AI Strategy: How to Choose What AI Product to Implement

Firms struggle to choose AI projects that pay off: two projects can look equally promising to smart, motivated stakeholders and yet deserve opposite decisions. At the residential real-estate brokerage Compass, one AI product (Likely-to-Sell recommendations) flagged sales outreach opportunities and went on to account for nine figures in annual gross commission revenue. Another championed AI product (a Time-on-Market pricing tool) was rightly shelved. A simple ROI estimate could not distinguish the two. We present expected ROI (eROI), a framework that decomposes each bet into three components and rates them separately: Value if Successful, Likelihood of Success, and Investment Required. Each maps to a question executives can answer before building: How valuable would it be if it worked? How likely is it to work? And what would it cost to implement? Separating the three breaks a common catch-22: teams cannot estimate ROI until they know whether a project will work, yet cannot know whether it will work without building it. Judging Value if Successful on its own dissolves the loop, letting a team argue that a product would be valuable if it worked while it weighs how likely that is. The framework also asks, before ranking anything, whether there are enough good ideas on the table. After ranking, it guides assembling a portfolio of bets rather than funding only the single top-ranked project. We illustrate eROI on Compass's candidate AI products. Precise ROI estimates are hard to make given the inherent uncertainty of AI projects. Coarse business-level ratings of the three components are enough to tell strong bets from weak ones.

Learning to Pay Attention: Unsupervised Modeling of Attentive and Inattentive Respondents in Survey Data

The integrity of behavioral and social-science surveys depends on detecting inattentive respondents who provide random or low-effort answers. Traditional safeguards, such as attention checks, are often costly, reactive, and inconsistent. We propose a unified, label-free framework for inattentiveness detection that scores response coherence using complementary unsupervised views: geometric reconstruction (Autoencoders) and probabilistic dependency modeling (Chow-Liu trees). While we introduce a "Percentile Loss" objective to improve Autoencoder robustness against anomalies, our primary contribution is identifying the structural conditions that enable unsupervised quality control. Across nine heterogeneous real-world datasets, we find that detection effectiveness is driven less by model complexity than by survey structure: instruments with coherent, overlapping item batteries exhibit strong covariance patterns that allow even linear models to reliably separate attentive from inattentive respondents. This reveals a critical ``Psychometric-ML Alignment'': the same design principles that maximize measurement reliability (e.g., internal consistency) also maximize algorithmic detectability. The framework provides survey platforms with a scalable, domain-agnostic diagnostic tool that links data quality directly to instrument design, enabling auditing without additional respondent burden.

Algorithmic Hiring and Diversity: Reducing Human-Algorithm Similarity for Better Outcomes

Algorithmic tools are increasingly used in hiring to improve fairness and diversity, often by enforcing constraints such as gender-balanced candidate shortlists. However, we show theoretically and empirically that enforcing equal representation at the shortlist stage does not necessarily translate into more diverse final hires, even when there is no gender bias in the hiring stage. We identify a crucial factor influencing this outcome: the correlation between the algorithm's screening criteria and the human hiring manager's evaluation criteria -- higher correlation leads to lower diversity in final hires. Using a large-scale empirical analysis of nearly 800,000 job applications across multiple technology firms, we find that enforcing equal shortlists yields limited improvements in hire diversity when the algorithmic screening closely mirrors the hiring manager's preferences. We propose a complementary algorithmic approach designed explicitly to diversify shortlists by selecting candidates likely to be overlooked by managers, yet still competitive according to their evaluation criteria. Empirical simulations show that this approach significantly enhances gender diversity in final hires without substantially compromising hire quality. These findings highlight the importance of algorithmic design choices in achieving organizational diversity goals and provide actionable guidance for practitioners implementing fairness-oriented hiring algorithms.

Full Characterization of Adaptively Strong Majority Voting in Crowdsourcing

A commonly used technique for quality control in crowdsourcing is to task the workers with examining an item and voting on whether the item is labeled correctly. To counteract possible noise in worker responses, one solution is to keep soliciting votes from more workers until the difference between the numbers of votes for the two possible outcomes exceeds a pre-specified threshold {\delta}. We show a way to model such {\delta}-margin voting consensus aggregation process using absorbing Markov chains. We provide closed-form equations for the key properties of this voting process -- namely, for the quality of the results, the expected number of votes to completion, the variance of the required number of votes, and other moments of the distribution. Using these results, we show further that one can adapt the value of the threshold {\delta} to achieve quality-equivalence across voting processes that employ workers of different accuracy levels. We then use this result to provide efficiency-equalizing payment rates for groups of workers characterized by different levels of response accuracy. Finally, we perform a set of simulated experiments using both fully synthetic data as well as real-life crowdsourced votes. We show that our theoretical model characterizes the outcomes of the consensus aggregation process well.