Abstract:Purpose Prior research has revealed that a large share of managers is reluctant towards the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in decision-making. This aversion can be caused by several factors, including individual drivers. The purpose of this paper is to better understand the extent to which individual factors influence managers' attitudes towards the use of AI and, based on these findings, to propose solutions for increasing AI adoption. Design/methodology/approach The paper builds on prior research, especially on the factors driving the adoption of AI in companies. In addition, data was collected by means of 16 expert interviews using a semi-structured interview guideline. Findings The study concludes on four groups of individual factors ranked according to their importance: demographics, familiarity, psychology and personality. Moreover, the findings emphasized the importance of communication and training, explainability and transparency and participation in the process to foster the adoption of AI in decision-making. Research limitations/implications The paper identifies four ways to foster AI integration for organizational decision-making as areas for further empirical analysis by business researchers. Practical implications This paper offers four ways to foster AI adoption for organizational decision-making: explaining the benefits and training the more adverse categories, explaining how the algorithms work and being transparent about the shortcomings, striking a good balance between automated and human-made decisions, and involving users in the design process. Social implications The study concludes on four groups of individual factors ranked according to their importance: demographics, familiarity, psychology and personality. Moreover, the findings emphasized the importance of communication and training, explainability and transparency and participation in the process to foster the adoption of AI in decision-making. Originality/value This study is one of few to conduct qualitative research into the individual factors driving usage intention among managers; hence, providing more in-depth insights about managers' attitudes towards algorithmic decision-making. This research could serve as guidance for developers developing algorithms and for managers implementing and using algorithms in organizational decision-making.

"Computer Says No": Algorithmic Decision Support and Organisational Responsibility

Doing AI: Algorithmic decision support as a human activity

When the Automated Fire Backfires: the Adoption of Algorithm-based HR Decision-making Could Induce Consumer's Unfavorable Ethicality Inferences of the Company

From decision aiding to the massive use of algorithms: where does the responsibility stand?

Owning Decisions: AI Decision-Support and the Attributability-Gap

In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence

Social Responsibility of Algorithms

Administration by algorithm: A risk management framework

Towards an Equitable Digital Society: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR)

Responsible data management

Challenging the Human-in-the-loop in Algorithmic Decision-making

Algorithmic Decision-Making, Agency Costs, and Institution-Based Trust

Reviewable Automated Decision-Making: A Framework for Accountable Algorithmic Systems

Decision Support Systems, Social Justice and Algorithmic Accountability in Social Work: A New Challenge

A Model for Evaluating Algorithmic Systems Accountability

A Framework of High-Stakes Algorithmic Decision-Making for the Public Sector Developed through a Case Study of Child-Welfare

Decision-making in organizations: should managers use AI?

Diffused responsibility: attributions of responsibility in the use of AI-driven clinical decision support systems

Algorithms and Decision-Making in the Public Sector

Primer on an ethics of AI-based decision support systems in the clinic

Trustworthy human-centric based Automated Decision-Making Systems