Who do you choose? : employees' perceptions of artificial intelligence versus humans in performance feedback

Purpose Firms have already begun integrating artificial intelligence (AI) as a replacement for conventional performance management systems owing to its technological superiority. This transition has sparked a growing interest in determining how employees perceive and respond to performance feedback provided by AI as opposed to human supervisors. Design/methodology/approach A 2 x 2 between-subject experimental design was employed that was manipulated into four experimental conditions: AI algorithms, AI data, highly experienced human supervisors and low-experience human supervisor conditions. A one-way ANOVA and Welch t-test were used to analyze data. Findings Our findings revealed that with a predefined fixed formula employed for performance feedback, employees exhibited higher levels of trust in AI algorithms, had greater performance expectations and showed stronger intentions to seek performance feedback from AI algorithms than highly experienced human supervisors. Conversely, when performance feedback was provided by human supervisors, even those with less experience, in a discretionary manner, employees' perceptions were higher compared to similar feedback provided by AI data. Moreover, additional analysis findings indicated that combined AI-human performance feedback led to higher levels of employees' perceptions compared to performance feedback solely by AI or humans. Practical implications The findings of our study advocate the incorporation of AI in performance management systems and the implementation of AI-human combined feedback approaches as a potential strategy to alleviate the negative perception of employees, thereby increasing firms' return on AI investment. Originality/value Our study represents one of the initial endeavors exploring the integration of AI in performance management systems and AI-human collaboration in providing performance feedback to employees.