Search results

The aim of this paper is to explore how multi-national corporations (MNCs) can effectively adopt artificial intelligence (AI) into their talent acquisition (TA) practices. While the potential of AI to address emerging challenges, such as talent shortages and applicant surges in specific regions, has been anecdotally highlighted, there is limited empirical evidence regarding its effective deployment and adoption in TA. As a result, this paper endeavors to develop a theoretical model that delineates the motives, barriers, procedural steps and critical factors that can aid in the effective adoption of AI in TA within MNCs.

Given the scant empirical literature on our research objective, we utilized a qualitative methodology, encompassing a multiple-case study (consisting of 19 cases across seven industries) and a grounded theory approach.

Our proposed framework, termed the Framework on Effective Adoption of AI in TA, contextualizes the motives, barriers, procedural steps and critical success factors essential for the effective adoption of AI in TA.

This paper contributes to literature on effective adoption of AI in TA and adoption theory.

Additionally, it provides guidance to TA managers seeking effective AI implementation and adoption strategies, especially in the face of emerging challenges.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this study is unparalleled, being both grounded in theory and based on an expansive dataset that spans firms from various regions and industries. The research delves deeply into corporations' underlying motives and processes concerning the effective adoption of AI in TA.

The use of multi-level labels can enhance product visibility by enabling labeling of various items. Moreover, it can better accommodate the diversity on both the producer and consumer sides. However, studies on the willingness to pay (WTP) for premium levels of those animal welfare labels are scarce.

We investigate consumers’ WTP for a four-level animal husbandry label introduced to the market by German retailers in 2019 by conducting an online survey with 1,223 German meat consumers using Van Westendorp’s price sensitivity meter (PSM).

There is a significant increase in WTP for level 3 of the husbandry label, but only a slight increase for level 4. One explanation is that consumers may have the mistaken belief that level 3 already includes outdoor access for animals. As a result of this expectation, consumers may not perceive much added value in level 4, which is reflected in their reluctance to pay a higher price. This is reinforced by the finding that once informed of the criteria, 18% of the participants reduced their WTP for level 3, whereas only 6% considered a discount for level 4. Furthermore, 40% were prepared to pay more for level 4 after being informed of the respective criteria than they had previously stated.

To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to analyze and emphasize the importance of clear label communication, particularly for multi-level animal husbandry labels.