[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
research-article

Waging War from Remote Cubicles: : How Workers Cope with Technologies That Disrupt the Meaning and Morality of Their Work

Published: 01 January 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Technologies are known to alter social structures in the workplace, reconfigure roles and relationships, and disrupt status hierarchies. However, less attention has been given to how an emerging technology disrupts the meaning and moral values that tether people to their work and render it meaningful. To understand how workers respond to such an emerging technology, we undertook an inductive, qualitative study of military personnel working in unmanned aerial vehicles, or drone operations, for the U.S. Air Force. We draw on multiple data sources, including personal diaries kept by personnel involved in drone operations. We identified three characteristics of drone technology: remote-split operations, remote piloting of unmanned vehicles, and interaction through iconic representations. Our analysis suggests that drone technology has revolutionized warfare by (1) creating distanciated intimacy, (2) dissolving traditional spatio-temporal boundaries between work and personal life, and (3) redefining the legal and moral parameters of work. Drone program workers identified with these changes to their working environment in contradictory ways, which evoked emotional ambivalence about right and wrong. However, their organization gave them little help in alleviating their conflicting feelings. We illuminate how workers cope with such ambivalence when a technology transforms the meaning and morality of their work. We extend theory by showing that workers’ responses to a changed working environment as a result of a remote technology are not just based on how the technology changes workers’ tasks, roles, and status but also on how it affects their moral values.

