In today’s world, ethics plays a critical role in various areas, including technology, medicine, and politics. It guides fair and responsible decisions, ensuring that our actions contribute to the well-being of society. However, an essential question arises: What is ethical? This question invites us to reflect on the principles and values that should guide our behaviours and decisions, marking the path towards a more conscious and balanced behaviour.

“I would call morality the normative and imperative discourse resulting from the opposition of Good and Evil considered universal and absolute values. It is the total of our duties. Morality answers the question, ‘What must I do? It aims to be one and universal. It tends towards virtue and culminates in holiness.
I call ethics any normative but non-imperative discourse (without any imperative other than hypothetical, and therefore without imperative in the usual sense of the term) resulting from the opposition of good and bad considered relative values. It is the reflected set of our desires. An ethic answers the question, ‘How should we live?  It is always specific to an individual or a group. It is an art of living. It most often tends towards happiness and culminates in wisdom.”

Comte-Sponville André

Applying ethics to incorporating Artificial Intelligence in an organization implies establishing hypothetical governance rules rather than imperative ones. These rules delimit guidelines suggested by corporate governance but are not imposed, allowing them to adapt to each organisation’s specific needs, circumstances, and moments. This flexibility facilitates the transition from a hierarchical approach, based on “What should I do?” to a collaborative perspective that asks: “How do we live this integration?”. This approach considers both the inherent risks and the psychological reactions of users, promoting a more conscious and balanced implementation.

Incorporating AI requires transparent and open multidisciplinary communication that addresses the associated ethical issues. Beyond teaching how to use technology, explaining how to live with this transformation is essential. Likewise, companies must commit to clarifying how they will maintain an appropriate balance between humans and AI, similar to work-life balance.

Based on the above, we pose the following essential questions: Who is responsible for these decisions? Is there an ethical framework specifically designed to regulate AI?

It is crucial to emphasize the importance of transparency as a fundamental pillar within AI ethics. When a system makes decisions, it does not do so transparently, as people cannot understand or explain the underlying logic of each decision. Although code developers can understand what AI does in general terms, they often lack clarity on how data is explicitly processed (Coeckelbergh, 2020).

The developers have created a system based on ethics and responsibility in using this technology. This system encompasses two key, closely related concepts that consider ethical values during design. The first is responsible innovation, which refers to design processes aligned with moral principles. The second is ethically sensitive design, which emphasizes the creation of designs that respect and promote fundamental values (Coeckelbergh, 2020).

The European Union (EU) has established the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which defines the rules companies and governments must follow for storing, processing, and protecting personal data. Companies have the responsibility and right to ensure the security of such information. However, in the event of a threat or data breach, companies must act quickly and notify the competent authorities (Scheire, 2023).

The regulation aims to optimise the functioning of the internal market by creating a legal framework regulating the development, introduction, implementation, and use of AI systems, which are always aligned with EU values and promoting the adoption of human-centred AI that is trustworthy while ensuring a high level of protection in terms of health, safety and fundamental rights set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. This includes protecting democracy, the rule of law and the environment, minimising the harmful effects of AI systems in the EU while encouraging innovation (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council, June 13, 2024).

This regulation also lays down rules for placing on the market, providing services, and using AI systems, as well as prohibitions on specific practices. Requirements are defined for high-risk AI systems, imposing obligations on the operators of these systems. In addition, transparency rules applicable to AI systems and guidelines for introducing general-purpose AI models on the market are included. Key aspects such as monitoring, surveillance, governance and compliance assurance are also addressed. Measures are also implemented to support innovation, focusing on SMEs (Small and Medium-sized Enterprises), including start-ups (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council, June 13, 2024).

Importantly, according to Article 114 of the AI Regulation, providers of general-purpose AI models that present systemic risks must comply with the obligation to identify, assess and mitigate such risks, ensuring cybersecurity protection. To ensure compliance with this regulation, suppliers must carry out relevant assessments through independent internal and external testing of the models, including the execution and documentation of contradictory tests before the models are placed on the market (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council, June 13, 2024).

Previous studies have concluded that many companies integrate some form of AI into their operations. It is estimated that, by 2030, AI will be present in between 60% and 70% of companies, becoming one of the key areas for economic growth, with revenue generation exceeding expectations (McKinsey Global Institute, 2023).

The futuristic vision of AI is that its use will be fundamental for the reorganization of the economy, with the potential to improve the functioning of society. AI is expected to offer an innovative and powerful way to connect producers and consumers, giving rise to new products, generating additional value for existing ones, and significantly improving production processes. In addition, it can streamline administrative procedures, making them more efficient and of higher quality. AI will also contribute to broader access to digital knowledge, providing tools that encourage creativity and facilitate the dissemination of cultural phenomena such as music or literature (Steels, 2017).

