Risk-Aware Product Intelligence for Enterprise Technology Adoption
Keywords:
Decision Governance, Product Evaluation, Product Intelligence, Procurement Analytics, Risk Assessment, Risk-Aware Decision Making, Technology Adoption, Technology Evaluation, Technology Governance, Technology Procurement, Technology Risk Management, Third-Party Risk, Vendor Assessment, Vendor Governance.Abstract
Today’s competitive environment requires organizations to continuously strengthen their technology infrastructure while simultaneously minimizing technology-related risk. Product intelligence helps ease the burden of selecting new technology, yet most business functions lack the data, analytical capability, and market knowledge needed to evaluate third-party products and services on their own. As a result, organizations often turn to external vendors or suppliers for help with evaluations. Proper governance of product intelligence supports more effective knowledge-gathering throughout the technology adoption process. By applying a governance framework that manages both product intelligence and risk assessment, decision-makers can make better-informed technology adoption choices—ones that reflect the organization’s existing risk profile within its unique operating environment.
Technology-procurement decisions are inherently challenging for several reasons: they involve investments that occur only periodically, making the decision unfamiliar each time it arises; they require technology-specific expertise that business functions may lack; they often rely on data of uncertain quality; and they unfold through processes involving multiple decision rights, adding further complexity. A well-structured product-intelligence function can ease these challenges, especially when paired with a governance framework that ensures the decision-making process is handled in a risk-aware manner. The proposed governance framework achieves this by clarifying roles and responsibilities for technology evaluation, defining decision rights for technology-related assessments, embedding product-intelligence policies directly into evaluation processes, and establishing an organizational risk profile that enables more accurate technology evaluations.
References
1. Anthony Jnr, B. (2023). Using an extended technology acceptance model to predict enterprise architecture adoption in making cities smarter. Environment Systems and Decisions, 43, 36–53.
2. Alfaro-Serrano, D., Bassi, V., & Galiani, S. (2021). Interventions to promote technology adoption in firms: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 17(4), e1181.
3. de Brito Duarte, R., Correia, F., Arriaga, P., & Paiva, A. (2023). AI trust: Can explainable AI enhance warranted trust? Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2023, Article 4637678.
4. Mangalampalli, B. M. Intelligent Data Profiling for Healthcare Data Lakes Using AI-Enhanced Analytics.
5. Ganguly, K. K. (2024). Understanding the challenges of the adoption of blockchain technology in the logistics sector: The TOE framework. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 36(3), 457–471.
6. Habbal, A., Ali, M. K., & Abuzaraida, M. A. (2024). Artificial intelligence trust, risk and security management (AI TRiSM): Frameworks, applications, challenges and future research directions. Expert Systems with Applications, 240, Article 122442.
7. Hanelt, A., Bohnsack, R., Marz, D., & Antunes Marante, C. (2021). A systematic review of the literature on digital transformation: Insights and implications for strategy and organizational change. Journal of Management Studies, 58(5), 1159–1197.
8. Manukonda, K. R. R., Swamy, H., Sankar, R., & CM, C. (2024, August). Application of Explicit Group Sparse Projection in Optimizing 5G Network Resource Allocation and Topology Design. In 2024 4th Asian Conference on Innovation in Technology (ASIANCON) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
9. Lahusen, C., Maggetti, M., & Slavkovik, M. (2024). Trust, trustworthiness and AI governance. Scientific Reports, 14, Article 20752.
10. Laux, J., Wachter, S., & Mittelstadt, B. (2024). Trustworthy artificial intelligence and the European Union AI Act: On the conflation of trustworthiness and acceptability of risk. Regulation & Governance, 18(1), 3–32.
11. KOLLA, S. K. (2024). DEEP LEARNING AND CLINICAL NLP FRAMEWORK FOR AUTOMATED KNOWLEDGE EXTRACTION FROM MULTIMODAL HEALTH . TPM – Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 31(S2), 134–140. Retrieved from https://tpmap.org/submission/index.php/tpm/article/view/4748
12. Li, C., & Wang, Y. (2024). Digital transformation and enterprise resilience: Enabling or burdening? PLOS ONE, 19(7), Article e0305615.
13. Luo, W., Yu, Y., & Deng, M. (2024). The impact of enterprise digital transformation on risk-taking: Evidence from China. Research in International Business and Finance, 69, Article 102285.
14. Naiseh, M., Al-Thani, D., Jiang, N., & Ali, R. (2023). How the different explanation classes impact trust calibration: The case of clinical decision support systems. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 169, Article 102941.
15. Mashetty, S. (2024). Leveraging Deep Learning, Neural Networks, and Data Engineering for Intelligent Mortgage Loan Validation: A Data-Driven Approach to Automating Borrower Income, Employment, and Asset Verification. Neural Networks, and Data Engineering for Intelligent Mortgage Loan Validation: A Data-Driven Approach to Automating Borrower Income, Employment, and Asset Verification (December 21, 2024).
16. Papagiannidis, E., Enholm, I. M., Dremel, C., Mikalef, P., & Krogstie, J. (2023). Toward AI governance: Identifying best practices and potential barriers and outcomes. Information Systems Frontiers, 25, 123–141.
