A Framework for Trustworthy Agentic Automation in Enterprise Environments
Keywords:
Agentic AI Strategy, Enterprise Risk Appetite, AI-Driven Decision Systems, Strategic RAG Architecture, Information-as-a-Service, AI in Financial Operations, Fraud Detection Systems, Explainable AI Compliance, Enterprise AI Adoption, AI Governance Frameworks, Risk-Based AI Deployment, Intelligent Information Systems, Business Process Automation, High-Volume Monitoring Systems, AI-Driven Advisory Services, Data Quality Management, Autonomous AI Services, Enterprise Knowledge Systems, AI-Enabled Strategy Execution, Scalable AI Infrastructure.Abstract
Activity for its own sake is not a strategy. Enterprise strategy demands a response to genuine business needs: meeting customer service levels, keeping the supply chain functional, detecting and managing fraud, and satisfying regulatory requirements. The shape and scale of that response should reflect both established organizational goals and the enterprise's risk appetite.
Where these needs are pressing but the business is not yet fully equipped to address them, planning becomes essential. Several paths are available. An organization might choose the simplest route to meeting service levels. Alternatively, it may be more practical to invest early effort in reducing long-term workload — through prototyping or piloting, for example. In some cases, a single substantial investment can sustain performance at the desired level for an extended period with minimal further effort. In other cases, a response may be mandated by a central function rather than chosen locally.
Where enterprise strategy calls for such responses, agentic AI offers a technology capable of fulfilling them. Financial operations and fraud detection illustrate two areas where a best-practice Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) approach is particularly well suited. Financial operations resemble an advisory service: interactions are largely one-off, with numerous edge cases. Fraud detection, by contrast, requires high-volume monitoring with zero tolerance for false negatives. Both domains carry an added demand for explainability and regulatory compliance.
Agentic AI can address these needs directly. At a narrow or operational level, agentic services can be deployed to replicate critical functions or guard against failure deep within the organization. However, its most strategically significant application lies in improving the availability and quality of information across the business ecosystem. A strategic RAG layer, delivering full-featured Information-as-a-Service, opens the door to invention and reinvention throughout the organization. Building this capability requires ensuring that information is accurate, complete, and current — and ensuring that the work of maintaining it is either automated or routed to wherever it can be handled most effectively within the ecosystem.
References
1. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610–623).
2. Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., Bernstein, M. S., Bohg, J., Bosselut, A., Brunskill, E., Brynjolfsson, E., Buch, S., Card, D., Castellon, R., Chatterji, N. S., Chen, A., Creel, K., Davis, J. Q., Demszky, D., … Liang, P. (2021). On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv.
3. Mattaparthi, R. (2023). Deep Learning-Driven Combustion Anomaly Detection in Diesel Powertrains: A Multi-Sensor Fusion Approach for Real-Time ECM Adaptation. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering, 11, 1084.
4. Gebru, T., Morgenstern, J., Vecchione, B., Vaughan, J. W., Wallach, H., Daumé III, H., & Crawford, K. (2021). Datasheets for datasets. Communications of the ACM, 64(12), 86–92.
5. Mehrabi, N., Morstatter, F., Saxena, N., Lerman, K., & Galstyan, A. (2021). A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. ACM Computing Surveys, 54(6), Article 115.
6. Suresh, H., & Guttag, J. V. (2021). A framework for understanding sources of harm throughout the machine learning life cycle. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 1–9).
7. Kolla, S. H., & Loganathan, R. (2023). Cloud-Native Deep Learning Architectures For Secure Generative AI Deployment In Enterprise Workflow Platforms. Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research, 603-618.
8. Hickman, E., & Petrin, M. (2021). Trustworthy AI and corporate governance: The EU’s ethics guidelines for trustworthy artificial intelligence from a company law perspective. European Business Organization Law Review, 22, 593–625.
9. Harrison, T. M., & Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2022). Cultivating trustworthy artificial intelligence in digital government. Social Science Computer Review, 40(2), 494–511.
10. Pessach, D., & Shmueli, E. (2022). A review on fairness in machine learning. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(3), Article 51.
11. Mangala, N. (2022). Implementing Databricks Unity Catalog For Centralized Data Governance In Multi-Business-Unitenterprises. Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research, 101-122.
12. Wang, X., Zhang, Y., & Zhu, R. (2022). A brief review on algorithmic fairness. Management System Engineering, 1, Article 7.
13. Stix, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence by any other name: A brief history of the conceptualization of “trustworthy artificial intelligence.” Discover Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article 26.
14. Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., Schulman, J., Hilton, J., Kelton, F., Miller, L., Simens, M., Askell, A., Welinder, P., Christiano, P. F., Leike, J., & Lowe, R. (2022). Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35.
