Academy of Management Discoveries

?? ?? Automation is often seen as a threat to human jobs, but what if it could actually enhance our sense of purpose? A study published in Academy of Management Discoveries (AMD) explored how employees respond to working with robots—especially ones that aren't perfect. Over 20 months and 117 interviews at two manufacturing companies, the researchers Bernadeta Go?tautait?, ?Irina Liubert?, Sharon Parker, and Ilona?Bu?iūnien? uncovered a surprising paradox: when robots made mistakes or failed to deliver, employees experienced more meaningfulness in their work. Why? Because these imperfections gave employees opportunities to step in, "outsmart" the robots, and showcase their human ingenuity and problem-solving skills. Here are the key takeaways: ?? ?Imperfect robots create opportunities for human ingenuity. Employees felt more engaged when they had to step in and "outsmart" robots to solve problems. ?? Challenges with technology can enhance the meaningfulness of work. Instead of diminishing the value of human labor, automation failures highlighted the unique worth of human creativity and adaptability. ?? ?Flawless automation isn’t always the goal. Designing systems where humans and robots complement each other may lead to greater satisfaction and collaboration. ?? Leaders should focus on building hybrid systems. Emphasize opportunities for humans to leverage their strengths, rather than aiming solely for technological perfection. For leaders and organizations, remember this: Technology doesn’t just need to work; it needs to create opportunities for humans to shine. What’s your experience with working alongside technology? Have you found that challenges with automation made your work more (or less) meaningful? Check out the article (see the link below) and share your thoughts in the comments. https://lnkd.in/eRmAckd7 #Innovation #Impact #FutureOfWork #Robot #ThoughtLeadership #Leadership #OrganizationalBehavior #Academia #QualitativeResearch #QuantitativeResearch (The special issue on The Future of Work was edited by Jochen Menges, Lauren Howe, Erika Hall, Jon M. Jachimowicz, Sharon Parker, Riki Takeuchi, Abhijeet Vadera, Ashley W., and Sue Cohen) AMD Editors and Associate Editors: C. Chet Miller (Co-Editor) Shiko Ben-Menahem Brianna Caza Prithviraj Chattopadhyay (Co-Editor) Sue Cohen Erika Hall Candace Jones Zhike Lei Christopher Myers Dusya Vera

????Would you let an algorithm decide your next promotion? Algorithms are taking over HR decisions, from performance evaluations to promotions. The promise? Objectivity, fairness, and reduced administrative burden. But here’s the twist: when algorithms dictate outcomes, they might unintentionally change how we behave—and not always for the better. A study by Isabella Scheibmayr and Astrid Reichel, published in Academy of Management Discoveries (AMD)' special issue on on The Future of Work, used a simulation to uncover a surprising paradox. Workers adjusted their behavior to align with algorithmic evaluations, even when it clashed with their own preferences, leading to discomfort and disengagement. What’s more, their attitudes toward the algorithm had no impact on their actions—suggesting that behavior was driven purely by the system’s design. This highlights Strathern’s Paradox embedded in algorithmic HRM: when metrics become the goal, they can lose their validity and undermine the very outcomes they were meant to achieve. The dilemma reminds us that algorithms, while powerful, aren’t infallible. As organizations embrace AI and automation, how do we ensure these tools enhance—not erode—the human side of HR? Check out the AMD article: https://lnkd.in/e9-_s8R6 #Innovation #Impact #FutureOfWork #ThoughtLeadership #Leadership #OrganizationalBehavior #Academia #QualitativeResearch #QuantitativeResearch (The special issue on The Future of Work was edited by Jochen Menges, Lauren Howe, Erika Hall, Jon M. Jachimowicz, Sharon Parker, Riki Takeuchi, Abhijeet Vadera, Ashley W., and Sue Cohen) #Innovation #Impact #FutureOfWork #ThoughtLeadership #Leadership #OrganizationalBehavior #Academia #QualitativeResearch #QuantitativeResearch AMD Editors and Associate Editors: C. Chet Miller (Co-Editor) Shiko Ben-Menahem Brianna Caza Prithviraj Chattopadhyay (Co-Editor) Sue Cohen Erika Hall Candace Jones Zhike Lei Christopher Myers Dusya Vera

???? Share this exciting news about Academy of Management Discovers (AMD) LinkedIn page and follow us to stay ahead of the curve in management thinking! ?? ?? AMD editorial team(Editors and Associate Editors): C. Chet Miller Shiko Ben-Menahem Brianna Caza Prithviraj Chattopadhyay Sue Cohen Erika Hall Candace Jones Zhike Lei Christopher Myers Dusya Vera

