@article{37155, abstract = {{Artificial intelligence (AI) has moved beyond the planning phase in many organisations and it is often accompanied by uncertainties and fears of job loss among employees. It is crucial to manage employees{\textquoteright} attitudes towards the deployment of an AI-based technology effectively and counteract possible resistance behaviour. We present lessons learned from an industry case where we conducted interviews with affected employees. We evaluated our results with managers across industries and found that that the deployment of AI-based technologies does not differ from other IT, but that the change is perceived differently due to misguided expectations. }}, author = {{Stieglitz, Stefan and Möllmann (Frick), Nicholas R. J. and Mirbabaie, Milad and Hofeditz, Lennart and Ross, Björn}}, issn = {{1477-9064}}, journal = {{International Journal of Management Practice}}, keywords = {{Artificial Intelligence, Change Management, Resistance, AI-Driven Change, AI Deployment, AI Perception}}, publisher = {{Inderscience}}, title = {{{Recommendations for Managing AI-Driven Change Processes: When Expectations Meet Reality}}}, year = {{2021}}, } @inproceedings{9676, abstract = {{Employees’ acceptance and resistance of new technology and social structure are frequently examined in Information Systems research. Resistance is expressed in various forms, including a lack of cooperation, workarounds, and physical sabotage. Workarounds, in particular, have a dual nature and can refer to both, undesirable behavior that contradicts organizational struc-ture and to desired organizational innovation. While antecedents and different forms of worka-rounds have been explored, literature has remained silent on how and why workarounds of an individual employee can affect activities performed by other employees and thereby, change work routines on an organizational level. Since employees’ day-to-day performances constitute the ostensive patterns of a routine, we argue that workarounds will not only impact performanc-es of adjacent routines, but also transform the organization as a social structure. With a prelim-inary set of qualitative data from 24 interviews, we used a multiple case study design to concep-tualize six patterns that illustrate how and why workarounds can spread through an organiza-tion. The patterns are systematized by a framework that considers three types of collaboration and two types of handoffs across routines. This first evidence points at the nature of complex desired and undesired consequences that can emerge through workarounds performed in an organization.}}, author = {{Wolf, Verena and Beverungen, Daniel}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the 27th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS)}}, keywords = {{Resistance, Workaround, Organizational Routines, Structuration Theory}}, location = {{Stockholm-Uppsala, Sweden}}, title = {{{Conceptualizing the Impact of Workarounds – An Organizational Routines’ Perspective}}}, year = {{2019}}, }