Eine Übersicht aller Sessions/Sitzungen dieser Veranstaltung. Bitte wählen Sie einen Ort oder ein Datum aus, um nur die betreffenden Sitzungen anzuzeigen. Wählen Sie eine Sitzung aus, um zur Detailanzeige zu gelangen.
Als Teilnehmende können Sie sich Ihr persönliches Programm zusammenstellen. Loggen Sie sich dazu in Ihren Account ein: Login
Chair der Sitzung: Stefanie Habersang, Leuphana Universität Lüneburg
Ort:C 40.146 Seminarraum
22
Präsentationen
How speciesist is AI? - Discussing AI, speciesism and vegaphobia with ChatGPT - Implications for inclusive workplaces
Doris Schneeberger1, Laura Traavik2
1Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria; 2Kristiania University College, Oslo, Norway
Rapid developments in artificial intelligence (AI) have brought about technological changes in organizations and workplaces which have manifold ramifications. AI bears both a chance to mitigate bias and discrimination in organizations as well as fostering them. This contribution discusses how recent AI developments, specifically ChatGPT, could influence speciesism and vegaphobia in the workplace. In this study, we employ illustrative data from our conversations with ChatGPT-3.5. We contribute to discussions on AI fairness and equality, diversity, and inclusion in organizations, and animal organization studies.
Artificial Intelligence and Worker Representation
Sonja Köhne1, Ali Aslan Gümüşay2,1, Georg von Richthofen1, Hendrik Send3,1
1Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society; 2Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich; 3Hochschule für Technik und Wirtschaft Berlin
While extant research has investigated the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on work, it has not explored the impact of AI on worker representation. At the same time, worker representatives expect AI to have implications for workers of large scale and scope. Understanding how worker representatives navigate the challenges of AI is critical, as it is through collective action that workers advocate their interests regarding AI implementation. To address this research-practice gap, we draw on interviews with worker representatives, documentary evidence, and field observations. Due to their intermediary role between workers and employers, worker representatives are uniquely positioned to shed light on competing perspectives on AI and how its implementation is negotiated in organizations. We apply a paradox lens that suggests that competing perspectives on AI in the workplace are not mutually exclusive but interwoven and persistent. The contribution of our study is twofold. First, we conceptualize four paradoxical tensions in AI engagement. These tensions relate to the evitability, tangibility, boundaries, and evaluation of AI. Second, our findings indicate that worker representatives have three response mechanisms to these tensions: accommodative visioning, experimenting within guardrails, and building coalitions. We conclude that it is this ambiguity and complexity that characterizes AI and places high demands on the representation of worker interests. Negotiating AI is not simply a matter of quickly building up new technical skills among worker representatives. Rather, they need to collectively organize in ways that enable multiple meanings and perspectives to be accommodated, simultaneously provide flexibility and structure, and enable dialogue and participation. With this, we extend scholarship on AI and work as well as on navigating paradox.
