By Kristin Broughton
After facing public backlash in 2018 for doing business with
U.S. immigration authorities amid the separation of migrant
families at the southern U.S. border, Salesforce.com Inc., a
company known for speaking up on social issues, hired a resident
ethicist.
Paula Goldman joined the business software company early last
year as chief ethical and humane use officer, a new role tasked
with developing a framework for making decisions on complicated
political issues.
Although the company's contract with U.S. Customs and Border
Protection remains in place, Salesforce has tackled other
controversial issues. In her first year on the job, Ms. Goldman
supervised the development of a corporate policy that prohibits
customers from using Salesforce's software to sell military-style
firearms to private citizens.
She also is responsible for ensuring Salesforce's products are
developed with ethics in mind, particularly those involving
artificial intelligence. One way she has done that is by
introducing a process known as "consequence scanning," an exercise
that requires employees to document the potential unintended
outcomes of releasing a new function, she said.
"We're in this moment of correction where it's like, 'Oh yeah,
this is our responsibility to integrate this question into the way
we do business,'" Ms. Goldman said.
Before joining the San Francisco-based company, Ms. Goldman, who
was trained as an anthropologist, was a senior leader at Omidyar
Network, the social-impact investing firm founded by eBay Inc.
founder Pierre Omidyar. She also was a member of Salesforce's
ethical use advisory council, a group made up of employees and
external technology experts.
Ms. Goldman, who reports to Salesforce Chief Equality Officer
Tony Prophet, spoke with Risk & Compliance Journal about her
first year on the job. Here are edited and condensed excerpts from
the conversation.
WSJ: The restrictions that Salesforce placed on firearms -- does
your office facilitate those conversations internally?
Yes, we do. How it works is, the council plays a really
important role. We set up these processes for [employees] to raise
flags. And then obviously we're also proactively looking at, what
are the biggest risk areas? What types of policies put us on the
best footing? When an issue is prioritized, we run through
exhaustive analysis.
WSJ: Is that a financial analysis?
No. It's an ethical analysis. So it's: "What's the issue? What
role are we playing or not playing? How does it stack up against
our principles? What are the different perspectives on this issue
in civil society? What's the regulatory landscape?" All of that
stuff. And then ultimately [we come up with] a recommendation.
Different subcommittees of the council are tasked with different
topics, but we'll take it to a subcommittee of the council. They
will vote. That vote is advisory, and then it goes up to
leadership.
WSJ: How was the firearms issue raised? Was it flagged
internally?
We are always monitoring any number of issues that might cross
our desk. In this case, an employee did raise the question. There
were a number of internal discussions about how our product is
getting used. What is our role in this issue? And a number of
internal consultations with different teams, along with all of the
analysis.
WSJ: Is it fair to describe one of your responsibilities as
managing the reputation of the company?
No, I wouldn't say that. I think that's one of the things that
sets apart an effort like this. We're charged with taking an
ethical lens to our actions, and that's what leads the analysis.
Sure, are there reputational consequences to the actions we take?
Yeah, of course there are. But is that driving our action? No.
WSJ: Has your work on product design influenced the decisions
the company has made on what to launch?
Definitely. And I think we're working on what a more cohesive
summary of what that is, but it manifests in a couple of different
ways. I'll give you an example.
Within our AI products, we have a feature called protected
fields. Let's say you're building an algorithm and your training
data has a category for race. And you're saying, "Well, I don't
know if I want race in this algorithm because it might bias the
results." Using the protected fields feature, you can protect it so
that it's not included in the calculation.
But what's interesting about this feature is that it will say,
"Hey, I see you protected race. I see that you also have ZIP Codes,
and ZIP Codes can be a proxy for race. Do you want to include this
field?"
WSJ: What's on the agenda for your second year?
A couple things. One is doubling down on the product side of the
equation and really formalizing the goals with key buy-in across
product leadership. And formalizing risk frameworks. We would be
able to say, the same way that a security team would say, "I see a
security risk. It's level one, two, three or four."
Number two, on the policy side of things, is continuing to add
rigor to the process. And what does that mean? It means ever
increasing the circle of stakeholders that we talk to within civil
society.
Write to Kristin Broughton at Kristin.Broughton@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
February 17, 2020 11:14 ET (16:14 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Salesforce (NYSE:CRM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Aug 2024 to Sep 2024
Salesforce (NYSE:CRM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Sep 2023 to Sep 2024