Zhu et al., 2021) and distrust (Choung et al., 2023) towards AI. Moreover, those who use AI are at the mercy of those who develop the technology in the first place. Like all other technological developments in the past, this technology can be misused by those who create it and those who rely on it, unintentionally or intentionally, for harmful purposes when it should be intended for good (Torresen, 2018). This is emphasized when the protagonist realizes that the nuclear catastrophe was not caused by an AI, as he originally thought, but by the people he had been fighting for. In fact, technology itself is not malevolent; most problems are caused by human or mechanical error (Torresen, 2018). Conversely, this does not mean that technological development must be stopped, but rather, that clear regulations have to be developed so that organizational members (and society at large) can not only better understand the technology, but utilize it in a safe and ethical manner (Choung et al., 2023; Minkkinen & Mäntymäki, 2023).
While humanity’s violent conflict over the control of AI escalates throughout the fictional narrative, the dynamic of trust between the protagonist and the AI begins to change. Initially very suspicious of the AI, he gradually becomes more comfortable with it. Through ongoing interactions with both the AI and other characters, he eventually realizes that this particular AI is not a threat. At the same time, however, the protagonist is confronted with the fact that his AI companion makes its own decisions, which he initially tries to control. When these attempts at control fail, the protagonist has no choice but to trust his companion. This phenomenon of trust becoming particularly relevant in the absence of control is also illustrated in the literature (Choung et al., 2023). However, this presents a paradox, because on the one hand we have limited trust in AI because we cannot control it, and on the other hand we have to trust it because we cannot control it (Glikson & Woolley, 2020).
This is further complicated by the fact that building trust is an ongoing process and a relationship of trust, once established, does not automatically continue. With more experience working with AI, a relationship of trust can be established, but that trust will be constantly tested by technological advances and can be lost, much like the relationship of trust between humans (Glikson & Woolley, 2020). Significant advances have rapidly transformed the field of AI, and the technology is constantly evolving and improving. This rapid pace of development poses a significant challenge to organizational members and society at large, as the trust we have in the technology we work with must be constantly redefined (Choung et al., 2023).
Politics of Control
While The Creator’s narrative depicts the protagonist’s journey to build trust in a singular AI entity, in the real world, trust in AI extends beyond the technology itself to include trust in those who develop and control these systems – ranging from technology organizations to governments. This raises significant concerns about transparency and accountability. Who controls the algorithms? Who decides how AI is used? The concentration of AI power in a few hands can lead to user distrust, as the creators of each system may prioritize profit or political power over ethical considerations. To mitigate these concerns and to ensure trust in this technology, both organizational managers and governmental institutions must recognize their active role in ensuring that AI is built and used in an ethical and transparent way. Against this background, Minkkinen and Mäntymäki (2023) recently distinguished between the ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ problems of AI governance. The ‘easy’ problem mainly concerns the alignment of organizations’ use of AI with laws, values and societal norms. Much as the film’s protagonist initially sought to control and limit the humanoid AI to prevent immediate threats, organizations need to implement policies and protocols to counteract potential issues arising from the implementation of AI technology (e.g. limiting algorithmic discrimination through AI-assisted recruitment). The ‘hard’ problem, however, is reflected in how AI has become a ‘general-purpose technology that transforms organizations and societies’ (Minkkinen & Mäntymäki, 2023, p. 188) and represents a sensemaking process regarding the sociotechnical implications of AI. Against this backdrop, emerging AI applications and their societal implications extend beyond traditional organizational boundaries (e.g. deepfakes, election manipulation, or robotic warfare). As AI continues to evolve, these challenges complicate the trust journey, suggesting that while trust in specific AI applications can be developed through increasing familiarity and dedicated organizational solutions, the broader uncertainties make it difficult to fully embrace AI without critically reflecting on these governance issues.
In The Creator, the conflict between humans and AI is driven by fear, misunderstanding and a desperate attempt to control a technology that has evolved beyond human comprehension. This particularly reflects the ‘hard problem’ of AI governance as described by Minkkinen and Mäntymäki (2023), where the transformative nature of AI introduces complex sociotechnical challenges that are difficult to fully anticipate or manage. The film’s depiction of the western hemisphere’s efforts to destroy AI, motivated by fear of its autonomy, can be seen as a metaphor for the real-world governance dilemma that we currently face: How do we regulate a technology that has the potential to radically transform society in unpredictable ways? The film suggests that excessive control, driven by fear, can lead to greater conflict. The solution the film offers: trust in the benevolence of the technology. Yet, trust and regulation are not mutually exclusive. Instead, we are in need of a more nuanced approach towards trust and governance, one that balances the benefits of AI with a critical awareness of the potential risks and uncertainties associated with its creators and the technology itself. Given the rapid pace of technological advancement in AI, now is the time for organizations, governments and supranational organizations to put in place necessary regulations to create a symbiotic coexistence between humans and AI (Jarrahi, 2018). While we still have a long way to go, regulatory measures such as the European Union’s AI Act are beginning to lay the groundwork for a non-dystopian future in which AI is trustworthy and safe to use.
