AI時代的董事會責任

The Accountabilities of the Board of Directors in AI Era

人工智慧（AI）逐步滲入公司治理核心，不僅能強化董事會在資訊掌握、決策效率及獨立性上的功能，亦使企業導入AI成為不可迴避的趨勢。甚而若公司選擇不採用AI，董事會可能因未盡善用工具而違反受任人義務。然而，AI應用同時伴隨資料偏誤、黑箱效應與責任歸屬不明等風險，並可能因外部AI服務滲透而模糊公司治理邊界。AI時代並未減輕董事責任，反而要求董事具備基本科技素養與資料治理能力，以有效監督AI的設計、資料來源與運作邏輯。參照美國德拉瓦州Caremark、Marchand及Boeing等案例，法院已強調董事對於關鍵營運風險須展現積極且善意之監督，否則將構成對忠實義務的違反。對我國企業而言，亦須建立透明、可解釋且可問責的AI治理架構。AI應被視為輔助董事履職的工具，而非替代責任的手段；唯有透過專業能力與監督機制之結合，方能於AI時代兼顧公司效率、法規要求與永續發展。

Artificial intelligence (AI) has gradually permeated the core of corporate governance. It not only enhances boards’capacity of accessing information, decision-making efficiency, and independence, but also renders AI adoption an unavoidable trend. Indeed, companies that refuse to employ AI may risk boards being deemed in breaching their fiduciary duties for failing to utilize available tools. Nevertheless, AI application entails risks such as data bias, black box issues, and unclear attribution of accountability, while external AI services may further blur the boundaries of corporate governance. The advent of the AI era does not alleviate but rather heightens directors’accountabilities, requiring technological literacy and data governance competence to effectively oversee AI design, data sources, and operational logic. Drawing on Delaware cases such as Caremark, Marchand, and Boeing, courts have underscored that directors must actively and in good faith monitor mission-critical risks, or risk breaching their duty of loyalty. For Taiwanese corporations, establishing transparent, explainable, and accountable AI governance frameworks is imperative. AI should be regarded as a tool to augment board, not as a substitute for directors’accountabilitieses; only by combining professional expertise with robust monitoring mechanisms can boards reconcile efficiency, compliance, and sustainability in the AIera.