Research can face artificial intelligence (AI) as an issue of technology development but also as an issue of enacted technology at work. Human-centered design of AI gives emphasis to the expertise and needs of human beings as a starting point of technology development or as an outcome of AI-based work settings. This is an important goal, as expressed, for example, by the international labor organization’s call for a „human-centered agenda“ for the future of AI and automation collaboration. This Research Topic raises the question of what human-centricity means, i.e. what are the criteria and indicators of human-centered AI and how can they be considered and implemented?

The aim of this Research Topic is to open a floor for an interdisciplinary discourse elaborating on theoretical concepts and methods in use that specify the human-centricity of AI work settings. A common ground for theory development and discourse on empirical results is necessary as human-centered AI is being theorized, investigated, and developed in various disciplines. The range of disciplines is from information science, machine learning, engineering and robotics, medicine up to ergonomics/work science, psychology, sociology, philosophy, business studies, law and labor relations just to mention the core disciplines involved in the current debate. These disciplines provide different basic understandings of what human-centered AI at work exactly means. Basic assumptions are not necessarily routed in explicit theories but also result from theories in use leading to a set of methods and instruments applied in R&D projects and transferred to practice. As different perspectives co-exist and are currently not well integrated there is a need to further specify and systemize what human-centered AI in the workplace exactly means and what the underlying criteria are. Based on that, we can gain an overview, search for a common ground and distinguish between communities that move forward the discourse in parallel.

We invite a wide range of empirical and theoretical contributions that investigate:

• Work settings making use of AI
• The connection and loops between AI development and AI use fields
• Regulations for AI implementation
• Issues of decision making with and/or about AI at work

We equally appreciate theoretical or empirical work on how to specify human-centricity as a (normative) input factor, as a throughput in process descriptions and/or as an measurable output of AI-based work settings. Invited research contributions might contribute from different starting points:

1. Theoretical outlines giving emphasis to concepts for specifying the normative basis of human-centered AI at work
2. Methods, instruments, and standards in terms of theories in use of what human-centricity means
3. Empirical studies investigating the antecedents and/ or outcomes of human-centered AI use at work and mediating or moderating mechanisms;
4. Case study analysis representing practices of human-centered AI where qualitative field work allows to specify criteria in an inductive manner

Topic Editors:

• Annette Kluge (Ruhr University Bochum)
• Corinna Pfeifer (University of Lübeck)
• Uta Wilkens (Institute of Work Science, Ruhr University Bochum)
• Verena Nitsch (Institute of Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, RWTH Aachen University)

Submission Deadline for Abstract: 06 February 2023.
Submission Deadline for Manuscript: 06 July 2023.
View the complete CfP here.

Embedded in a background of multi-level crises (e.g. Covid-19, violent-conflict, inflation, climate-change, growing social inequalities), and growing threats to the commons (democratic freedom, human rights, ecological integrity), our call can be considered a response to an urgency for business and HRM to adopt a more societal role and to critically reflect on the impact of HR policies, strategies and practices on wider societal and ecological shared “Common-Good” interests.

While scholarly concepts of and approaches to sustainable HRM are diverse (e.g. Aust et al., 2020), our aim of this conference is to offer an opportunity for international scholars to present and discuss how and when our research can have a real-life impact by making contributions to today’s sustainability challenges as framed through the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and beyond.

We welcome high-quality contributions and work-in-progress submissions across diverse research fields and theoretical backgrounds that could help advance our understanding of how to develop, initiate, implement and sustain a “Common-Good HRM” within the workplace from a broad range of complementary perspectives, e.g. Socio-Economics, Business-Ethics, Organizational studies and Sustainable HRM.

Potential areas of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Defining the purpose and boundaries of different conceptual and empirical manifestations of Sustainable HRM
• Exploring the intended (‘bright side’) and unintended (‘dark side’) of Sustainable HRM
• Exploring the gap between greater sustainability challenges (SDGs) and HRM or employment relations practices
• Contributions of “Common-Good HRM” practices to grand sustainability challenges such as climate change, social inequalities etc.
• Responses to challenges to a “Common-Good HRM” paradigm that materialize in tensions,
  contradictions or paradoxes of shareholder and stakeholder, business and society interests.
• Mixed-methods approaches to investigating workplace “Common-Good HRM” policy and practices and in capturing respective antecedents and outcomes
• Comparative research into the process and outcomes of determining key issues and policies for “Common-Good HRM” within and between both alternative “purpose-driven” companies and more mainstream organizations.
• How different national and industrial contexts may shape sustainable HRM policy and practice.

