Not yet human-reviewed
This source record was written automatically by the research pipeline and has not yet been reviewed by the maintainer or integrated into a topic page. Treat it as a provisional summary and verify claims against the original source.
Generative Artificial Intelligence in Business: Towards a Strategic Human Resource Management Framework
Citation. Chowdhury, S., Budhwar, P., & Wood, G. (2024). Generative Artificial Intelligence in Business: Towards a Strategic Human Resource Management Framework. British Journal of Management, 35(4), 1680–1691. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12824
Summary. This peer-reviewed conceptual paper proposes an eight-dimension strategic HRM framework for integrating generative AI into business. Drawing on institutional entrepreneurship and re-institutionalization, it frames GAI integration as aligning objectives, identifying opportunities, assessing and orchestrating resources, redesigning norms and processes, and continuously adapting workforce capabilities. The paper argues that responsible, human-centred deployment must recognize GAI’s rapid evolution, human–AI interdependence, and the organizational changes required around work and human capital.
Key claims
- Existing HRM frameworks do not fully account for GAI’s rapid evolution, its human–AI symbiosis, workforce learning requirements, and its potential to alter organizational norms and routines.
- The proposed framework links business-objective alignment, opportunity identification, resource assessment and orchestration, re-institutionalization, realignment, and continuous learning as interdependent elements of GAI-enabled HRM.
- Organizations need transparent, accountable, and human-centred practices around privacy, information reliability, trust, and human intervention when integrating GAI into HRM.
- The authors position workforce development and continuous adaptation as necessary for organizations to realize GAI-related efficiency and innovation rather than treating adoption as a standalone technical deployment.
Evidence & limitations
- This is a theory-building conceptual article, not an empirical evaluation of the proposed framework; the authors call for longitudinal, cross-industry, and multilevel empirical validation.
- Its strategic recommendations are grounded in institutional entrepreneurship and HRM theory, so claims about organizational effects should not be read as causal estimates.