Search

We offer a critical inquiry into the faltering entry of an anthropomorphised AI (ro)bot, an algorithm without physical or visual form, into the workplace in a media consultancy company. While living a digital life in the virtual world, the ro(bot) was given a human name. We highlight the unexpected consequences the humanisation of an early form of artificial intelligence (AI) has on the affects circulating between people and the new technology and between members of different organisational groups. We argue that anthropomorphising technologies such as AI influences the affective life of organisations and amplifies existing discontent between organisational members, complicating the introduction of the technology. Focusing on human–AI interaction, our analysis reveals a rift between managers who are excited and hopeful about the future capabilities of AI and employees who are frustrated and angry about its present shortcomings. We conclude that collective affects play a central role in contemporary technology-driven organisations in which the role people play in relation to the avalanche of AI technologies is often neglected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following criticism about the quality of writing in management communication and organization studies, this Forum presents arguments for change in how scholarly knowledge is communicated. The expectation today seems to be that, to get published, academic writing requires monologic and complex ways of expression. However, using formulaic and reader-exclusive language in publications limits their accessibility to a wider readership, including not only more diverse members of the disciplinary community—such as non-Anglophone scholars and junior researchers—but also those we study and write about. In our respective contributions, we argue for more meaningful communication between writers and readers achieved through writers adopting reflexive practices when crafting their texts for publication. Specifically, we suggest considering reflexivity through the following concepts: conformity and individuality, socialization, tenderness, and respect. These, we argue, help make our academic writing more accessible and meaningful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I offer an autoethnography of academic work and imagination. I write as an "armchair traveler" who joins others in research endeavors that they have initiated. Imagination takes center stage in what I do: I use my imagination in analyzing empirical materials and in theorizing and writing meaningful research. Together with others, I engage in studies where I am close to the subject of inquiry and feel sameness, but also in research that for me is grounded in difference and otherness. Through my autoethnography, I elucidate the potential and limits of imagination in different research initiatives. Reflecting on my experiences and learning, I discuss how imagination relates to ethico-politics in doing research. I argue that imagination thrives in small acts of generosity in research collaboration, which harbor a sense of togetherness and solidarity. This has implications for understanding academic work that is obsessed with performance in publishing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gender perspectives and feminism are rarely considered legitimate in business school education. Existing research tells us that those who teach in business schools do so in conditions where feminist theories and pedagogy evoke resistance and where their work is paved with discomfort caused by tensions between feminist and neoliberal idea(l)s. We argue that for those challenging the status quo in the business school through teaching, the impact of the threat of resistance can be as "real" as that of realized resistance. In this paper, we engage with collaborative autoethnography and elucidate how our anticipation of resistance shapes the way we teach, even when resistance does not materialize in the classroom. Building on reflections of our shared experiences, we theorize anticipated resistance as productive in and of itself, challenging the conventional view of resistance as brought into being through resisting practices at a specific time and place. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the Finnish higher education system, government steering and the interests of industry and business have come to focus on the impact of the university in society. In 2010, "Aalto University" was created in a merger of three universities representing different academic fields. The new university developed a forward-looking strategy, restructured its operations to serve a new innovative and interdisciplinary institutional profile or brand, and to attract top talent across the world introduced an academic tenure track career system unprecedented in Finland. In this article, we identify strategy, branding, and human resources systems as key integrative mechanisms in the merger process and consider some of the complexities and contradictions in a merging university's drive for "excellence" from the perspective of the identity of academic faculty members. We also consider more general implications of the "Aalto" merger for understanding the opportunities and challenges presented by contemporary university mergers.