Best friend or broken tool? Exploring the co-existence of humans and artificial intelligence in the workplace ecosystem

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become an important topic in business literature and strategy talk. Yet, much of this literature is normative and conceptual in nature. How organizational members perceive AI and the job role changes that come with it is, so far, largely unknown territory for both HR scholars and practitioners. We sought to investigate the relationship between humans and AI and conducted an in-depth exploratory study into the co-existence of humans and two early-stage AI-solutions, one for “low-status” automation and another for “high-status”; augmentation. We suggest that different organizational groups may engage in distinctly different sensemaking processes regarding AI, an important insight for successful HRM strategies when AI is being introduced into the workplace. Moreover, contrary to recent conceptual work, our findings indicate that AI-enabled automation and augmentation solutions may not be detached from nor exist in tension with each other. They are deeply embedded in organizational processes and workflows for which people who co-exist with the technologies must take ownership. Our findings, in part, go against discussions on AI “taking over” jobs or deskilling humans. We describe a more nuanced version of reality fluctuating around the various ways different organizational groups encounter different AI-solutions in their daily work. Finally, our study warns against unconditional technological enthusiasm, managerial ignorance of the nature of work that employees undertake in different organizational groups, and a neglect of the time and effort required to successfully implement AI-solutions that affect not only the home organization but also members of the broader ecosystem.     

Reducing intentions to resist future change: Combined effects of commitment‐based HR practices and ethical leadership

Change management, and particularly the human side of change, is a central tenet of the strategy of contemporary organizations. However, there is little evidence concerning how strategic HR practices influence how individuals anticipate and react to the implementation of a major change and how direct supervisors influence that process. With a sample of 191 employees from multiple organizations, who completed two surveys with a four‐week lag, we examined the role of commitment‐based HR practices on employees’ intentions to resist future change. We found that commitment‐based HR practices contribute to a decrease in intentions to resist future change, measured four weeks later, via increased affective commitment to change. Moreover, we found that this relationship is conditional on ethical leadership, in that it is significant when ethical leadership is high but not when it is low. Building on social exchange and uncertainty reduction theories, our findings contribute to the literature by examining how and under what boundary conditions HR practices are an effective means for organizations to anticipate and manage change.     

Mixed Methods Studies in Environmental Management Research: Prevalence,Purposes and Designs

Mixed methods research, that is, the combined use of quantitative and qualitative methods in the same study, is a popular approach in several fields. However, its use in the field of environmental management and sustainable development has not been examined. The authors review the application of mixed methods research in the journal Business Strategy and the Environment in the last ten years. A total of 340 articles have been read and reviewed, and 26 mixed methods studies have been identified. The main purposes and mixed methods designs are examined. Suggestions on why and how to use mixed methods research are offered, and recommendations are provided to guide future mixed methods studies to advance our understanding of environmental management topics. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment