Call for papers

[Janetta Knighton]

Call for Papers

Brave New Work: The Future of Work, Tasks and Jobs




MIS Quarterly Executive Special Issue

Guest editors:

Fred Niederman, St. Louis University, fred.niederman at slu.edu

Damien Joseph, National Technical University of Singapore,
ADJOSEPH at ntu.edu.sg

Hope Koch, Baylor University, Hope_Koch at baylor.edu

Tim Weitzel, University of Bamberg, tim.weitzel at uni-bamberg.de

Elizabeth Baker, Virginia Commonwealth University, bakerew at vcu.edu

Mary Sumner, Mary.B.Sumner-1 at ou.edu





Overview



The rapid evolution of information technology (IT) has undoubtedly
influenced the nature of:

Jobs (the combination of tasks listed and unlisted in job descriptions),

Work (the type of tasks we perform and how we perform them),

Careers (the movement over time from one job to another), and

Employment (the broad set of relations between employees and organizations).

Clearly IT has influenced jobs, work, careers, and employment through the
automation of otherwise solely human tasks and the secondary effects of how
individuals and organizations organize these tasks as well as their effects
on society at large (Bailey and Barley, 2020; Willcocks, 2020).

With the evolution of computing from platform to platform (Hirschheim and
Klein, 2012; Niederman et al., 2016), we have seen the need for tasks and
the skills to do them arise, become obsolete, and simply change. Given the
continuation of Moore’s Law, there is every reason to believe that new
platforms and applications will continue to emerge, change how we undertake
tasks, and eventually initiate reshaping organizational and societal
approaches to employment.

These transformations affect:

IT professionals (those directly designing, building, deploying and
maintaining/operating IT),

Employees applying computer technology to purposes outside of IT (e.g., the
flier of the drone, rather than the one programming its guidance system),
and ​

Those engaged in traditional jobs with minimal use of computing (though as
information systems increasinglyinfiltrate machinery like tractors or
create substitutes like 3D printing for an assembly line, these may be
shrinking in proportion of the workforce, if not gross numbers).

The evolution of tools affects not only the number of jobs and how they are
distributed, but also how and even where work is performed. Coming out of
the pandemic lockdown, the sudden shift of many jobs from face to face to
remote, followed by a set of new hybrid options, presents salient problems
and opportunities for organizations.

Looking at the issues of the future of work as a hierarchy, we might be
able to examine the plausible effects of individual technologies like
blockchain and chatbots while also considering both the technical and
social impacts of their possible, perhaps likely, convergence (Chiasson,
et. al, 2018).

Individual employees will need to consider the effects on what work
possibilities are open to them, which they prefer, how to pursue opportunities,
and how to fulfill obligations.

Organizations will need to consider which tools to invest in (both for
products and services offered, but also for efficient and humane means of
production). Human resource concerns across the entire lifespan of
engagement from recruiting to retirement may need to be reconsidered and
reorganized. IT leaders planning for future personnel needs must account
for strategic initiatives while remaining responsive to outside trends and
forces.

Society in the sense of multitudinous individual decisions and their
emergent effects will set limits on what is allowed and acceptable in
creating employment relationships (Susskind, 2020). Basic relationships
between humans and work may need reconsideration as software guided agents
become increasingly better at a broader range of tasks that are exclusive
to humans now. Will humans find ways to maintain opportunities for work if
machinery can better perform any task? If jobs become unnecessary or
scarce, how will basic resources be distributed among humans? Will a future
with more leisure lead to utopian freedoms or dystopian nightmares (or how
will be two be combined)? What will humans who do not need to work do to
support an identity as a contributor to society and structure their time?

The central concern is how organizations, particularly IT managers and
employees, especially IT specialists or "power users," can best prepare for
the changes suggested by the rapid evolution of computing technologies.

The project seeks future-oriented papers (Glenn & Gordon,2009, Gray and
Hovav, 2008; Hovorka & Peter, 2022),including:

(1) conceptual studies focused on extrapolation of trends(particularly
revealing inferences of converging technologies, social norms, and
organizational structures);

(2) empirical studies, particularly cases, showing current conceptualizations
of the future and planning for future organizational work-related
systems and/or
recent actions taken anticipating future work needs, relationships, or
structures (Lalot et al., 2020);

(3) empirical or conceptual papers, particularly constructed from public
sources like the United Nations and/or national/regional labor organizations
, forecasting from current and recently past data;

(4) studies, particularly Delphi and/or scenario based, showing either how
individuals currently conceptualize the future of work or envision plausible
futures and the values they suggest(Fergnani and Song, 2020, Markus &
Mentzer, 2014; Walsham, 2012); and

(5) education-oriented studies in terms of organizations and/or educational
institutions, planning for future skills and abilities for yet unknown
technologies and techniques for performing tasks.

Because the intended primary audience for this work is academics valuing
practice and practitioners, the emphasis is decidedly on relevance. Three
main criteria will be usefulness – can such a future stimulate useful
planning, values clarification and/or actions; plausibility – can
intermediate steps leading to such a future be articulated, even if
requiring some leaps of assumed not yet realized capabilities; and surprise
– can readers experience: “I hadn’t thought of that before.”

