IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v33y2022i1p83-104.html

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

Author

Listed:
  • Madeleine Rauch

    (Department of Strategy and Innovation, Copenhagen Business School, 2000 Fredriksberg, Denmark)

  • Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari

    (Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1AG, United Kingdom)

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Madeleine Rauch & Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari, 2022. "Waging War from Remote Cubicles: How Workers Cope with Technologies That Disrupt the Meaning and Morality of Their Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 83-104, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:33:y:2022:i:1:p:83-104
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2021.1555
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1555
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2021.1555?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul M. Leonardi, 2021. "COVID‐19 and the New Technologies of Organizing: Digital Exhaust, Digital Footprints, and Artificial Intelligence in the Wake of Remote Work," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 249-253, January.
    2. Diane E. Bailey & Paul M. Leonardi & Stephen R. Barley, 2012. "The Lure of the Virtual," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1485-1504, October.
    3. Stephen R. Barley & Debra E. Meyerson & Stine Grodal, 2011. "E-mail as a Source and Symbol of Stress," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 887-906, August.
    4. Pamela J. Hinds & Diane E. Bailey, 2003. "Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 615-632, December.
    5. Jeffrey Sanchez-Burks & Quy Nguyen Huy, 2009. "Emotional Aperture and Strategic Change: The Accurate Recognition of Collective Emotions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 22-34, February.
    6. Melissa Mazmanian & Wanda J. Orlikowski & JoAnne Yates, 2013. "The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1337-1357, October.
    7. Stephen R. Barley & Gideon Kunda, 2001. "Bringing Work Back In," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 76-95, February.
    8. Michael Barrett & Eivor Oborn & Wanda J. Orlikowski & JoAnne Yates, 2012. "Reconfiguring Boundary Relations: Robotic Innovations in Pharmacy Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1448-1466, October.
    9. Andrew H. Van de Ven & Marshall Scott Poole, 1990. "Methods for Studying Innovation Development in the Minnesota Innovation Research Program," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 313-335, August.
    10. Sven Ove Hansson, 2018. "How to Perform an Ethical Risk Analysis (eRA)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1820-1829, September.
    11. Matt Beane & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2015. "What Difference Does a Robot Make? The Material Enactment of Distributed Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1553-1573, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kratochvil, Renate, 2025. "Stepping in and stepping aside: Employees navigating digital transformation paradoxes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    2. Rojas, Alejandra & Gölgeci, Ismail & Santoro, Gabriele, 2025. "Navigating meaningful work: Exploring the impact of mobile telepresence robots on healthcare professionals," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    3. Diane E. Bailey & Samer Faraj & Pamela J. Hinds & Paul M. Leonardi & Georg von Krogh, 2022. "We Are All Theorists of Technology Now: A Relational Perspective on Emerging Technology and Organizing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 1-18, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katherine C. Kellogg, 2022. "Local Adaptation Without Work Intensification: Experimentalist Governance of Digital Technology for Mutually Beneficial Role Reconfiguration in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 571-599, March.
    2. Sarah Lebovitz & Hila Lifshitz-Assaf & Natalia Levina, 2022. "To Engage or Not to Engage with AI for Critical Judgments: How Professionals Deal with Opacity When Using AI for Medical Diagnosis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 126-148, January.
    3. Callen Anthony & Beth A. Bechky & Anne-Laure Fayard, 2023. "“Collaborating” with AI: Taking a System View to Explore the Future of Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 1672-1694, September.
    4. Olive, Mattia Vincenzo & Gastaldi, Luca & Appio, Francesco Paolo, 2026. "Relational coordination in medical work: The role of digital health practices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    5. Ruthanne Huising, 2014. "The Erosion of Expert Control Through Censure Episodes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1633-1661, December.
    6. Matt Beane & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2015. "What Difference Does a Robot Make? The Material Enactment of Distributed Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1553-1573, December.
    7. Christensen, Peter Holdt & Foss, Nicolai J., 2021. "Present-but-online: How mobile devices may harm purposeful co-presence in organizations (and what can be done about it)," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 84-94.
    8. Jiuh‐Biing Sheu & Tsan‐Ming Choi, 2023. "Can we work more safely and healthily with robot partners? A human‐friendly robot–human‐coordinated order fulfillment scheme," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(3), pages 794-812, March.
    9. Giurge, Laura M. & Bohns, Vanessa K., 2021. "You don’t need to answer right away! Receivers overestimate how quickly senders expect responses to non-urgent work emails," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 114-128.
    10. Alaimo, Cristina & Kallinikos, Jannis, 2022. "Organizations decentered: data objects, technology and knowledge," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112470, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Ebru Dilan & Mehmet N. Aydin, 2019. "An Integrated Framework for Examining Innovation Alignment in Organizations," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(04), pages 1-28, June.
    12. Youngjin Yoo & Richard J. Boland & Kalle Lyytinen & Ann Majchrzak, 2012. "Organizing for Innovation in the Digitized World," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1398-1408, October.
    13. Szennay, Áron & Radácsi, László & Timár, Gigi, 2021. "Szabadúszók Magyarországon. Egy új kutatási program elméleti háttere és első empirikus eredményei [Freelancers in Hungary: the theoretical background and initial empirical results of a new research programme]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(S11), pages 78-106.
    14. Jasmina Chauvin & Prithwiraj Choudhury & Tommy Pan Fang, 2024. "Working Around the Clock: Temporal Distance, Intrafirm Communication, and Time Shifting of the Employee Workday," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(5), pages 1660-1681, September.
    15. Leroy Gonsalves, 2023. "Work Un(Interrupted): How Non-territorial Space Shapes Worker Control over Social Interaction," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 1651-1671, September.
    16. Matthew Beane & Callen Anthony, 2024. "Inverted Apprenticeship: How Senior Occupational Members Develop Practical Expertise and Preserve Their Position When New Technologies Arrive," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 405-431, March.
    17. Linus Dahlander & Siobhan O'Mahony, 2011. "Progressing to the Center: Coordinating Project Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 961-979, August.
    18. Jenna E. Myers, 2024. "Triadic Technology Configuration: A Relational Perspective on Technologists’ Role in Shaping Cloud-Based Technologies," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 77(3), pages 307-335, May.
    19. Nathalie Greenan & Jean-Claude Sardas & Pascal Ughetto, 2020. "Organising the disconnection? Intense work and articulation of times and spaces in the design activities of an automotive company [Organiser la déconnexion ? Travail intense et articulation des temps et des espaces dans les activités de conception," Post-Print halshs-03145158, HAL.
    20. Gajendran, Ravi S. & Loewenstein, Jeffrey & Choi, Hyeran & Ozgen, Sibel, 2022. "Hidden costs of text-based electronic communication on complex reasoning tasks: Motivation maintenance and impaired downstream performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:33:y:2022:i:1:p:83-104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.