References

[1]
Alvesson M, Robertson M (2016) Money matters: Teflonic identity maneuvering in the investment banking sector. Organ. Stud. 37(1):7–34.
[2]
Amabile T, Kramer S (2011) The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement, and Creativity at Work (Harvard Business Review Press, Cambridge, MA).
[3]
Ashforth BE, Kreiner GE, Fugate M (2000) All in a day’s work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. Acad. Management Rev. 25(3):472–491.
[4]
Ashforth BE, Kreiner GE, Clark MA, Fugate M (2007) Normalizing dirty work: Managerial tactics for countering occupational taint. Acad. Management J. 50(1):149–174.
[5]
Bailey D, Barley S (2020) Beyond design and use: How scholars should study intelligent technologies. Inform. Organ. 30(2):100286.
[6]
Bailey DE, Leonardi PM, Barley SR (2012) The lure of the virtual. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1485–1504.
[7]
Baumeister RF, Vohs KD (2002) The pursuit of meaningfulness in life. Snyder CR, Lopez SJ, eds. Handbook of Positive Psychology (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 608–618.
[8]
Barley SR (1986) Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from observations of ct scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 31(1):78–108.
[9]
Barley SR (1990) The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35:61–103.
[10]
Barley SR (2019) How Do Technologies Change Organizations? Work and Technological Change (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).
[11]
Barley SR (2020) Work and Technological Change (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).
[12]
Barley SR, Kunda G (2001) Bringing work back in. Organ. Sci. 12(1):76–95.
[13]
Barley SR, Bechky BA, Milliken FJ (2017) The changing nature of work: Careers, identities, and work lives in the 21st century. Acad. Management Discovery 3(2):111–115.
[14]
Barley SR, Meyerson DE, Grodal S (2011) Email as a source and symbol of stress. Organ. Sci. 22(4):887–906.
[15]
Barrett M, Oborn E, Orlikowski WJ, Yates J (2012) Reconfiguring boundary relations: Robotic innovations in pharmacy work. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1448–1466.
[16]
Beaudry A, Pinsonneault A (2010) The other side of acceptance: Studying the direct and indirect effects of emotions on information technology use. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 34(4):689–710.
[17]
Beane M (2018) Shadow learning: Building robotic surgical skill when approved means fail. Adm. Sci. Q. 64(1):87–123.
[18]
Beane M, Orlikowski WJ (2015) What difference does a robot make? The material enactment of distributed coordination. Organ. Sci. 26(6):1553–1573.
[19]
Bechky BA (2020) Evaluative spillovers from technological occupational practices in forensic science. Admin. Sci. Quart. 65(3):606–643.
[20]
Biernacki P, Waldorf D (1981) Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociol. Methods Res. 10(2):141–163.
[21]
Boyle MJ (2015) The legal and ethical implications of drone warfare. Internat. J. Human Rights 19(2):105–126.
[22]
Brayne S (2017) Big data surveillance: The case of policing. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 82(5):977–1008.
[23]
Brusoni S, Vaccaro A (2017) Ethics, technology and organizational innovation. J. Bus. Ethics 143:223–226.
[24]
Bunderson J, Thompson J (2009) The call of the wild: Zookeepers, callings, and the double-edged sword of deeply meaningful work. Admin. Sci. Quart. 54(1):32–57.
[25]
Chell E (2004) Critical incident technique. Cassell C, Symon G, eds. Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research (Sage), 1515–1539.
[26]
Corbin J, Strauss A (1990) Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociol. 13(1):3–21.
[27]
Coser RL (1979) Training in Ambiguity: Learning Through Doing in a Mental Hospital (Free Press, New York).
[28]
Cullen TM (2011) The MQ-9 Reaper remotely piloted aircraft: Humans and machines in action. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
[29]
Curchod C, Patriotta G, Cohen L, Neysen N (2020) Working for an algorithm: Power asymmetries and agency in online work settings. Admin. Sci. Quart. 65(3):644–676.
[30]
de Rond M, Lok J (2016) Some things can never be unseen: The role of context in psychological injury at war. Acad. Management J. 59(6):1965–1993.
[31]
Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44:350–383.
[32]
Elish MC (2017) Remote split: A history of US drone operations and the distributed labor of war. Sci. Tech. Human Values 42(6):1100–1131.
[33]
Elish MC (2018) 24/7: Drone Operations and the Distributed Work of Work (Columbia University).
[34]
Elsbach K (1999) An expanded model of organizational identification. Sutton RI, Staw BM, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 21 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 163–200.
[35]
Evans J (2021) How professionals construct moral authority: Expanding boundaries of expert authority in stem cell science. Admin. Sci. Quart. 66(4):989–1036.
[36]
