Spearheaded under the leadership of Clinton J. Andrews, a second special issue, although connected to the first, commands its own set of viewers captivated by the topic of unexpected results stemming from innovation. Andrews’ work is neither situated solely on GenAI nor on the broader topic of emerging technologies, which often preoccupies attention in this space, but on innovation per se. Carvalko and Andrews both concur that there are positive and negative unintended consequences of innovation.
Andrews begins by asking the age-old question: “If people want the benefits of innovations, must they simply accept the unintended adverse consequences?” He implies that there are certain tools and techniques that could assist designers in addressing challenges before they take root so that these challenges may be easily preventable before diffusion of an innovation into the market. However, he acknowledges that not all businesses adopt such preventive strategies toward what he terms “spillover effects.” He summarizes the present situation as "deploy first, worry about teething problems later." In this reactive mode, Andrews states, jurisprudence is busy remediating blatant wrongs.
While it might appear to be an ethical problem at its root, the development of poor digital applications or services may well be more about an organization’s competencies or incentives in their workforce. Andrews highlights various methodologies and tools that can be employed to anticipate the unintended consequences of innovation. His fundamental proposition emphasizes addressing potential challenges prior to or soon after introducing a new invention to alleviate harm to stakeholders before core features become firmly established.
Just as Carvalko’s paper frames his special issue, Andrews’ peer-reviewed paper introduces three additional papers with a mixture of positive and negative social implications.
