Harnessing Artificial Intelligence for Corporate Crisis Management and Foresight

Abstract

Traditional corporate crisis management remains largely reactive, rooted in manual monitoring, static risk frameworks, and experience-driven decision-making. These approaches often prove inadequate in today’s volatile business landscape, where crises can emerge and evolve rapidly across digital, financial, and operational domains. Empirical studies indicate that delayed detection and fragmented responses contribute to the escalation of many corporate crises. Artificial Intelligence (AI) offers a transformative approach, enabling organisations to shift from reactive to proactive crisis management. Through advanced technologies such as machine learning, natural language processing, computer vision, graph-based analytics, and generative models, AI systems can process vast volumes of structured and unstructured data, detect early indicators of potential disruptions (including subtle anomalies, patterns, and shifts—referred to as “weak signals”), and support timely, data driven decision-making. This review synthesises current academic and industry literature, presents a structured methodology for identifying relevant studies, and critically examines AI’s capabilities, applications, and limitations in corporate crisis management. Particular attention is paid to issues of human trust in AIgenerated insights, transparency, and ethical considerations— key factors influencing adoption. The paper also outlines open research challenges and suggests pathways for developing AI enabled, trustworthy, resilient crisis management frameworks.

Introduction

1. Rising Crisis Complexity & Inadequacy of Traditional Models
Corporate crises are now more frequent, complex, and financially damaging due to pandemics, cyberattacks, and supply chain issues. Traditional crisis management methods—based on fixed plans, intuition, and fragmented data—fail to address today’s dynamic, interconnected risks.

2. AI as a Transformational Solution
AI provides a modern approach to crisis management by offering real-time sensing, predictive modeling, anomaly detection, and adaptive responses. Key techniques include:

• Machine Learning (ML) for predictive analytics.

• Natural Language Processing (NLP) for social/media sentiment analysis.

• Anomaly Detection for cybersecurity and operational risks.

• Reinforcement Learning, Computer Vision, and Knowledge Graphs for dynamic decision-making and systemic risk mapping.

3. Traditional Model Limitations (Table I)
Past models suffer from:

• Overly simplistic frameworks.

• Static planning.

• Poor data integration.

• Reactive strategies.

• Cognitive overload and bias.
  AI addresses these by automating, learning, and interpreting large, real-time data flows.

4. AI Techniques & Impact (Table II)
AI improves crisis response through:

• Faster detection (e.g., early fraud, reputational dips).

• Better forecasting (e.g., financial distress, supply chain disruptions).

• Higher accuracy and proactive responses.

5. Real-World Applications

• Reputation Management: Real-time NLP detects sentiment shifts before public backlash escalates.

• Financial Risk: AI models outperform traditional methods in predicting insolvency or bankruptcy.

• Cybersecurity: Adaptive anomaly detection identifies zero-day attacks.

• Supply Chain: AI tools warn of disruptions using IoT, graph analysis, and visual inspection.

6. Future Challenges & Directions (Table III)
Despite progress, challenges remain:

• Ethics & Bias: AI must be fair, explainable, and regulation-compliant.

• Data Fusion: Multimodal AI systems are still rare.

• Human-AI Collaboration: Interfaces need better design for high-pressure decision-making.

• Generalizability: Transfer learning across crisis types is underdeveloped.

• Simulation & Preparedness: AI-powered crisis simulators and digital twins are emerging tools but need refinement.

Conclusion

This review has shown how Artificial Intelligence is already transforming corporate crisis management by providing organisations with advanced capabilities to predict, detect, and manage crises in ways that traditional frameworks cannot. AI tools—ranging from machine learning and natural language processing to anomaly detection and knowledge graphs—enable the processing of massive, real-time, and event-centric data streams. These technologies reveal patterns often imperceptible to human analysts and allow for faster, evidence-based decision-making across interconnected domains such as reputational, financial, cybersecurity, and operational risk. However, the review also identified persistent limitations and research gaps. These include issues with data quality, model transparency, multi-modal data integration, and challenges in effective human–AI collaboration, both individually and at complex intersectional levels. Moreover, ethical dilemmas and regulatory ambiguity remain under-addressed, posing barriers to building responsible and trustworthy AI systems for crisis contexts. Emerging trends—such as explainable AI (XAI), federated learning, AI-driven crisis simulation, and digital twins—offer further potential for organisations to move from reactive crisis response to proactive, adaptive risk management. Realising this potential will require sustained interdisciplinary collaboration between AI researchers, industry practitioners, ethicists, legal experts, and corporate leaders. Only through such concerted efforts can AI-driven crisis management systems evolve to become resilient, accountable, and aligned with organisational and societal values.