Would you trust a team managed by an algorithm to innovate? Many leaders don’t—and that bias could be holding us back. In a recent paper published in Academy of Management Discoveries, Shane Schweitzer?and?David De Cremer explored how algorithmic management impacts perceptions of creativity. The authors found a surprising and troubling pattern: employees managed by algorithms are often seen as less creative than those led by humans. This isn’t just a perception problem—it’s shaping how resources are allocated and innovation budgets are spent. Key insights ?? Creativity Bias in Algorithmic Management: Employees managed by algorithms are often perceived as less creative compared to those managed by humans, leading to biased evaluations and decision-making. ?? Unequal Resource Allocation: Algorithm-led teams receive less funding and support for innovation, even when they are equally capable of creative contributions. ?? Persistent Bias Across Contexts: The negative perceptions of algorithm-managed employees remain consistent across industries and organizational contexts, regardless of how prevalent algorithmic management is. ?? Contradiction with AI Narratives: Industry narratives tout AI as a driver of innovation, yet the stigma of algorithmic oversight undermines employees’ opportunities to showcase creativity. The final thoughts? If we want to unlock the full potential of innovation, we need to challenge our assumptions about technology and creativity. Employees managed by algorithms deserve the same opportunities to demonstrate their ingenuity as those led by humans. After all, creativity isn’t about who manages you—it’s about how you’re empowered to think and contribute. (The paper is part of our special issue on The Future of Work, edited by Jochen Menges, Lauren Howe, Erika Hall, Jon M. Jachimowicz, Sharon Parker, Riki Takeuchi, Abhijeet Vadera, Ashley W., and Sue Cohen) Academy of Management #Innovation #Impact #FutureOfWork #ThoughtLeadership #Leadership #OrganizationalBehavior #Academia #QualitativeResearch #QuantitativeResearch AMD Editors and Associate Editors: C. Chet Miller (Co-Editor) Shiko Ben-Menahem Brianna Caza Prithviraj Chattopadhyay (Co-Editor) Sue Cohen Erika Hall Candace Jones Zhike Lei Christopher Myers Dusya Vera

It started when I received comments like these: "This was a great session, but I'm not sure how it could help, I'm not a creative person." "I enjoyed the class, but as someone who isn't creative, I don't think it was a good use of my time." I was teaching a class on "Managing Creativity" to executives. Participants respected the effort I was putting into the class, but they rejected the idea that creativity could be useful for them because they were not creative. So I turned this into a research project. Why do people make this claim? Why is it made so frequently? Our findings are now out in Academy of Management Discoveries. Along with Mel Hua and Derek Deasy, we gathered stories and collages about "creativity scars": moments when a person's connection to creativity is damaged. We found that for a large portion of people, moments in childhood left creativity scars that made them feel they could not be creative again. We even found that some of these creativity scars form later in life in professional settings. Creativity scars reveal a huge issue for humanity: if today's problems cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that caused them, then we need creativity to imagine a better future. But, if a substantial portion of people have internalized that they are not creative, we are missing out on a lot of ideas that could help us collectively live better lives. If you're a member of AOM, you can get the pre-print here (otherwise feel free to message me): https://lnkd.in/ev_7kxiE

How do remote work and workplace inclusion go together? Today’s workplaces are shaped by two mega-trends: the rise of remote work and the increasing focus on workplace inclusion. But how do these trends interact? A new paper by Magdalena Schertler, Nicola Vivienne Glumann, and Stephan B?hm from the University of St.Gallen tackles this timely question using a robust longitudinal study. Key Insights: 1?? Contrasting Effects: At the individual level, more remote work reduces feelings of belongingness and authenticity over time. At the group level, employees who work remotely more often report higher general inclusion compared to others. 2?? Gender Matters: Women face stronger negative impacts on the opportunity for authenticity when working remotely compared to men, highlighting the nuanced interplay between virtuality and workplace dynamics. 3?? Advanced Methods: Using a Random Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Model, the authors separate individual-level changes from group-level effects, revealing a Simpson’s paradox in the data. Why It Matters? This study underscores that while remote work can level the playing field by reducing social hierarchies, it also presents risks to individuals’ sense of inclusion—especially for women. Organizations must strategically design policies to balance flexibility with meaningful connection and equity. ?? This research is a must-read for practitioners navigating hybrid or remote work environments and those interested in understanding how to foster an inclusive and effective workplace. The paper is part of our special issue on The Future of Work, edited by Jochen Menges, Lauren Howe, Erika Hall, Jon M. Jachimowicz, Sharon Parker, Riki Takeuchi, Abhijeet Vadera, Ashley W., and Sue Cohen. #RemoteWork #WorkplaceInclusion #FutureOfWork #Leadership Academy of Management @ https://lnkd.in/eN_iMQNd

