Human vulnerability and robo-advisory

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce the work of Mark Coeckelbergh into the field of management. Design/methodology/approach This is a conceptual paper with interviews. Findings The author suggests that Coeckelberghs’ considerations of an anthropology of vulnerability have the potential to provide a rich and insightful exploration of the machine-human interface, which is not afforded by many of the current approaches taken in this field. Their development of an anthropology of vulnerability suggests an approach to the machine-human interface that re-frames the machine-human interface in terms of human vulnerability, rather than machine’s performance, and sustains that the machine-human interface can be understood in terms of the transfer of human vulnerability. Research limitations/implications This paper reveals some of the possibilities inherent in Coeckelbergh’s theories by providing an analysis of a specific event, the recent introduction of robo-advisors in portfolio management, from a Coeckelberghian perspective and by exploring some of the implications of this type of approach for the machine-human interface. Originality/value As far as the author knows, there is no previous paper on this topic.

Being Human in the Digitally Enabled Workplace: Insights From the Robo-Advice Literature

“…In this scenario, the RA is more likely to have additional human traits while human advisor involvement will be significantly reduced. As researchers and professionals point out, there will be a significant need for experts in specialized services required for, e.g., taxation [75], as well as data science, computer science, or systems engineering [72], [74], [90]. Apart from investment management, financial professionals could become particularly relevant for the monitoring of algorithms [89].…”

“…With the introduction of RAs as a tool for investment management, the requirements for human financial advisors are changing. According to Beltramini [90] we quickly become dependent on machines, ending up vulnerable. Along with existing industry solutions, researchers therefore argue for models that combine RAs and human advisors [50], [69], [71], [92].…”

Robo-Consultants Research in Financial Technology Companies

“…Remiantis tarpasmeninių santykių analize, dėl žmogaus ir automatizacijos sąveikos tarpininkauja nepasitikėjimas (Ghazizadeh et al, 2012). Pasak Beltramini (2018), investuotojas gali patirti ilgą investavimo procesą, vedamą robotų-konsultantų technologijos algoritmų, nekeliančių jokių emocijų. Tačiau kitaip yra tada, kai investuotojas pasikliauja emocijomis, kurios veda prie didesnės tikimybės suklysti.…”

Artificial Intelligence Modelling Framework for Financial Automated Advising in the Copper Market

“…However, this business model may have unknown risks that innovations may imply and cause severe negative externalities revealed only after substantial welfare losses [31]. In this vein, some authors [32] have warned of the risks derived from human-machine interactions in terms of human vulnerability, and about the risk that humans lose their knowledge and machines are the only entities retaining knowledge on financial markets when automation takes over a financial advisor's work.…”