 |
|
Who's Making the Call? Paring back the Blackbox of Technology
|
Author: Deborah Anderson, U. of Oxford
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Understanding the impact and use of technology and emergent forms of data production and analysis by professionals and knowledge workers is increasingly salient, yet difficult to study. Scholars have explored how and the degree to which experts question the assumptions embedded in the tools they employ (Mackenzie, 1990 p.5; Anthony,2018), the interaction of technology and professional judgment on various forms of valuation (Jarzabkowski,2015), as well as illustrated how the implementation of a new technology can create subtle but significant change (Orlikowski, 1996 p.63). However, little is known about the ways in which technology is pared back, subordinated, and modified over time by the firm in order to combat the passivity inculcated by the abstraction of computer-mediated work (Zuboff, 1988). In this study, I examine an audit firm deploying a new technology intended to move away from a prescriptive ‘black box' and towards a system that aims to put professionals and professional judgment back at the forefront, in part by removing the auto-population of checklists and tasks and forcing junior auditors to define and type descriptions of the work being done. Drawing upon ethnographic data, I illustrate the differing expectations of management and junior professionals, as well as the responses of junior members in trying to implement the new technology.
|
|
|
|
Paper is No Longer Available Online: Please contact the author(s).
|
|
|
|
|
Measuring the Effects of Technology Framing: Development of a Multiple Item Scale
|
Author: Christoph Klos, U. of Kassel
Author: Patrick Spieth, U. of Kassel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In recent years the process of digital technology integration and adoption has received much attention from business companies as well as academia. Technology framing is described as a sensemaking instrument which determines how an organization member reacts to a new tech-nology. Despite strong interest in this phenomenon, there is no common method to actually measure technological frames. First, this paper aims to develop a detailed definition of technol-ogy framing which is unfortunately still missing. Second, since a validated measurement in-strument for technological frames is not available, we target this gap by systematically devel-oping a new multiple item scale. For achieving this goal, we follow a rigorous scale develop-ment process based on the technology framing and technology adoption literature as well as additional qualitative interview data. Third, we help business companies to better understand what the underlying factors of the employee’s reaction to a new technology are. We conducted our study among 47 German business companies and provide an empirically validated meas-urement model for technological frames. Our exploratory analyses indicated the following five reliable factors: personal attitude, application, organizational influence, industrial influence, and supervisor influence.
|
|
|
|
Paper is No Longer Available Online: Please contact the author(s).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Running with (CRISPR) Scissors: Tool Adoption and Team Assembly (WITHDRAWN)
|
Author: Samantha Zyontz, MIT Sloan School of Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research tools are essential inputs to technological progress. Yet many new tools require specialized complementary know-how to be applied effectively. Teams in any research domain face the tradeoff of either acquiring this know-how themselves or working with external tool specialists, individuals with tool know-how independent of a domain. These specialists are scarce early on and can choose domain teams to create many applications for the tool or to focus on complicated problems. Ex ante it is unclear where the match between domain teams and external tool specialists dominates. The introduction of the DNA-editing tool CRISPR enables identification of external tool specialists on research teams by exploiting natural difficulties of applying CRISPR across disease domains. Teams have a higher share of external tool specialists in difficult diseases, especially for subsequent innovations. This suggests that external tool specialists and domain teams match more often to solve complex but influential problems. As more tools like Artificial Intelligence emerge, research teams will have to also weigh the importance of their possible solutions when considering how best to attract and collaborate with external tool specialists.
|
|
|
|
Paper is No Longer Available Online: Please contact the author(s).
|
|
|
|
|
Preparing Minority Worker for the Future of Work with Automation
|
Author: Kristen Elizabeth Broady, Dillard U.
Author: Darlene Booth Bell, Coastal Carolina U.
Author: Daisha Martin, Harvard U.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automation continues to increase productivity and efficiency providing promising projections for those focused on economic growth, while at the same time serving as a source of fear for Americans who are employed in fields most at risk of being automated. Automation will affect Americans of all races, but it will have a significant impact on African-American and Latino workers who are more likely to be employed in fields at risk of being automated. This study focuses on the extent to which African American and Latino workers are concentrated in the ten occupations that employ the most people in the United States and have a high probability of being automated over the next 10 to 20 years. One of the main challenges will be combating the substantial skills gap that already exists in the American labor market. Many businesses are currently unable to find qualified workers to fill available jobs. Automation without strategic intervention will increase the skills gap, the wage gap, and increase economic inequality. African American and Latino communities will face unique challenges in labor transitions as a result of automation. We provide strategic solutions to prepare these and other undeserved minorities for the future of work with automation.
|
|
|
|
Paper is No Longer Available Online: Please contact the author(s).
|
|
|
|
|