Call for Papers

Organizations worldwide are at crossroads regarding human workers’ roles and identities concerning their operational interaction with technology – e.g., given the rise of artificial intelligence, robotics, and technology in all fields of work. We want to shed light on this intersection from three dedicated perspectives and theoretical lenses. First, good work has been a topic for organization research, with a focus on workers themselves as leaders and team members (Kociatkiewicz & Kostera, 2012; Lekkas & Souitaris, 2022; Sharma & Bansal, 2017), but less so regarding technology impact on good working conditions besides the obvious ergonomic angle (Viviani et al., 2018). Second, the sustainability angle holds the social sustainability dimension to be referred to from a holistic sustainability perspective (Slager & Gond, 2022). This field is relevant to the human factor in organizations and supply chains. Third, the field of digital ethics is deemed crucial for organizations’ successful management, emphasizing issues of fairness, justice, longtermism and social responsibility of global actors towards planet, people and environment (Knights & Latham, 2020; Thorén, Ågerfalk & Rolandsson, 2018).
 
Within this sub-theme, we aim to contribute to the further development of the organization and management discourse and theory. We emphasize on the importance of how to build good work settings in detail and apply holistic human-centered approaches in the wake of technology permeation throughout all areas of work and organizations. Specifically, this discussion and contribution can be seen along the lines of the following questions connected to the overall topical discourse of the EGOS Colloquium 2024 and outlining possible contribution areas towards the sub-theme objective:

• What does good work in the context of human-technology interaction in supply chains mean? How is this related to sustainability and digital ethics?

• How do different levels of organizational policies, leadership styles, team collaboration and individual expectations relate when it comes to building human-centered systems and good work settings in globalized and digital supply chains? What are ethical challenges and trends at these crossroads considering the changing nature of global supply chains?

• As new forms of coordination are emerging to achieve practical cooperation at the global level including diverse institutions like governments, corporations, associations – what does this imply for the field of human-centered work design and good work?

• How can organizations enhance people’s willingness to experiment with new forms of structuring and routines and therefore generate their evolution as a form of good work design? Is this feasible for the core question of human-technology interaction where efficiency issues are usually at the forefront of stakeholder objectives?

• How can we integrate approaches and methods from different disciplines – e.g., normative, descriptive, and empirical methodologies – for better understanding of issues at the crossroad with human-technology interaction?

• How can organization studies carry out an effort to reveal fundamental principles for good work and human-centered operations, e.g. is it feasible to formulate generalized organizational design principles (e.g., the EU legislation on AI and robotics), or do we need dedicated industry standards to cover the issue?

References

• Knights, D., & Latham, Y. (2020): “Disabled People and Digitalization: Disruptive documents in distributing digital devices.” Organization Studies, 41 (6), 855–872.
• Kociatkiewicz, J., & Kostera, M. (2012): T”he Good Manager: An Archetypical Quest for Morally Sustainable Leadership.” Organization Studies, 33 (7), 861–878.
• Lekkas, C.-K., & Souitaris, V. (2022): “Bureaucracy Meets Digital Reality: The Unfolding of Urban Platforms in European Municipal Governments.” Organization Studies, https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406221130857
• Sharma, G., & Bansal, P. (2017): “Partners for Good: How Business and NGOs Engage the Commercial–Social Paradox.” Organization Studies, 38 (3–4), 341–364.
• Slager, R., & Gond, J.-P. (2022): “The Politics of Reactivity: Ambivalence in corporate responses to corporate social responsibility ratings.” Organization Studies, 43 (1), 59–80.
• Thorén, C., Ågerfalk, P. J., & Rolandsson, B. (2018): “Voicing the Puppet: Accommodating Unresolved Institutional Tensions in Digital Open Practices.” Organization Studies, 39 (7), 923–945.
• Viviani, C., Arezes, P.M., Bragança, S., Molenbroek, J., Dianat, I., & Castellucci, H.I. (2018): “Accuracy, precision and reliability in anthropometric surveys for ergonomics purposes in adult working populations: A literature review.” International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 65, 1–16.
•