A QUALITATIVE STUDY EXPLORING THE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN: SITUATIONS WHERE AI IS SUITABLE AND WHERE IT IS NOT

Abstract

This qualitative research examines professionals’ perceived suitability of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) for various situations across four different professional fields. Through 30 interviews with Swedish professionals, the study explores when and why AI is perceived as either suitable or unsuitable. Findings present that AI is perceived as suitable for structured and data intensive tasks, such as documentation, analysis, and routine support. In contrast, AI is perceived as unsuitable for situations involving moral judgment, emotional sensitivity, and social human interaction. Moreover, attitudes and trust are seen to influence how professionals perceive AI and its suitability, where more positive approaches and higher levels of trust to AI enhances adoption and usage. The study also demonstrates how professionals rely on AI while simultaneously recognising its limitations, revealing a contradiction between the professionals’ perceived suitability of AI and their practical use of it. The professionals further tend to perceive AI as objective for structured and neutral situations, which may lead to ethical dilemmas and increased inequalities. Moreover, it is shown that an overreliance on AI could hinder professionals’ opportunity for learning and be an obstacle for collective tacit knowledge development. Together, these insights contribute to a broader understanding of professional’s perceived suitability of AI in various situations, along with presenting practical implications for organizations and managers aiming to work with AI in a responsible and ethical manner.