This study shows how introducing new technology can be like welcoming a digital colleague. Designed to mimic the actions of employees, robotic process automation is a technology that involves developing software robots to perform standardized tasks. Although beneficial for the firm, robotization may come at a cost for the employees, since the technology puts positions at risk by automating manual procedures. In this study, I used a case study approach to examine how employees responded to robotization in three organizations. The findings revealed that the employee responses were overwhelmingly constructive and positive. In addition to responding with a big-picture perspective and finding opportunities, the employees humanized software robots as new digital colleagues, with whom they developed relationships. The results discussed in this study contribute to understanding technology-driven change by empirically illustrating employees’ multidimensional—affective, behavioral, and cognitive—responses to robotization, and the supportive context securing implementation.
AlvessonM. (2003). Beyond neopositivists, romantics, and localists: A reflexive approach to interviews. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 13-33. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040678
2.
AshforthB. E.SchinoffB. S.BricksonS. L. (2020). My company is friendly,” “Mine’s a rebel”: Anthropomorphism and shifting organizational identity from “what” to “who”. Academy of Management Review, 45(1), 29-57. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0496
3.
BalogunJ.BartunekJ. M.DoB. (2015). Senior managers’ sensemaking and responses to strategic change. Organization Science, 26(4), 960-979. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.0985
4.
BalogunJ.JohnsonG. (2005). From intended strategies to unintended outcomes: The impact of change recipient sensemaking. Organization Studies, 26(11), 1573-1601. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840605054624
5.
BarleyS. R. (1986). Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(1), 78. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392767
6.
BarleyS. R. (2015). Why the internet makes buying a car less loathsome: How technologies change role relations. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1(1), 31-60. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2013.0016
7.
BartunekJ. M.RousseauD. M.RudolphJ. W.DePalmaJ. A. (2006). On the receiving end: Sensemaking, emotion, and assessments of an organizational change initiated by others. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(2), 182-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886305285455
8.
BuchananD.DawsonP. (2007). Discourse and audience: Organizational change as multi-story process. Journal of Management Studies, 44(5), 669-686. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00669.x
9.
CartonA. M. (2018). “I’m not mopping the floors, I’m putting a man on the moon”: How NASA leaders enhanced the meaningfulness of work by changing the meaning of work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(2), 323-369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217713748
CzarniawskaB. (2004). Narratives in social science research. Sage.
12.
DentE. B.GoldbergS. G. (1999). Challenging “resistance to change”. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35(1), 25-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886399351003
13.
EisenhardtK. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532. https://doi.org/10.2307/258557
FordJ. D.FordL. W.D’AmelioA. (2008). Resistance to change: The rest of the story. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 362-377. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.31193235
16.
GioiaD. A.ChittipeddiK. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433-448. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250120604
17.
GliksonE.WoolleyA. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 627-660. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057
18.
Golden-BiddleK.MaoJ. (2012). Implementing positive change. In CameronK. S.SpreitzerG. M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 763-772). Oxford University Press.
19.
GujralV.MalikN.TaraporevalaZ. (2019). Rewriting the rules: Succeeding in the new retail banking landscape (Vol. February). McKinsey & Company. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54666-7
20.
HuyQ. N. (2011). How middle managers’ group-focus emotions and social identities influence strategy implementation. Strategic Management Journal, 32(13), 1387-1410. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.961
21.
HuyQ. N.CorleyK. G.KraatzM. S. (2014). From support to mutiny: Shifting legitimacy judgments and emotional reactions impacting the implementation of radical change. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6), 1650-1680. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0074
22.
KotterJ. P. (1995). Leading change. Harvard Business Press.
23.
LacityM. C.WillcocksL. P. (2016). A new approach to automating services. MIT Sloan Management Review, 58(1), 41-49. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/68135/
24.
LacityM. C.WillcocksL. P.CraigA. (2015). Robotic process automation at telefónica O2 (The Outsourcing Unit Working Research Paper Series Paper 15/02). London School of Economics. https://www.outsourcingunit.org
LazarusR. S. (1999). The cognition-emotion debate: A bit of history. In DalgleishT.PowerM. (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and emotion (pp. 3-19). Wiley.
27.
LogemannM.PiekkariR.CornelissenJ. P. (2019). The sense of it all: Framing and narratives in sensegiving about a strategic change. Long Range Planning, 52(5), 101852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.10.002
MaitlisS.ChristiansonM. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2014.873177
30.
OregS. (2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(1), 73-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320500451247
31.
OregS.BartunekJ. M.LeeG.DoB. (2018). An affect-based model of recipients’ responses to organizational change events. Academy of Management Review, 43(1), 65-86. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0335
32.
OregS.BersonY. (2019). Leaders’ impact on organizational change: Bridging theoretical and methodological chasms. Academy of Management Annals, 13(1), 272-307. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0138
33.
OregS.VakolaM.ArmenakisA. A. (2011). Change recipients’ reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(4), 461-524. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886310396550
PettigrewA. M.FerlieE.McKeeL. (1992). Shaping strategic change—The case of the NHS in the 1980s. Public Money & Management, 12(3), 27-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540969209387719
37.
PideritS. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. The Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 783. https://doi.org/10.2307/259206
38.
RaffertyA. E.GriffinM. A. (2006). Perceptions of organizational change: A stress and coping perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(5), 1154-1162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1154
39.
RaischS.KrakowskiS. (2020). Artificial intelligence and management: The automation–augmentation paradox. Academy of Management Review, 46(1), 192–210. https://doi.org/10.5465/2018.0072
40.
SchneiderP.StingF. J. (2020). Employees’ perspectives on digitalization-induced change: Exploring frames of industry 4.0. Academy of Management Discoveries, 6(3), 406-435. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2019.0012
41.
SonensheinS. (2010). We’re changing—or are we? Untangling the role of progressive, regressive, and stability narratives during strategic change implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 477-512. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.51467638
42.
SonensheinS.DholakiaU. (2012). Explaining employee engagement with strategic change implementation: A meaning-making approach. Organization Science, 23(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0651
43.
YinR. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.
