Existing CSCW and organization management literature suggests that knowledge is a central construct when developing, deploying, and using technological systems that are embedded in multi-stakeholder supply chains. Yet, it has rarely been the focus of comprehensive empirical investigations across LLM and broader AI supply chains. In this work, we draw on semi-structured interviews with 71 LLM practitioners to examine the knowledge required to produce responsible LLM systems, and how practitioners acquire it within LLM supply chains. Our findings not only reveal knowledge blindspots, but also a knowledge access and translation gap, where practitioners recognize knowledge needs but cannot fulfill them. We explain these gaps by showing how knowledge exchanges occur (proactively or serendipitously), which organizational arrangements and tools facilitate them (e.g., knowledge intermediaries), and which barriers undermine them (including limited visibility, lack of mutual understanding, and unclear responsibility for sharing and maintaining knowledge). We further synthesize knowledge needs into a multi-dimensional taxonomy that characterizes knowledge based on its abstraction, theme, and lens. We then discuss how this taxonomy can serve both as a practical resource for organizations of the responsible LLM supply chain to improve actionability and accountability (for example, by supporting precise communication, prompting self-reflection, and facilitating mutual blindspot identification), and as a methodological tool to reframe, revise, and disambiguate research and policy works on responsible AI notions related to knowledge. We hope to inspire future work in the CSCW community by outlining research opportunities to support practitioners in accessing, exploiting, and sharing relevant LLM knowledge across the supply chain.
Responsible AI (RAI) has become a central concern for technology companies, regulators, and the public. How industry practitioners interpret, implement, and sustain RAI work directly shapes the design and deployment of AI systems. As empirical scholarship examining RAI practices in industry has rapidly expanded, findings are dispersed across studies that focus on different roles, organizational contexts, and interventions. This work synthesizes current knowledge through a literature review of 161 empirical studies spanning six years, each engaging industry practitioners via interviews, surveys, workshops, ethnographies, and other methods. Our synthesis reveals both meaningful progress and persistent challenges in industry RAI practice. Practitioner awareness has increased, RAI activities have become more professionalized, and interventions such as toolkits and guidelines are more widely adopted. At the same time, practitioners continue to face substantial barriers, including limited training, uneven organizational support, and a lack of interventions tailored to day-to-day work practices. By consolidating and organizing these findings, we provide a more complete account of industry RAI than any single study to date. We conclude by discussing implications for RAI researchers, practitioners seeking to adopt effective practices, and policymakers aiming to ground governance efforts in the realities of industry contexts.
Wesley Hanwen Deng, Agathe Balayn, Andrew D. Selbst et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.