Hey Fellow Case Writers!

As artificial intelligence transforms our educational landscape, I've been fielding numerous questions about how major case publishers are responding. What are the rules for using AI in case writing? Are publishers embracing or restricting these new tools? What do we need to disclose?

To answer these pressing questions, I've compiled the latest policies and guidelines from the industry's leading publishers. Here's what you need to know as we navigate this new terrain together.

Support the newsletter - Case-spiration in Print Available.

Back to the Newsletter…..

Harvard Business Publishing (HBP): Cautious and Clear

HBP has taken perhaps the most direct stance on AI use in case writing. Their Quick Case submission guidelines explicitly ask authors not to use generative AI tools like ChatGPT to create any content for cases, teaching notes, or supplements.

This aligns with HBP's broader editorial approach that:

• If authors do use AI for idea generation or research, they must disclose this to their editor

• Authors remain fully accountable for the originality and integrity of their work

For instructors, HBP has been more accommodating, publishing resources to help faculty adapt to AI in academia. Senior editor John Lafkas even reassured faculty that student use of generative AI need not undermine case discussions, noting that AI-generated solutions lack the surprise or nuance of real classroom analysis.

Ivey Publishing: Quality First

Ivey has taken an experimental approach to assess AI's role in case writing. In early 2023, an Ivey professor conducted a fascinating experiment: he tasked ChatGPT to write a complete business case and submitted it for consideration. The verdict? The AI-written case did not meet Ivey's quality standards and would have been rejected. A lot has changed since then…..

While ChatGPT could produce a basic, generic case draft, Ivey found it lacked the "vibe, energy and emotion" of an effective case. Their experience underscores that while AI may serve as a research or drafting aid, human expertise remains essential for creating publishable cases.

Emerald Publishing: Transparency Required

Emerald, which publishes case collections alongside academic journals, has updated its official guidelines with specific AI rules:

• AI tools cannot be credited as authors on any case or article

• If authors use generative AI, they must explicitly disclose this in the work AND at submission

• Editors and peer reviewers are barred from using AI to evaluate submissions

• AI-generated images or figures are not permitted in submitted works

Emerald's approach emphasizes transparency and human accountability while acknowledging AI as a potential part of the writing process.

The Case Centre: Disclosure Mandatory

The Case Centre has introduced a clear policy requiring authors to disclose any use of Artificial Intelligence during the case writing process when submitting for distribution. This isn't a ban but rather a transparency mandate.

The Centre has been actively monitoring AI's impact on case writing, exploring both opportunities (like research assistance) and risks (such as "hallucinated" facts and plagiarism). They've shared diverse viewpoints - from those who believe institutions should only use AI as an aid, to those calling for an AI-use disclaimer on case cover pages.

Key Trends Across Publishers

Looking across these policies, several consistent themes emerge:

1. Human accountability remains paramount - No publisher accepts AI as an author or allows AI to absolve humans of responsibility for content accuracy

2. Transparency is non-negotiable - Most publishers now require disclosure of AI use in case development

3. Quality concerns are real - There's widespread acknowledgment that AI-generated content often lacks the depth and nuance required for effective teaching cases

4. Different standards for creation vs. consumption - Policies tend to be stricter for case authors than for instructors using cases

5. The landscape is still evolving - All publishers are actively engaging with these issues rather than issuing final, rigid policies

What This Means For You

If you're a case writer or educator navigating these evolving standards, here are my recommendations:

• Always disclose AI use in your case writing process, even if not explicitly required

• Maintain human oversight of all AI-generated content and verify all facts

• Use AI as a complement to your expertise, not a replacement

• Stay informed about policy updates at your target publishers

• Consider the pedagogical implications of how AI is changing both case writing and teaching

For classroom use, the consensus seems to be that AI tools can potentially enhance rather than undermine the case method when used thoughtfully. Publishers are encouraging instructors to adapt case discussions to acknowledge AI's presence rather than pretending it doesn't exist.

Looking Forward

It's fascinating to reflect on how rapidly AI has transformed our field. What began as speculative conversations just a few years ago has now prompted formal policies from our industry's leading publishers.

In our next newsletter, I'll share some practical examples of how case writers are using AI while staying within these guidelines - the "acceptable" uses that enhance rather than compromise the quality and integrity of teaching cases.

Until then, I'd love to hear about your experiences. Have you disclosed AI use in your case submissions? Has your approach to case writing changed in response to these policies? Drop me a line and share your thoughts by replying to this email.

Happy (and compliant) case writing!

Other Resources and Books

-------------------

Wrapping it all Up!

If you are interested in trying out the Free Case Study Prompt Generator .. Click the image below.

* Remember, please move this email from your promotions to your primary Inbox

If you have a podcast, I would love to speak on it -

Please reach out and lets start a conversation. [CLICK HERE]

If you have a newsletter or website, I would love to be a guest writer for it -

Please reach out and lets start a conversation. [CLICK HERE]

Your Feedback Matters -

We love hearing from you! Share your thoughts, suggest topics, or case studies you'd like to see in future newsletters. [Feedback Here]

Thank you for being a part of our community. Together, we're shaping the future of education, one case study at a time!

Warm regards,

Matthew