Human and Organizational Factors in AI Risk Management: Proceedings of a Workshop (2025)
Chapter: Front Matter
Human and Organizational Factors in AI Risk Management
Convened June 11, 20, 26 and July 2, 2024
_______
Nneka Udeagbala, Rapporteur
Computer Science and Telecommunications Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
Board on Human-Systems Integration
Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
Proceedings of a Workshop
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This work was performed under the following financial assistance award 60NANB21D111 from the Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-73453-0
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/29046
This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242; https://nap.nationalacademies.org.
The manufacturer’s authorized representative in the European Union for product safety is Authorised Rep Compliance Ltd., Ground Floor, 71 Lower Baggot Street, Dublin D02 P593 Ireland; www.arccompliance.com.
Copyright 2025 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Human and Organizational Factors in AI Risk Management: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/29046.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR A WORKSHOP ON HUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS IN AI RISK MANAGEMENT
BEN A. SHNEIDERMAN (NAE), University of Maryland (emeritus), Co-Chair
MONA SLOANE, University of Virginia, Co-Chair
SOLON BAROCAS, Microsoft and Cornell University
TARA S. BEHREND, Michigan State University
MADELEINE C. ELISH, Google
SHEENA ERETE, University of Maryland
NATHANAEL FAST, University of Southern California
HODA HEIDARI, Carnegie Mellon University
WILLIAM ISAAC, Google DeepMind
ABIGAIL JACOBS, University of Michigan
TAMARA KNEESE, Data & Society
RAVI PARIKH, University of Pennsylvania
Study Staff
NNEKA UDEAGBALA, Associate Program Officer, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board, Project Director
JON EISENBERG, Senior Director, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board
EMANUEL ROBINSON, Director, Board on Human-Systems Integration
THO NGUYEN, Senior Program Officer, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board
SHENAE BRADLEY, Administrative Coordinator, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board
This page intentionally left blank.
Reviewers
This Proceedings of a Workshop was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published proceedings as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this proceedings:
DAVID DANKS, University of California, San Diego
EMANUEL MOSS, Intel Labs
JENNIFER WORTMAN VAUGHAN, Microsoft
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the content of the proceedings nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this proceedings was overseen by ROBERT SPROULL, University of Massachusetts Amherst. He was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this proceedings was carried out in accordance with standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the rapporteur and the National Academies.
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
1 WIDENING PARTICIPATION IN THE DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEPLOYMENT OF AI TOOLS
Panel 1: Ensuring Stakeholder Participation in AI Design and Development
Panel 2: Labor Processes in AI
Panel 3: Building Equitable Infrastructure to Address Risk
2 EVALUATION, TESTING, AND OVERSIGHT
Panel 2: Evaluation Methods and Mechanisms
Panel 3: Governance of Evaluation
Panel 1: Maturing AI and Its Consequences
Panel 2: AI Integration and Safety
Panel 3: Organizational Dynamics and AI
Panel 2: Widening Participation in the Design, Development, and Deployment of AI Tools
Preface
On June 11, 20, 26 and July 2, 2024, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a series of workshop sessions to consider human and organizational factors of artificial intelligence (AI) risk management. The first three sessions—which examined community participation, testing and evaluation, and organizational culture—were held virtually, and the final session—in which members of the planning committee and a set of invited respondents reflected on the earlier sessions—was held in person. This proceedings recounts the presentations and discussions that occurred throughout these workshop sessions.
The planning committee was charged with organizing discussions that would identify and explore approaches to addressing human and organizational risks in AI systems with an emphasis on approaches that could be included in a more detailed guidance document building on the recently issued “AI Risk Management Framework” from the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The full statement of task can be found in Appendix A. In planning the workshop, the committee identified three overarching topics for the workshop sessions:
- Broadening participation (June 11 session, summarized in Chapter 1)—Who are or should be involved in visualizing, designing, testing, and implementing AI tools?
- Evaluation, testing, and oversight (June 20 session, summarized in Chapter 2)—What are the benefits and limitations of current AI evaluation methodologies and what approaches could make evaluation more robust?
- Safety in context (June 26 session, summarized in Chapter 3)—How can culture, processes, and frameworks either add risk or strengthen risk management strategies?
The first three sessions were organized to offer concrete examples of risk factors and how researchers and practitioners assess, manage, and mitigate these factors. The fourth and final session (July 2, summarized in Chapter 4) was organized to capture additional ideas and approaches not captured earlier in the workshop series.