Faraj S, Pachidi S, Sayegh K (2018) Working and organizing in the age of the learning algorithm. Inform. Organ. 28(1):62–70.
[37]
Fayard AL, Stigliani I, Bechky BA (2017) How nascent occupations construct a mandate: The case of service designers’ ethos. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(2):270–303.
[38]
Foucault M (1982) Technologies of the self.Technologies of the Self (University of Massachusetts Press), 16–49.
[39]
Fong CT (2006) The effects of emotional ambivalence on creativity. Acad. Management J. 49(5):1016–1030.
[40]
Frankl V (1959) Man’s Search for Meaning (Hodder & Stoughton, London).
[41]
Freidson E (2001) Professionalism: The Third Logic (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).
[42]
Friedland R (2018) Moving institutional logics forward: Emotion and meaningful material practice. Organ. Stud. 39(4):515–542.
[43]
Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (Aldine Publishing).
[44]
Glikson E, Woolley AW (2020) Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Acad. Management Ann. 14(2):627–660.
[45]
Hansson SO (2018) How to perform an ethical risk analysis. Risk Anal. 38(9):1820–1829.
[46]
Hinds PJ, Bailey DE (2003) Out of sight, out of sync: Understanding conflict in distributed teams. Organ. Sci. 14(6):615–632.
[47]
Hirschhorn L (1984) Beyond Mechanization (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
[48]
Hirschman AO (1970) Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Response to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).
[49]
Jasper JM (2011) Emotions and social movements: Twenty years of theory and research. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 37:285–303.
[50]
Kahn WA (2019) Dynamics and implications of distress organizing. Acad. Management J. 62(5):1471–1497.
[51]
Kellogg K, Valentine M, Christin A (2019) Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Acad. Management Ann. 14(1):366–410.
[52]
Klein J, Amis J (2021) The dynamics of framing: Image, emotion, and the European migration crisis. Acad. Management J. 64(5):1324–1354.
[53]
Klein K, Boals A (2001) Expressive writing can increase working memory capacity. J. Experiment. Psych. 130(3):520–533.
[54]
Kreuzer M (2014) Remotely Piloted Aircraft: Evolution, Diffusion, and the Future of Air Warfare (Princeton University, Princeton, NJ).
[55]
Kroll J, Egan E (2004) Psychiatry, moral worry, and moral emotions. J. Psychiatric Practice 10:352–360.
[56]
Kunda G (2006) Engineering Culture: Control and Commitment in a High-Tech Corporation, revised ed. (Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA).
[57]
Leonardi PM, Barley SR (2010) What’s under construction here? Social action, materiality, and power in constructivist studies of technology and organizing. Acad. Management Ann. 4(1):1–51.
[58]
Leonardi PM, Treem JW (2020) Behavioral visibility: A new paradigm for organization studies in the age of digitization, digitalization, and datafication. Organ. Stud. 41(12):1601–1625.
[59]
Leonardi PM (2021) COVID-19 and the new technologies of organizing: digital exhaust, digital footprints, and artificial intelligence in the wake of remote work. J. Management Stud. 58:1.
[60]
Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry (Sage Publications).
[61]
Locke K (2001) Grounded Theory in Management Research (Sage Publications).
[62]
Mazmanian M (2013) Avoiding the trap of constant connectivity: When congruent frames allow for heterogeneous practices. Acad. Management J. 56(5):1225–1250.
[63]
Mazmanian M, Orlikowski WJ, Yates J (2013) The Autonomy paradox: The implication of mobile email devices for knowledge professionals. Organ. Sci. 24(5):1337–1357.
[64]
Möhlmann M, Zalmanson L, Henfridsson O, Gregory RW (2020) Algorithmic management of work on online labor platforms: When matching meets control. Management Inform. Systems Quart.
[65]
Nord WR, Brief AP, Atieh JM, Doherty EM (1990). Studying meanings of work: the case of work values. Brief AP, Nord WR, eds. Issues in Organization and Management Series. Meanings of Occupational Work: A Collection of Essays (Lexington Books/D.C. Heath and Com), 21–64.
[66]
Nurmi N, Hinds PJ (2020) Work design for global professionals: Connectivity demands, connectivity behaviors, and their effects on psychological and behavioral outcomes. Organ. Stud. 41(2):1697–1724.
[67]
O’Neill OA, Rothbard N (2017) Is love all you need? The effects of emotional culture, suppression, and work–family conflict on firefighter risk-taking and health. Acad. Management J. 60(1):78–108.
[68]
Oreg S, Bartunek J, Lee G, Do B (2018) An affect-based model of recipients’ responses to organizational change events. Acad. Management Rev. 43:65–86.
[69]
Pachidi S, Berends H, Faraj S, Huysman M (2020) Make way for the algorithms: Symbolic actions and change in a regime of knowing. Organ. Sci. 32(1):18–41.
[70]
Perrow C (1983) The organizational context of human factors engineering. Admin. Sci. Quart. 28(4):521–541.
[71]
Perrow C (1999) Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).
[72]