Conclusions

Work has evolved significantly throughout history from a subsistence-oriented activity to more automated and intellectual processes. Today, this transformation continues with the incorporation of AI, redefining the conception of work as a simple transfer of energy and a human activity enriched by technology.

Integrating AI in the workplace represents a profound transformation that requires an ethical and well-structured approach. Both connectionist and symbolic AI notably impact individuals’ psychological and social aspects, making careful management of their implementation in companies essential. The goal is to maximize profits while minimizing the associated risks.

From the employers’ perspective, AI is a key tool for achieving business goals, optimising efficiency, and fostering innovation. However, its implementation requires reorganising labour structures and actively accepting the support that AI can offer in decision-making. For employees, AI has the potential to reduce repetitive tasks, improve collaboration, and empower the development of new skills, requiring a greater ability to adapt to technological changes.

It is critical to address the risks inherent in AI, such as misinformation, discrimination, abuse, and negative impacts on privacy and security. An ethical approach is essential to balancing transformative opportunities with the potential challenges this technology poses.

The influence of technology on our daily lives is indisputable. Electronic devices have increasing control over our activities, from socialising to thinking and acting. Although the internet, social networks, and other emerging technologies are seen as engines of progress, they have displaced fundamental aspects of human beings, such as critical thinking, creativity, and genuine social interactions. We are so immersed in technology that our social skills and human contact have deteriorated. In addition, the proliferation of unreliable sources of information has contributed to the spread of fake news, generating confusion and misinformation (Coeckelbergh, 2020).

Finally, AI governance and regulatory rules must be clear and accessible for developers, subject matter experts, and users in general. Ensuring everyone understands these rules is essential to encourage ethical and responsible use of technology.

In conclusion, AI offers excellent opportunities for the world of work. Still, its integration must be based on sound ethical principles and thoughtful governance, ensuring its benefits are accessible to all involved.