17. Papagni, G., de Pagter, J., Zafari, S., Filzmoser, M., & Koeszegi, S. T. (2023). Artificial agents’ explainability to support trust: Considerations on timing and context. AI & Society, 38, 947–960.
18. Movva, V. R. (2024). Cloud-Native Platform Engineering for High-Scale Retail Systems: Designing Resilient Microservices and Intelligent Infrastructure. Available at SSRN 7449480.
19. Polemi, N., Praça, I., Kioskli, K., & Bécue, A. (2024). Challenges and efforts in managing AI trustworthiness risks: A state of knowledge. Frontiers in Big Data, 7, Article 1381163.
20. Rodríguez-Espíndola, O., Chowdhury, S., Dey, P. K., Albores, P., & Emrouznejad, A. (2022). Analysis of the adoption of emergent technologies for risk management in the era of digital manufacturing. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 178, Article 121562.
21. Shin, D. (2021). The effects of explainability and causability on perception, trust, and acceptance: Implications for explainable AI. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 146, Article 102551.
22. Yandamuri, U. S. (2022). Cloud-Based Data Integration Architectures for Scalable Enterprise Analytics. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering, 10, 472-483.
23. Wang, P., & Ding, H. (2024). The rationality of explanation or human capacity? Understanding the impact of explainable artificial intelligence on human-AI trust and decision performance. Information Processing & Management, 61(4), Article 103732.
24. Wirtz, B. W., Weyerer, J. C., & Kehl, I. (2022). Governance of artificial intelligence: A risk and guideline-based integrative framework. Government Information Quarterly, 39(4), Article 101685.
25. Zheng, X., & Lertatthakornkit, T. (2024). Willingness of digital transformation of Chinese (Xiamen) enterprises: Technology acceptance model with perceived risk. Asia Pacific Journal of Religions and Cultures.
26. Mahadevan, S., Desani, N. R., Yadav, P. S., Joseph, T., & Malcom, A. (2024). FutureTech Innovations. Cari Journals USA LLC.
27. Explainable recommendation: When design meets trust calibration. (2021). World Wide Web, 24, 1857–1884.
28. The role of domain expertise in trusting and following explainable AI decision support systems. (2023). Journal of Decision Systems, 32(1), 110–138.
29. Manukonda, K. R. R. (2024). Chapter-5 Enhancing Test Automation Efficiency Through AI-driven Reporting: An Empirical Study on Defect Detection and Resolution Time. ADVANCES IN, 119, 107.
30. Critical roles of explainability in shaping perception, trust, and acceptance of autonomous vehicles. (2024). International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 100, Article 103568.
31. Enabling affordances for AI governance. (2024). Journal of Responsible Technology, 18, Article 100086.
32. Responsible artificial intelligence governance: A review and research framework. (2024). The Journal of Strategic Information Systems.
33. AI as decision aid or delegated agent: The effects of trust dimensions on the adoption of AI digital agents. (2024). Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 2(2), Article 100094.
34. Rohit Gorle. (2024). Deep Learning Approaches for Threat Detection in Multi-Cloud Environments. Journal of Computational Analysis and Applications (JoCAAA), 33(07), 3857–3864. Retrieved from https://eudoxuspress.com/index.php/pub/article/view/5879
35. Digital transformation and enterprise risk-taking. (2024). Finance Research Letters, 62, Article 105139.
36. Digital transformation and enterprise resilience: Enabling or burdening? (2024). PLOS ONE, 19(7), Article e0305615.
37. Yandamuri, U. S. (2024). AI-Driven Decision Support Systems for Operational Optimization in Hospitality Technology. Metallurgical and Materials Engineering.
38. Navigating uncertainty: The impact of environmental instability on enterprise digital transformation. (2024). PLOS ONE.
39. Digital transformation and corporate risk taking: Evidence from China. (2024). Global Finance Journal, 62, Article 101012.
40. Embedding governance and risk control into enterprise product strategy. (2025). The American Journal of Analytics and Artificial Intelligence.
41. Mahadevan, S. (2024). Empowering Manufacturing: Generative AI Revolutionizes ERP Application. Int. J. Innov. Sci. Res, 9, 593-595.
42. Interventions to promote technology adoption in firms: A systematic review. (2021). Campbell Systematic Reviews, 17(4), e1181.
43. Blockchain technology for supply chains operating in emerging markets: An empirical examination of technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework. (2023). Annals of Operations Research.
44. Using an extended technology acceptance model to predict enterprise architecture adoption in making cities smarter. (2023). Environment Systems and Decisions, 43, 36–53.
45. Understanding the challenges of the adoption of blockchain technology in the logistics sector: The TOE framework. (2024). Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 36(3), 457–471.
46. Mangalampalli, B. M. Generative AI Applications In Healthcare Data Mart Design And Optimization.
47. Toward AI governance: Identifying best practices and potential barriers and outcomes. (2023). Information Systems Frontiers, 25, 123–141.
Additional Files
Published
Data Availability Statement
None
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Bharath Somu, Hiroshi Tanaka (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Authors retain full copyright of their published work. Under this license, others are free to share, copy, distribute, transmit, remix, transform, and build upon the published work for any purpose, including commercial use, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are clearly indicated. No additional restrictions may be applied that limit others from doing anything the license permits. All published articles are freely and permanently accessible online to readers worldwide without any subscription or access fees.
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
