This paper presents a lifecycle-oriented synthesis of human-AI collaboration risks spanning four stages: task allocation, interaction, feedback, and adoption, and proposes a conceptual interaction model that illustrates how these risks emerge from sociotechnical drivers, interact through cascading pathways, and ultimately affect team performance and human well-being.
Abstract
As AI systems become increasingly integrated into consequential domains such as healthcare, journalism, education, scientific research, organizational decision-making, and defense, effective human-AI collaboration has emerged as a critical challenge. However, the sociotechnical risks that undermine collaboration are often studied in isolation, obscuring the recurring failure mechanisms that cut across domains. This paper presents a lifecycle-oriented synthesis of human-AI collaboration risks spanning four stages: task allocation, interaction, feedback, and adoption. Drawing on evidence from diverse application domains, we identify six recurring cross-domain risk clusters: Trust Miscalibration, Cognitive Burden, Accountability Gap, Capability Erosion, Goal Misalignment, and AI Anxiety and Technostress. We further propose a conceptual interaction model that illustrates how these risks emerge from sociotechnical drivers, interact through cascading pathways, and ultimately affect team performance and human well-being. Our analysis shows that many collaboration failures stem not from isolated technical deficiencies but from interconnected sociotechnical dynamics, helping explain why piecemeal interventions frequently create unintended consequences. By synthesizing fragmented literature into a unified framework, this work provides a foundation for future empirical research, lifecycle-oriented governance, and the design of more resilient, trustworthy, and human-centered human-AI collaboration systems.
The study proposes the Sociotechnical Explainability Alignment (SEA) framework, which conceptualizes ethical XAI as requiring alignment across four levels: design, user, team, and organization.
Hoda Parvaneh Shirazi, A. Al-Asfour, Sami El Ahmadie et al.· Systems· 0 citations
This article synthesizes recent scholarship and practitioner experience into a structured playbook for executives, design leaders, and human resources partners that argues that the value of HAIC depends on three deliberate design choices: who initiates the collaboration, how broad the AI's knowledge scope must be, and...
Jonathan H. Westover· Human Capital Leadership Rev...· 0 citations
A five-dimensional diagnostic framework that maps the challenges of human-AI collaboration across Integration, Representation, Scale, Temporality, and Adequacy gaps and shows that augmentation remains the dominant and most viable mode of use in complex environments.
Ganesh Sankaran, Marco A. Palomino, G. Siestrup· Big Data and Cognitive Compu...· 0 citations
The study argues that collaborative intelligence should be viewed as an organizational capability rather than merely a technological outcome, requiring deliberate management of human judgment, ethical responsibility, and organizational design.
M. R· International Journal of Phi...· 0 citations
Serious organisational incidents are often described within contemporary safety science as emergent outcomes arising from the interaction of complex sociotechnical conditions. While this perspective has advanced understanding of systemic risk, it has also contributed to debates regarding the extent to which serious inc...
Communication inflexibility, limited shared understanding, and trust miscalibration emerge as recurring barriers to HAT, while regulatory capacities represent particularly critical dimensions of HAT readiness that remain to be fully operationalized.
Sébastien Tremblay, Delphine De Hemptinne, Gabrielle Teyssier-Roberge et al.· Human Factors· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.