How many executives use generative AI?

Hello, and welcome to New Scientist’s Business Insights newsletter. I’m Chris Stokel-Walker and this is your guide to the latest science affecting business that you ought to know about.

But before we get to the latest research, can we recommend one event you won’t want to miss?

Thanks to the sponsors of New Scientist’s inaugural Emerging Technologies Summit, we have a limited number of complimentary tickets to give away to our newsletter subscribers. Join more than 300 senior business leaders, scientists, technology experts and policy makers to identify how emerging technologies such as AI, quantum computing and space tech will combine to tackle the major challenges facing businesses. Request your complimentary ticket if you would like to attend on 15 May in London.

How ubiquitous is AI?

One major concern for businesses has been unauthorised use of generative AI tools like ChatGPT in the workplace – with potentially company-changing impacts.

Samsung was one of the first firms to fall foul of rogue generative AI use almost a year ago, when staff were censured for putting proprietary information into ChatGPT in order to try to do their work quicker. But since then, the adoption of generative AI across industries has increased – and a new survey by Jason P. Davis at the INSEAD business school in Fontainebleau, France, suggests it’s being used at the highest levels of organisations.

In the survey of more than 1200 alumni of INSEAD, 68 per cent of whom identified as executives, nearly two-thirds reported using generative AI in their professional lives. A similar proportion used the technology in their personal lives. “The survey offers an early view of leaders' views on AI technology,” says Davis.

What’s particularly notable is that – much as in the Samsung case – the data suggests those executives using generative AI are perhaps doing so without the explicit support of their organisation. Around half of those who responded to the survey said their organisations already used generative AI. A further 27 per cent of businesses planned to start using generative AI in the next year or more. Just 21 per cent of organisations had no plans to engage with the technology.

Opinions differed over who would benefit most from the current AI revolution. Those working in the financial sector believed the organisations they worked for would benefit the most from generative AI, rather than individual customers. But those in healthcare and the utilities sector believed the benefits of generative AI would be shared equally.

Why clean supply chains matter

Companies can quickly get caught up in scandals if they are found to have corruption, discrimination or sweatshops in their supply chain. A recent study shows how such cases of “corporate social irresponsibility” can have a negative impact on the bottom line.

Nuruzzaman Nuruzzaman at the University of Manchester, UK, and his colleagues tracked the growth of sales for 335 subsidiaries of companies across 109 countries for nine years. Those figures were compared with the number of corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) incidents reported against those subsidiaries’ parent companies. The researchers found a link between the two, suggesting that consumers may reduce their spending with a company if they found out the parent company or subsidiary had done wrong.

“We wanted to explore how much negative news spreads globally and how stakeholders react to incidents beyond their borders,” says team member Erin E. Makarius at the University of Akron, Ohio. “The data shows the location of misconduct no longer seems to matter. There’s still significant negative impact.”

Shifting emissions problems elsewhere isn’t sustainable

More research into supply chains comes from Yuli Shan at the University of Birmingham, UK, and his colleagues, who have highlighted how countries in the Global North – i.e. developed countries – tend to outsource more energy-intensive – and polluting – industrial processes to developing countries, collectively called the Global South.

In their recent study, the researchers looked at how global trade has shifted in the 21st century. Traditionally, trade between richer countries in North America and Western Europe used a lot of energy. But increasingly, trade between countries in the Global North is becoming less prominent, while trade between countries in the Global South is growing.

The study suggests that wealthier countries are using less energy directly, but are increasingly dependent on products made in lower-income countries that require a lot of energy to produce.

“As negotiations unfold on global trade agreements, the Global North must recognise the pivotal role played by certain nations in the Global South with export-oriented, manufacturing economies,” says Shan. “While energy-rich countries in the Global North primarily export energy resources, the Global South engages in energy-intensive export production, potentially compromising their own environment.”

Shan and his colleagues call for those Global North countries to rethink their energy use and environmental policies to reduce their impact on other nations. “Improving energy efficiency is key to mitigating potential inefficiencies that could strain an already fragile ecological environment and hasten climate change,” says Shan.

Thanks for reading, and do remember to share this newsletter with your network by hitting the repost button.

Chris Stokel-Walker