Systematic review finds dynamic tensions between human and artificial intelligence in business organizations, highlighting the need for collaborative co-evolution.
The accelerated growth in artificial intelligence (AI) has compelled many businesses to get ahead of the curve by adapting AI into various business processes and systems, while also emphasising the need for organisations to change, rethink, redesign, collaborate, and coevolve with AI. However, this enthusiasm towards AI by businesses appears to ignore the dynamics related to human intelligence (HI), including the strategic relevance and evolution of HI with the rise of human-like capabilities of AI. This systematic literature review examines the current framing by academia of the intersection of AI and HI, critically examining the need to keep HI relevant and competitive amid many noteworthy AI advancements. More specifically, the study aims to address three research questions: (1) What is the current positioning of HI within AI advancement? (2) What tensions are predicted between HI and AI? and (3) How is the co-evolution and co-value creation between HI and AI framed, and what gaps exist in positioning HI as a critical resource within businesses alongside AI in the future? Drawing upon 45 peer-reviewed articles published between 2020 and 2025, this review synthesises theoretical and empirical insights into how academia conceptualises the relationship between human and artificial intelligence. Findings indicate that AI is largely portrayed as a transformative driver of efficiency, analytics, and strategic decision-making, whereas HI remains vital for contextual reasoning, ethical judgment, creativity, and adaptability. However, the current discourse of in-depth analysis of HI and AI generates tensions around substitution, autonomy, trust, and control. Wise, an emerging strand of literature, highlights collaborative intelligence, where AI enhances human decision-making and HI anchors interpretive and ethical depth. By mapping these dynamics, the study identifies gaps in positioning HI as a strategic resource and argues for reframing it as a co-evolving partner to ensure resilience, inclusivity, and sustainable value creation in the age of AI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patabendige et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: