The main claim of our paper is that managers should not outsource moral decision-making to Artificial Moral Advisors (AMAs) and that such devices should not be used as a way of offloading moral responsibility for business decisions. In other words, in the wake of the rise of Artificial Intelligence advisors, Chief Ethics Officers or business ethics consultants still have an integral role to play. In the first part of our paper we provide a brief overview of various examples of unethical behavior in business, followed by some hypotheses regarding why unethical behavior seems to be inescapable. We then proceed to present how AMAs could be used for the purpose of moral enhancement and analyze whether moral decisions could be outsourced towards them. Our main argument is that such a task is doomed to fail since AMAs are not responsible for their decisions/actions. We conclude by providing a positive agenda for the use of AI in the field of business ethics, by fleshing out how AMAs could be used as moral enablers.

In the past couple of years, more and more companies have been trying to integrate, within their ethical infrastructure, a varying degree and amount of ethical concerns regarding the development and deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems. As a result, it would not be an exaggeration to say that we have witnessed an explosion of ethics codes concerning AI. The main purpose of this paper is to explore the way in which business organizations have dealt with such concerns. In particular, we first aim to analyze whether companies have a genuine interest in AI ethics or whether it is nothing more than a case of ethics washing, making this whole enterprise virtually useless. We will conclude by advancing an agenda regarding how AI ethical regulations could be empirically assessed, by highlighting a few of the downsides and explaining how different experimental methods could help us close the empirical knowledge gap.