References

• Aanbevolen citeerwijze: Luc Steels (ed.), Artificiële intelligentie. Naar een vierde industriële revolutie? KVAB Standpunt 53, 2017. 
• Altomare, M. (2005). Modernidad y subjetividad en la socilogía de Max Weber: la racionalidad puritana y la racionalidad capitalista. Subjetividad y procesos cognitivos, 7, 20-44.
• Arrigain García, I. (2020). Regulación de las invenciones relacionadas con Inteligencia Artificial en el campo de la Propiedad Intelectual. Universidad Pontifica Comillas. 
• BATHAEE, Y. (2018). “The Artificial Intelligence Black Box and the Failure of Intent and Causation”. En Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, vol. 31(2) pág. 905. Véase también, PARALAMENTO EUROPEO (2020). Resolución 2020/2012(INL), Op. cit., Apartado 23.
• Blanc, B. F. L. (S.F) Sesgos cognitivos, toma de decisiones e inteligencia artificial a reflexión.
• Cárdenas, J. (2023). Inteligencia artificial, investigación y revisión por pares: escenarios futuros y estrategias de acción. Revista Española de Sociología, 32(4), a184. https://doi.org/10.22325/fes/res.2023.184
• (Centre National de Ressources Textuelles et Lexicales, 2012) 
• Coeckelbergh, Mark. (2020). AI ethics. Hoe omgaan met artificiële intelligentie? 
• Dávila Morán, R. C., & Agüero Corzo, E. D. C. (2023). Desafíos éticos de la inteligencia artificial: implicaciones para la sociedad y la economía. Conrado, 19(94), 137-144.
• Duckett, S., & Pearson, S. (2018). Agricultural Robotics: Robotics: The Future of Robotic Agriculture. UK-RAS.
• Estupiñán Ricardo, J., Leyva Vázquez, M. Y., Peñafiel Palacios, A. J., & El Assafiri Ojeda, Y. (2021). Inteligencia artificial y propiedad intelectual. Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 13(S3), 362-368. 
• Gracia, J. L. B. (2024). El Sesgo algorítmico en la inteligencia artificial. Implicaciones para la seguridad global y la política criminal. GEOCONFLICTS & INTELLIGENCE: Revista sobre Seguridad Global y Terrorismo, 2(2), 183-203.
• García, J. S. C., Delgado, M. A. P., Pionce, B. S. M., & Quijije, G. S. B. (2024). USO ESTRATÉGICO DE LA INTELIGENCIA ARTIFICIAL EN LA GESTIÓN DE LA CADENA DE SUMINISTRO EMPRESARIAL. Ciencia y Desarrollo, 27(2), 267-276.
• Goldbach, Dumitru & Cetina, Iuliana & Manea, Natalia. (2018). The 14th International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education Academika-Online Learning Platform. 10.12753/2066-026X-18-057.
• González, N (2024). Algunos parámetros jurídicos y éticos en torno a la inteligencia artificial. Una visión humanista de la tecnología. Editoral ABC 
• Hoza, B., Waschbusch, D. A., Pelham, W. E., Molina, B. S. G., & Milich, R. (2000). Attention-Deficit / Hyperactivity Disordered and Control Boys ’ Responses to Social Success and Failure. 71(2), 432–446
• Icarte Ahumada, G. A. (2016). Aplicaciones de inteligencia artificial en procesos de cadenas de suministros: una revisión sistemática.  Ingeniare. Revista chilena de ingeniería, 24(4), 663-679 
• John Lygeros, Lecture Notes on Hybrid Systems, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering – University of Patras (2004). http://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sastry/ee291e/lygeros.pdf
• Kopitowski, K. (2016). La falacia de la evidencia incompleta o “cherry picking”. Evidencia, actualizacion en la práctica ambulatoria, 19(2).
• Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (n.d.). The AI Risk Repository. Retrieved April 26, 2025, from https://airisk.mit.edu/
• Martín, L., & Álvarez, A. (2000). Sesgos cognoscitivos del gerente: su influencia en la toma de decisiones. Revista Cubana de Salud Pública, 26(1), 5-11. Recuperado de: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0864-34662000000100001
• McKinsey Global Institut, (2023). El estado de la IA en 2023: El año clave de la IA generativa. 
• Quirumbay Yagual, D. I., Castillo Yagual, C. A., & Coronel Suárez, I. A. (2022). Una revisión del aprendizaje profundo aplicado a la ciberseguridad. Revista Científica y Tecnológica UPSE (RCTU), 9(1), 57-65. 
• REGLAMENTO (UE) 2024/1689 DEL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO Y DEL CONSEJO. 13 de junio de 2024. (Reglamento de Inteligencia Artificial) ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj ISSN 1977-0685 (Electronic edition) 
• Rothman, K. J., Huybrechts, K. F., & Murray, E. J. (2024). Epidemiology: an introduction. Oxford University Press.
• Russell, S.J. y P. Norvig (2004). Inteligencia artificial. Un enfoque moderno. Pearson Educación, S.A.  
• Serrahima de Bedoya, Á. (2022). Avances y desafíos de la inteligencia artificial. 
• Scheire Lieven (2023) A.I Artificiële intelligentie. Over een wonderlijke nieuwe vorm van software die nu al overal om ons heen is. Gent, België ISBN 9789463939591 
• Torres, C. E. T. (2014). Inteligencia colectiva: enfoque para el análisis de redes.  Estudios Gerenciales, 30 (132), 259-266  
• Todolí-Signes, A. (2019). En cumplimiento de la primera Ley de la robótica: Análisis de los riesgos laborales asociados a un algoritmo/inteligencia artificial dirigiendo el trabajo (Complying With the First Law of Robotics: An Analysis of the Occupational Risks Associated With Work Directed by an Algorithm/Artificial Intelligence). Labour & Law Issues, 5(2).
• Tversky, A., y Kahneman, D. (1974). El juicio bajo incertidumbre: heurísticas y sesgos. Pensar rápido, pensar despacio. Buenos Aires: Debate. 
• Valencia Mendoza, G. E., Barragán Merino, R. del L., Ledesma Trujillo, S. C., & Moraima Peña, P. (2024). Impacto de la inteligencia artificial generativa en la creatividad de los estudiantes universitarios. Technology Rain Journal, 3(1), e33. https://doi.org/10.55204/trj.v3i1.e33
• XIN, Yang; KONG, Lingshuang; LIU, Zhi; CHEN, Yuling; LI, Yanmiao; ZHU, Hongliang; GAO, Mingcheng; HOU, Haixia y WANG, Chunhua. Machine Learning and Deep Learning Methods for Cybersecurity. IEEE Access [En línea]. 2018, vol. 6, pág. 35365-35381. ISSN 21693536. Disponible en: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2836950
• Zambrano, P. J. S., Cedeño, G. D. R. B., & Rivadeneira, M. R. L. (2016). La teoría constructivista de Jean Piaget y su significación para la pedagogía contemporánea. Dominio de las Ciencias, 2(3), 127-137. 

For a human management of Artificial Intelligence - Introduction through ethics and governance

(1) For a human management of Artificial Intelligence – Introduction through ethics and governance (Part 1)

(2) For a human management of Artificial Intelligence – Introduction through ethics and governance (Part 2)

(3) For a human management of Artificial Intelligence – Introduction through ethics and governance (Part 3)

(4) For a human management of Artificial Intelligence – Introduction through ethics and governance (Part 4)

(5) For a human management of Artificial Intelligence – Introduction through ethics and governance (Part 5)

(6) For a human management of Artificial Intelligence – Introduction through ethics and governance (Part 6)

(7) For a human management of Artificial Intelligence – Introduction through ethics and governance (Part 7)