The future of work is a fiction, not a fact. This surprising conclusion is at the heart of a new AMD paper "Imagining the (Distant) Future of Work," by Nicky Dries, Joost Luyckx, and Philip Rogiers, published in our recent special issue devoted to The Future of Work, edited by Jochen Menges, Lauren Howe, Erika Hall, Jon M. Jachimowicz, Sharon Parker, Riki Takeuchi, Abhijeet Vadera, Ashley W., and Sue Cohen Rather than a straightforward forecast, the authors argue that the future of work is a tapestry of competing narratives, each promoted by different actors—tech experts, policymakers, authors, and engaged citizens—all pushing distinct visions of what should happen. Through a combination of media analysis and surveys, the study reveals that narratives about the future aren’t just idle predictions; they actively shape public opinion, policy, and the direction of innovation. Key insights : ?? Seven Competing Narratives: From “Dataism,” where society becomes entirely data-driven, to “Exterminism,” which envisions the wealthy elite dominating a resource-scarce world, each narrative reflects unique social and political stakes. Other narratives include Augmentation (tech enhancing, not replacing human work), Job Destruction, and Work Deintensification, each representing different values and priorities. ?? A Paradigm Shift: Instead of focusing on deterministic “predictions,” the authors call for attention to these "imaginaries" that can be intentionally shaped. By emphasizing agency, this approach counters the narrative that the future of work is something that happens to us. ?? Reframing Work as a Choice: A critical takeaway is that these narratives reveal choices we can make collectively, with potential to shift outcomes in our favor rather than passively awaiting an inevitable tech-driven transformation. This study challenges us to see the future of work not as a predetermined path but as something we shape through the stories we choose to tell and believe! https://lnkd.in/eC9PjfNM #futureofwork Academy of Management

Oct. 31 is World Cities Day: https://lnkd.in/d-3CH5Q How #Nonprofits and Companies Help Build #Sustainable Cities: https://lnkd.in/eQqQMbxB “Few challenges are as urgent as the sustainable transformation of cities and communities," AOM Scholars Horacio Rousseau of Florida State University - College of Business, Pascual Berrone?of IESE Business School, and?Liliana Gelabert?of IE University wrote in an Academy of Management Discoveries?article. “More than 50% of the world’s population lives in metropolises, and cities are responsible for a significant proportion of the world’s economic, social, and environmental impacts. Scholars estimate that cities account for 60% to 80% of the world’s employment and global GDP [gross domestic product] and are responsible for similar shares of industrial contamination, energy consumption, and water usage, a trend that will likely worsen due to growing #urbanization,” they wrote. Infographic: https://lnkd.in/etCg_tav Video: https://lnkd.in/eFSXzD_z #sustainability #WorldCitiesDay, #UrbanOctober, #SustainableUrbanFuture, #cities

Think cheating automatically gives you an edge? Well, think again! A new study by Josh Downs from Michigan State University, Joseph Mahoney, and Deepak Somaya from Gies College of Business - University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign in Academy of Management Discoveries takes a deep dive into the infamous Houston Astros sign-stealing scandal and finds...no advantage! This paper explores how organizational #misconduct, specifically using “illicit competitive intelligence” like sign stealing, might not always yield the expected performance boost. With a clever analysis of the Astros' batting performance at home (where cheating happened) vs. away games, the authors discovered that even when cheating, the Astros didn’t score any significant gains. ? But why didn’t it work? The paper suggests some fascinating reasons: - Identity conflicts: Did players’ professional ethics clash with organizational demands? - Info leaks: Could the secret get out, diminishing its value? - Routine disruptions: Did the cheating process break the usual game flow? Want to dive into this counterintuitive take on misconduct and performance? ?? Check out the study to see how this real-world scandal flips the script on competitive intelligence in organizations! https://lnkd.in/eb4ydutt

Two Mindsets That Can Create #Rude or #Polite?Coworkers https://lnkd.in/e_BXXWib Rude behavior plagues?teams?and organizations, with 70% of employees reporting incivility from colleagues and half reporting that incivility occurs on a weekly basis. Understanding the?#mindsets?that prompt people to treat colleagues with #politeness or #incivility can help managers foster collegial behavior and enhance decision-making, according to an?Academy of Management Discoveries?article. “When we think of management, it’s how to be fast, how to be #efficient. It’s important for managers to know that employees are human beings,” said E-Yang Goh of the National University of Singapore (NUS) Business School. “It isn’t just about managing a #crisis. It’s managing how the crisis impacts people.” "Unfortunately, in a crisis situation, people might tend to assume that it is alright to be #rude because there is no time to be #nice,” added?Sandy Lim, also of NUS. Goh's and Lim's coauthors, all of NUS, are Yew Kwan Tong of NUS and?Jeremy Choon Peng Wee?of Singapore General Hospital.