Petriglieri G, Ashford SJ, Wrzesniewski A (2019) Agony and ecstasy in the gig economy: Cultivating holding environments for precarious and personalized work identities. Admin. Sci. Quart. 64(1):124–170.
[73]
Pratt MG (2000) The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: Managing identification among Amway distributors. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45:456–493.
[74]
Pratt MG, Doucet L (2000) Ambivalent feelings in organizational relationships. Fineman S, ed. Emotions in Organizations (Sage, London), 204–226.
[75]
Pratt MG (2008) Fitting oval pegs into round holes tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals. Organ. Res. Methods 11(3):481–509.
[76]
Radcliffe LS (2017) Capturing the complexity of daily workplace experiences using qualitative diaries. Cassel C, Cuncliffe A, Grandy G, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods (Sage Publications), 188–204.
[77]
Rauch M, Ansari S (2021) Diaries as a methodological innovation for studying grand challenges. Res. Sociol. Organ. In press.
[78]
Rogers J (2019) The dark side of our drone future. Bull. Atomic Scientists, https://thebulletin.org/2019/10/the-dark-side-of-our-drone-future/
[79]
Rosso BD, Bekas KH, Wrzesniewski A (2010) On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review. Res. Organ. Behav. 30:91–127.
[80]
Sanchez-Burks J, Huy QN (2009) Emotional aperture and strategic change: The accurate recognition of collective emotions. Organ. Sci. 20(1):22–34.
[81]
Schabram K, Maitlis S (2017) Negotiating the challenges of a calling: Emotion and enacted sensemaking in animal shelter work. Acad. Management J. 60(2):584–609.
[82]
Schwarz E (2018) Death Machines: The Ethics of Violent Technologies (Manchester University Press).
[83]
Schwartz SH (1992) Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Zanna MP, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 25 (Academic Press, New York), 1–65.
[84]
Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques, and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed. (Sage Publications).
[85]
Taylor SJ, Bogdan R (1984) Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: The Search for Meaning, 2nd ed. (Wiley, New York).
[86]
Thompson J, Bunderson J (2003) Violations of principle: Ideological currency in the psychological contract. Acad. Management Rev. 28(4):571–586.
[87]
United Nations (2020) Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions to the Human Rights Council. Accessed January 3, 2021, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G20/211/32/PDF/G2021132.pdf?OpenElement.
[88]
Van de Ven AH, Poole MS (1990) Methods for studying innovation development in the Minnesota Innovation Research Program. Organ. Sci. 1(3):313–335.
[89]
Vertesi J (2014) Seeing Like a Rover How Robots, Teams, and Images Craft Knowledge of Mars (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).
[90]
von Krogh G (2018) Artificial intelligence in organizations: New opportunities for phenomenon-based theorizing. Acad. Managment Discovery 4(4):404–409.
[91]
von Krogh G (2020) Building capacity for empirical discovering in management and organization studies. Acad. Management Discovery 6(2):159–164.
[92]
von Krogh GV, Haefliger S, Spaeth S, Wallin MW (2012) Carrots and rainbows: Motivation and social practice in open source software development. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 36(2):649–676.
[93]
Voronov M, Vince R (2012) Integrating emotions into the analysis of institutional work. Acad. Management Rev. 37(1):58–81.
[94]
Voronov M, Weber K (2016) The heart of institutions: Emotional competence and institutional actorhood. Acad. Management Rev. 41(3):456–478.
[95]
Weick KE (1979) The Social Psychology of Organizing, 2nd ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).
[96]
Wrzesniewski A (2012) Callings. Cameron KS, Spreitzer GM, eds. Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 45–55.
[97]
Zerubavel E (1991) The Fine Line: Making Distinctions in Everyday Life (Free Press, New York).
[98]
Zietsma C, Toubiana M, Voronov M, Roberts A (2018) Emotions in Organization Theory (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).
[99]
Zuboff S (1988) In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power (Basic Books, New York).
[100]
Zuboff S (2019) The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power (Public Affairs).

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Organization Science
Organization Science  Volume 33, Issue 1
January-February 2022
496 pages
ISSN:1526-5455
DOI:10.1287/orsc.2022.33.issue-1
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

INFORMS

Linthicum, MD, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 January 2022
Accepted: 27 October 2021
Received: 15 January 2020

Author Tags

  1. emerging technology
  2. drones
  3. emotional ambivalence
  4. emotions
  5. remote control
  6. moral emotions
  7. war
  8. military

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 20 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media