15. Bai, Y., Jones, A., Ndousse, K., Askell, A., Chen, A., DasSarma, N., Drain, D., Ganguli, D., Henighan, T., Joseph, N., Kadavath, S., Kernion, J., Conerly, T., El-Showk, S., Elhage, N., Hatfield-Dodds, Z., Hernandez, D., Hume, T., Johnston, S., … Kaplan, J. (2022). Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI feedback. arXiv.
16. Mangalampalli, B. M. (2023). AI-Driven Anomaly Detection in Healthcare Claims Data: A Business Intelligence Perspective. Journal of Rare Cardiovascular Diseases.
17. Weidinger, L., Mellor, J., Rauker, T., Griffin, C., Uesato, J., Huang, P.-S., Cheng, M., Glaese, A., Balle, B., Kasirzadeh, A., Kenton, Z., Hawkins, W., Stepleton, T., Birhane, A., Williams, A., & Gabriel, I. (2022). Taxonomy of risks posed by language models. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 214–229).
18. Syed, S. (2023). Shaping The Future Of Large-Scale Vehicle Manufacturing: Planet 2050 Initiatives And The Role Of Predictive Analytics. Nanotechnology Perceptions, 19(3), 103-116.
19. Yao, S., Zhao, J., Yu, D., Du, N., Shafran, I., Narasimhan, K. R., & Cao, Y. (2023). ReAct: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. In International Conference on Learning Representations.
20. Schick, T., Dwivedi-Yu, J., Dessi, R., Raileanu, R., Lomeli, M., Hambro, E., Zettlemoyer, L., Cancedda, N., & Scialom, T. (2023). Toolformer: Language models can teach themselves to use tools. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36.
21. Wang, L., Ma, C., Feng, X., Zhang, Z., Yang, H., Zhang, J., Chen, Z., Tang, J., Chen, X., Lin, Y., Zhao, W. X., Wei, Z., & Wen, J.-R. (2023). A survey on large language model based autonomous agents. arXiv.
22. Yandamuri, U. S. (2023). An Intelligent Analytics Framework Combining Big Data and Machine Learning for Business Forecasting. International Journal Of Finance, 36(6), 682-706.
23. Park, J. S., O’Brien, J., Cai, C. J., Morris, M. R., Liang, P., & Bernstein, M. S. (2023). Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology.
24. Shinn, N., Cassano, F., Labash, B., Gopinath, A., Narasimhan, K., & Yao, S. (2023). Reflexion: Language agents with verbal reinforcement learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36.
25. Wu, Q., Bansal, G., Zhang, J., Wu, Y., Li, B., Zhu, E., Jiang, L., Zhang, X., Zhang, S., Liu, J., Awadallah, A. H., White, R. W., Burger, D., & Wang, C. (2023). AutoGen: Enabling next-gen LLM applications via multi-agent conversation. arXiv.
26. Díaz-Rodríguez, N., Del Ser, J., Coeckelbergh, M., López de Prado, M., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2023). Connecting the dots in trustworthy artificial intelligence: From AI principles, ethics, and key requirements to responsible AI systems and regulation. Information Fusion, 99, Article 101896.
27. Reddy, V. A. R. (2022). Designing Fault-Tolerant Data Ingestion Pipelines for High-Volume Healthcare Transactions. Frontiers in Health Informatics, 11, 861-889.
28. Laux, J., Wachter, S., & Mittelstadt, B. (2023). Trustworthy artificial intelligence and the European Union AI Act: On the conflation of trustworthiness and acceptability of risk. Regulation & Governance, 18(1), 3–32.
29. Simion, M., & Kelp, C. (2023). Trustworthy artificial intelligence. Asian Journal of Philosophy, 2, Article 8.
30. Sharma, S. (2023). Trustworthy artificial intelligence: Design of AI governance framework. Strategic Analysis, 47(5), 443–464.
31. Yandamuri, U. S. (2022). Big Data Pipelines for Cross-Domain Decision Support: A Cloud-Centric Approach. International Journal of Scientific Research and Modern Technology, 1(12), 227-237.
32. Kleizen, B., Van Dooren, W., Verhoest, K., & Tan, E. (2023). Do citizens trust trustworthy artificial intelligence? Experimental evidence on the limits of ethical AI measures in government. Government Information Quarterly, 40, Article 101834.
33. Kapoor, S., & Narayanan, A. (2023). Leakage and the reproducibility crisis in machine-learning-based science. Patterns, 4(9), Article 100804.
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 European Advanced Journal for Science & Engineering (EAJSE)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the European Advanced Journal for Science & Engineering (EAJSE) are made freely available online immediately upon publication under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. Authors retain copyright of their work. By submitting to EAJSE, authors grant the journal the right of first publication. For details, visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
