Discovering how the world of work is changing

Between artificial intelligence and the development of new relationships of subordination, just think of the world of the gig economy, without taking into account the disruptive effect that environmentalism and feminism are having on perception of hierarchies and on the exercise of leadership, one might ask whether speculation and social investigation still make sense for deciphering a world of work constantly evolving.

We talked about it with Adriano Solidoro, professor of Information Systems for Knowledge Management at the University of Milan-Bicocca and organizer, together with professors Barbara Quacquarelli and Francesco Paoletti, of the 40th edition of the Colloquium.

The conference, promoted by Egos – European Group for Organisational Studies, from 4 to 6 July, will bring more than 3,000 social science researchers to Milan coming from over 100 countries to discuss the future of the world of work in such a complex period.

Over 1,000 research results will be presented in Milan, but the question is: do social sciences still make sense to understand the current world of work?

Organizational Studies, which are part of the social sciences, are proposed as a discipline for the original development and interdisciplinary debate of the different sciences that traditionally study organizations (economics, sociology, management, anthropology, etc.). In addition to the theoretical development typical of basic research, organizational studies offer tools and methods to entrepreneurs, managers, officials, professionals for the development and competitiveness of large, medium and small businesses, business networks, regional economic systems, central and local public administrations, non-profit organizations. Therefore, the question should be: how can academic knowledge be better perceived and integrated into the production systems of private businesses and the way public institutions operate?

What are the research challenges today to interpret the world of work?

One of the challenges is to better understand the meaning that work has for people and how organizations can participate in the search for this meaning. The expression “purpose” has been widely used in popular literature in recent years and, thus, the concept of time has also been a very current topic in research. The future of work and its meaning will be shaped by intrinsic needs, by people’s motivation and by crucial external factors such as human resources practices, leadership, the valorization of differences – not only of gender, but also of social and economic origin, of work, of work styles – of the co-design of roles, tasks and processes, so that people can also participate, at least in part, in decision-making and the definition of strategies.

What are the changes that need to be (and have been) further investigated?

The future of work is evolving in real time as organizations navigate profound changes in a shorter timeframe. Companies are experiencing supply chain disruptions, security threats, inflation, uncertain economic signals, and rising customer expectations, all while the labor market is not always dynamic enough. These accelerated transformations are putting more pressure on a workforce that has been living and working under unprecedented pressure for more than two years. Mental health is being challenged, and this has become a fairly widespread issue, as the term burnout has become a household word. At the same time, there is a greater demand for experimentation with ways of working, such as the demand for flexibility in work hours and locations, and a greater focus on personal values ​​and priorities.

In regards to AI penetration, what are the most interesting positions?

The development of AI raises profound questions. Perhaps the most pressing, however, is a relatively simple one. What does this mean for the economy? Many have high hopes. New research from Goldman Sachs suggests that widespread adoption of AI could eventually lead to a 7% or nearly $7 trillion increase in annual global GDP over a ten-year period. Academic studies indicate a three-percentage point increase in annual labor productivity growth in companies that adopt the technology, which would represent a huge increase in earnings over many years. But how can these expectations be realized? I still see the widespread illusion that technology alone can bring about this advancement for the economy, but technology, even the most advanced and innovative, must always be enabled by a context. And that context is organizations that have the ability to innovate in products, services, strategy, and processes, which requires people expertise and vision from leadership.

Can feminism work on inequalities in the world of work?

A feminist look at the future of work helps us gain a critical perspective. It helps us put people at the center, beyond their gender, drawing on the experiences, aspirations and realities of feminism that is certainly not just theoretical speculation. Starting from the perspective of activism therefore forces us to work to gain concrete insights from academic, but also legal and development and design perspectives that can help us think about inclusive futures and possibly create more just and positive digital, social and management work infrastructures.

At Egos in Milan, will there be research presented that has a perspective or an object of investigation that has been unexplored to date?

Queer theory has been used as a conceptual resource to study the experiences of homo/bisexual and/or trans minorities in the workplace, often focusing on how heteronormativity shapes the constitution of sexualities and genders. Queer theory has been an important avenue for questioning what is “normal” and normative in organizations and for critically examining the heteronormative aspects of everyday life. Queers have historically organized and continue to organize alternative, safer and more courageous spaces for identification where one is both freer from homo-, bi-, and transphobia and, at the same time, freer to be oneself, expressing one’s sexual and gender identities with less fear of risk, danger, harm, controversy, or other hardship. Defining queer becomes problematic, however, because for something or someone to be queer is to resist, or at least challenge, the process of categorization and the propositions of meaning on which a definition is based.

And what about the penetration of technology into organizations?

Another interesting strand is the study of how ignorance rules the world, which seeks to investigate how ignorance is shaped through technological structures and practices of power. With the rise of “smart technology,” people and organizations are increasingly connected and have vast knowledge at their fingertips. At the same time, we are seeing a rise in “fake news” and counter-narratives that are presented to hide the truth. Indeed, it has been pointed out that the sheer volume of “knowledge” that is now available to us via technology makes life more transparent, but also more opaque, as we cannot process all the available data and must choose what to ignore. As individuals and organizations head into an uncertain future, knowledge and ignorance chart their path in equal measure. How will organizations of the future use ignorance to their advantage? Can this be done in ethical ways?

Where is Italy at? Can we make comparisons with other countries?

Certainly in Italy the idea of ​​autocratic leadership is still too widespread, whereby those in power believe they always know more and pay little attention to the ideas of those around them. If in the past it was a very widespread style, today people struggle to have esteem and respect towards the autocratic leader. Furthermore, there are still too few women in leadership positions, and for the youngest the career paths are often too long and uncertain. But at the same time, professionalism and high skills and creativity are very widespread. Let’s say that the significant difference is between large companies and medium-small ones and between those who innovate by looking outside their organization and at research and those who have a conservative attitude.