A total change in leadership is needed to address the problems at the UK¡¯s Alan Turing Institute, employees have said, after the chief executive of the national artificial intelligence (AI) body resigned.

Peter Kyle, the former science secretary who controversially directed the institute to focus on defence, was also?replaced in September¡¯s Cabinet reshuffle, raising further questions about the future direction of the organisation.

Jean Innes, chief executive of the Alan Turing Institute,?announced she was stepping down on 4 September, following a?period of staff unrest?over job cuts and scrapped research projects.

Although the institute says it has been undergoing a transformation programme that will see it move away from working on a large number of projects to a more focused approach,?employees are calling for further changes at management level.

91ÇÑ×Ó

¡°Jean¡¯s sudden resignation alone won¡¯t fix the Turing ¨C individuals on the board and [executive leadership team] have been in post for many years before her appointment,¡± said a current staff member.

¡°Unless leadership is fully refreshed, her departure will not bring the urgent changes needed to fulfil our mission.¡±

91ÇÑ×Ó

The institute was established in 2015 to focus on AI in areas including environmental sustainability and health, as well as defence and security, but, earlier this year, Kyle directed the institution to pivot its focus to supporting national defence ¨C a decision that has raised some eyebrows.

Timothy Clement-Jones, a Liberal Democrat peer and co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on AI, said in a statement that while the defence focus isn¡¯t ¡°inherently problematic¡±, it is problematic to use it as ¡°cover for broader institutional failure¡± ¨C with the pivot perceived as the government¡¯s way of handling management concerns at the institute.?

Innes and Douglas Gurr, chair of the board of trustees, released a statement in response to Kyle?agreeing to ¡°step up¡± work on security and defence, stoking fears that other research areas may be paused.

While Kyle has now been replaced by Liz Kendall as science secretary, the institute is expected to continue taking government direction, despite ministers¡¯ continued assertions that Turing is an independent organisation.

It is understood that, in a staff meeting held after Innes¡¯ resignation, Gurr and members of the executive leadership team said that health and environment work may continue with funding from non-government sources, but then later said that the institute needed to focus on the government¡¯s priorities. They allegedly claimed that digital society and policy were not of interest to ministers.

A spokesperson for the Alan Turing Institute said, ¡°We¡¯re shaping a new phase for the Turing, and this requires substantial organisational change to ensure we deliver on the promise and unique role of the UK¡¯s national institute for AI and data science.

91ÇÑ×Ó

¡°This includes responding to the national need to step up our work in defence, national security and sovereign capabilities, and making sure we drive forward other high-impact work in environment and health that supports government priorities and the interests of our philanthropic and private funders.¡±

While some defence work would be welcome, ¡°to say that¡¯s virtually the exclusive domain of the Turing going forward is just extraordinary,¡± Clement-Jones told?Times Higher Education. ¡°It¡¯s a perversion of what the original mission of the Turing was.¡±

91ÇÑ×Ó

Clement-Jones said the country needs a body that can provide ¡°dispassionate advice¡± on the ethical use of AI but warned that the government is ¡°dragging their heels¡± on regulation of the technology.

¡°A level of regulation which is proportionate is absolutely vital for [public] confidence,¡± he said.

¡°We want the Turing to be the powerhouse for advising government on things like ethical regulation and so on, but¡­I think it¡¯s going to be very difficult to put the whole thing back in the box.¡±

The employee, who said they had consulted with their colleagues, said having one focus area is ¡°too narrow¡±.

¡°The value of AI is that it can be applied to a wide range of areas, and that applies to other national priorities; and that is the scale of work a national institute should be doing.¡±

A spokesperson for the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said: ¡°The Alan Turing Institute is an independent organisation and has been consulting on changes to refocus its work under the Turing 2.0 strategy.

91ÇÑ×Ó

¡°The Institute is heavily reliant on public funding, so it is fair that we have some kind of input on its future so it delivers value for money and maximum impact for taxpayers. We will continue our work to support that ambition.¡±

helen.packer@timeshighereducation.com