Scientific Committee:

• Prof. Ina Aust (LouRIM at UCLouvain, Belgium)
• Prof. Julia Brandl (Universität Innsbruck, Austria)
• Prof. Michael Brookes (SDU, DK)
• Prof. Fang Lee Cooke (Monash University, Australia)
• Prof. Marco Guerci (Università Delgi Studi Di Milano, Italy)
• Prof. Michael Müller-Camen (WU Vienna, Austria)
• Prof. Shuang Ren (Queen’s Management School, UK)
• Prof. Douglas Renwick (Nottingham Trent University, UK)
• Prof. Judith Semeijn (Open Universiteit, NL)
• Prof. Philip Yang (Universität Tübingen, Germany)
• Prof. Geoffrey Wood (Western University, Canada)

Date: 14 & 15 March 2023.
Venue: Online. The online access details will be sent to your email address a few days prior to the event.
Paper Submission: 2 to 31 January 2023.
View the complete CfP here.

Over the past few decades, innovation that takes place within the boundaries of a single organization has become increasingly rare. Instead, organizations collaborate with other organizations in order to generate innovative products and services (Powell et al., 1996). Examples for such organizational practices that open organizational boundaries for innovation include: strategic alliances (e.g., Inkpen & Tsang, 2007), open innovation (e.g., Dahlander & Gann, 2010), entrepreneurial or innovation ecosystems (e.g., Auschra et al., 2019), external corporate venturing focusing on inter-organizational collaboration between established companies and startups (e.g., Gutmann, 2019), digital platforms bringing together several organizations in order to reach common goals (e.g., Cusumano et al., 2019), and collective creativity to come up with new ideas and, even more important, implement them in organizations, inter-organizational arrangements and markets/fields (e.g., Hargadon & Bechky, 2006).

Processes of inter-organizational collaboration and innovation (Sydow & Berends, 2019) are important for the national economies of both Israel and Germany: both countries are classified as innovative economies, both provide attractive ecosystems for startups (e.g., in Tel-Aviv and Berlin respectively), and both share a long history of collaboration on the national, but also on the inter-organizational level, reaching far beyond the present support of transnational venturing. At the same time, Israel and Germany are very different with regard to their institutional environment. Consider, for instance, well-established differences in entrepreneurial orientation, financial support by private investors and public agencies, technological skills and labor market conditions. Hence, it comes as no surprise that different entrepreneurial communities have developed and have begun to interact in what may be called transnational technological and scientific communities (Oliver & Montgomery, 2010).

Who can participate or apply to do so

The Minerva School will host ten participants from Israel and ten participants from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. If you actually do so, or plan to conduct process-oriented research on inter-organizational collaboration, creativity and innovation, you are invited to apply for participation.

The school starts on June 28th with an evening reception and will end at noon on July 1st. Accommodation costs in Berlin and for travelling to and from Berlin will be covered by the Minerva Stiftung (About us | Minerva Stiftung Gesellschaft für die Forschung mbH (mpg.de)).

Organizers

• Carolin Auschra & Jörg Sydow (both Freie Universität Berlin) together with
• Amalya Oliver (Hebrew University, Jerusalem) & Adi Sapir (University of Haifa, Haifa)

Keynote speakers

• Hans Berends (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)
• Moshe Farjoun (York University Toronto)

View the complete CfP here.
Submission deadline: 20 December 2022.
Minerva School: 28 June – 1 July 2023.

Minna Paunova, Miguel Morillas und Renate Ortlieb veranstalten ein Sub-Theme “Organizing for Multiculturalism: Between Conflict and Inclusion” im Rahmen des 39^th EGOS Colloquium, 6.-8. Juli 2023 in Cagliari, Italien.

Deadline für Short Papers: 10. Januar 2023.
Hier der vollständige CfP zum Download.