References

[1] PwC. (2023). Global Crisis Survey 2023: Prepare to thrive. PricewaterhouseCoopers. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/crisis-solutions/ global-crisis-survey.html [2] Oxford Metrica. (n.d.). Reputation and value: The impact of corporate crises on shareholder value. [3] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2018). Actions taken by Equifax and federal agencies in response to the 2017 breach (GAO18-559). https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-559 [4] World Economic Forum. (2021). The COVID-19 pandemic has cost the global economy $4 trillion – so far. https://unctad.org/news/ global-economy-could-lose-over-4-trillion-due-covid-19-impact-tourism [5] Pearson, C. M., & Mitroff, I. I. (1993). From crisis-prone to crisisprepared: A framework for crisis management. Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 48–59. [6] Coombs, W. T. (2015). The value of communication during a crisis. Public Relations Review, 41(5), 689–691. [7] Wooten, L. P., & James, E. H. (2008). Linking crisis management and leadership competencies. Academy of Management Journal, 22(2), 25–39. [8] Williams, N. L., et al. (2017). Organizational response to adversity. Journal of Business Research, 100, 441–448. [9] Herbane, B. (2010). Small business research: Time for a crisis-based view. Long Range Planning, 43(3), 283–294. [10] Bundy, J., et al. (2017). Crises and crisis management. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 733–789. [11] Schwarz, A., Seeger, M. W., & Auer, C. (2016). Ethical challenges in crisis communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(2), 379–391. [12] Rosenthal, U., Charles, M. T., & ’t Hart, P. (2001). Coping with crises. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 9(2), 65–73. [13] Lalonde, C. (2007). Crisis management and organizational development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74(8), 1309–1327. [14] Liu, Y., Xie, E., & Zhang, H. (2020). Smart risk management via AI. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(3), 616–625. [15] Williams, T., et al. (2020). Sensing in crisis. Academy of Management Discoveries, 6(3), 443–448. [16] Houston, J. B., et al. (2015). Crisis communication in the digital age. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 43(2), 188–206. [17] Reddy, M. C., et al. (2009). Crisis coordination challenges. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 78(4), 259–267. [18] Zhao, Z., Li, D., & Dai, W. (2023). ML for SMEs in crisis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 191, 122492. [19] Dakhli, I., et al. (2024). AI and Crisis Management. In IRASET, pp. 1–6. doi:10.1109/IRASET60544.2024.10549274. [20] M., Mahmood, A. N., & Hu, J. (2015). Network anomaly detection. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 60, 19–31. [21] Wanjale, K., et al. (2023). Financial Risk Prediction using ML. In ASIANCON, pp. 1–5. doi:10.1109/ASIANCON58793.2023.10270196. [22] Rajadesingan, A., Zafarani, R., & Liu, H. (2015). Sarcasm Detection on Twitter. WSDM, pp. 97–106. [23] Ho, R., & Hung, K. (2024). Financial Forecasting using TFT. In ISCAIE, pp. 209–215. doi:10.1109/ISCAIE61308.2024.10576340. [24] Iqbal, A., & Amin, R. (2023). Forecasting and anomaly detection with deep learning. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 182, 108560. [25] Zhang, J., et al. (2023). Survey of Multimodal Sentiment Analysis. In CCIS, pp. 446–450. doi:10.1109/CCIS59572.2023.10263012. [26] Kosasih, E. E., et al. (2022). GNNs in supply chain risk. International Journal of Production Research, 62(15), 5596–5612. [27] Syu, J.-H., et al. (2020). Portfolio Management via RL. In SMC, pp. 4146–4151. doi:10.1109/SMC42975.2020.9283359. [28] Doshi-Velez, F., & Kim, B. (2017). Interpretable Machine Learning. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1702.08608 [29] Aguirre, A., et al. (2020). AI in Business Process Automation. In IEEE Big Data, pp. 3476–3485. [30] Wooldridge, M. (2009). An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems. Wiley. [31] Shirata, C. Y., & Terano, T. (2001). Japanese Bankrupt Firms via AI. In KES, pp. 663–666. [32] Shirata, Y., & Terano, T. (2000). Predictors of Bankruptcy. LNAI, 1805, 204–207. [33] Chan-Lau, J. A., et al. (2023). Surrogate Models for Crisis Prediction. IMF Working Paper, WP/23/41. [34] Bluwstein, K., et al. (2021). Yield Curve and Crisis Prediction. ECB Working Paper No. 2614. [35] Chen, E., et al. (2022). Benchmarking ML for Bankruptcy. arXiv:2212.12051. [36] Unknown. (2023). SCRPF for Contagion Risk. Networked-loan. [37] Shahverdi, N., et al. (2025). AI in Energy Sustainability. Energy Reports, 13, 5551–5578. [38] Okpala, I., et al. (2023). ML for Public Crisis. arXiv. https://doi.org/10. 48550/arxiv.2302.02267 [39] McGee, F. (2024). AI Risk Management in Finance. arXiv:2404.06521. [40] Hamid, I., & Rahman, M.M.H. (2025). AI in Cyber Risk Management. Discov Sustain, 6, 389. [41] Kaur, R., et al. (2023). AI for Cybersecurity. Information Fusion, 97, 101804. [42] Chauhan, B.V.S., et al. (2025). AI in Natural Disaster Management. In Springer. [43] Comes, T. (2024). AI for Crisis Decisions. Ethics Inf Technol, 26, 12. [44] Visave, J. (2025). Transparency in AI for Emergency Management. AI Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-025-00692-x [45] Gerolimos, N., et al. (2025). ML for Disaster Management. Hum-Cent Intell Syst. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44230-025-00098-2 [46] Marciniak, D., et al. (2023). New technologies in crisis management. Journal of Public Governance, 65(3), 73–85. [47] Cao, L. (2023). AI and Data Science for Smart Emergency Resilience. Int J Data Sci Anal, 15, 231–246. [48] Kumar, N. (2025b). Social engineering attack in the era of generative AI. International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology, 13(1), 1737–1747. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2025.66688

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Nikita Priyadarshi, Ankita Joshi. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.