Future studies work largely requires a different paradigm and mindset from
traditional IS research. It is not about prediction(Carmel and Sawyer (2023),
but about setting out multiple logical possibilities (in the spirit of
“what if” analysis); it is not about “proving” the strength of causal
relationships among variables, but rather illuminating the
interrelationships within and between systems; and while there are multiple
methods for conducting such research, strict adherence to a particular
method’s detailed steps is less important than using solid judgment
revealing important insights.

The centrality of focus on information technology may vary but must be
present. Submitted papers must speak to the IS practitioner and/or IS
academic audience. There must be a strong and clear connection to IS in the
paper. Where articles are likely to focus on particular geographic
locations or individual organizations, we would be looking for specificity
in these cases but encourage discussion, even speculation, about how the
lessons (or cautions) might be applied elsewhere.

Some potential topics are shown below. Other relevant topics are welcome.
• Assuming that the nature of work will continue changing, how will IT
faculty adjust teaching style, curriculum and courses to accommodate these
changes? How will organizations convey changing needs, requirements, and
preferences to IT faculty?


• How can accumulated technology or specific families of them (e.g.,
metaverse, blockchain) be expected to change work, jobs, and/or tasks? How
will these in turn affect the way organizations are structured and
individualsconnect into them?


• Given radical reshaping of the way society structures work, jobs, and
distribution of resources, what support would be needed from information
technologies? How would information technologies contribute to the new
order, and what secondary, tertiary, and further impacts might arise from
these sorts of changes?


• Are there examples of work arrangements existing now that can provide a
glimpse of future possibilities? How did these come about? What seems to be
required to make these effective (to the extent that they are)?


• Average or typical generational characteristics (e.g., boomers versus gen
Z) seem to be evolving and taking new forms. How would this affect the
trajectory of organizational work and what role would IT play in supporting
and/or inhibiting this?


• Given continued information technology evolution and growth in
capabilities, what ethical, moral, and practical consequences can be
inferred? Are there lessons from adoption of technologies in the past that
might guide or help us to improve the equity and benefits derived from the
emergence of new ones?





Conceptual papers should focus on “big picture” issues.Proposed
counterfactuals (e.g., states projected for the future without currently
being instantiated) need not be imminent, or even likely, but should
generate consideration of salient issues and trigger provocative responses. The
evaluation of such papers cannot be based on a “checklist” or precise adherence
tomandated steps, but rather on the subjective views of reviewers,
associate editors, and workshop/special issue editors.

Submission and Review

Consult the following MIS Quarterly Executive editorials beforesubmission:

“Guidance for Research Articles Submitted to MIS Quarterly Executive – Where
 Research Shapes and is Shaped by Practice” (Volume 22, Issue 2) (available
at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/vol22/iss2/1/), and “Pathways to Writing
MIS Quarterly Executive Articles” (Volume 23, Issue 1)(available at:
https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/vol23/iss1/1/).



Consult the following Future Studies (including those among the references
listed below) and MIS Quarterly Executive for some sample papers. For
example:



Eden, Rebekah; Jones, Andrew Burton; Casey, Veronica; and Draheim, Michael
(2019) "Digital Transformation Requires Workforce Transformation," MIS
Quarterly Executive: Vol. 18: Iss. 1, Article 4.

Available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/vol18/iss1/4



Eckhardt, Andreas; Endter, Florian; Giordano, Anthony; and Somers, Paul
(2019) "Three Stages to a Virtual Workforce," MIS Quarterly Executive: Vol.
18: Iss. 1, Article 5.
Available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/vol18/iss1/5



Xiao, Xiao and Hedman, Jonas (2019) "How a Software Vendor Weathered the
Stormy Journey to the Cloud," MIS Quarterly Executive: Vol. 18: Iss. 1,
Article 6.
Available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/vol18/iss1/6



• Submissions will be subject to an initial screening for suitability;
suitable papers will be pre-reviewed

by the special issues editors and members of the editorial board

• Note that participation in the SIM pre-ICIS conference workshop is not
required for a journal submission

• Full paper submissions are due March 1, 2025.

• First round notifications will be sent to authors on May 1, 2025

• Paper resubmissions, based on editorial feedback, are due July 1, 2025

• Second round notifications will be sent to authors on August 1, 2025

• Publication time: December 2025

REFERENCES



Bailey, D.E. and Barley, S.R. (2020). Beyond design and use: How scholars
should study intelligent Technologies. Information and Organization 30
(2020) 100286. 1-12.

Carmel, E. and Sawyer, S. (2023). The multi-dimensional space of the
futures of work. Information Technology & People. Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 1-20. DOI
10.1108/ITP-12-2020-0857.

Chiasson, M., Davidson, E. & Winter, J. (2018) Philosophical foundations
for informing the future (S) through IS research. European Journal of
Information Systems, 27(3), 367-379.

Fergnani, A., and Song, Z. (2020). The six scenario archetypes framework: A
systematic investigation of science fiction films set in the future. Futures
124, 102645, pp. 1-21.

Glenn, J.C., & Gordon. (2009). Futures research methodology (Version 3).
American Council for the UN University, Washington, DC.

Gray, P. and Hovav, A. (2008). From Hindsight to Foresight: Applying
Futures Research Techniques in Information Systems.Communications of the
Association for Information Systems, Volume 22 Article 12, pp. 211-234.
DOI: 10.17705/1CAIS.02212.

Hirschheim, R. and Klein, H.K. (2012). A Glorious and Not-So-Short History
of the Information Systems Field. Journal of the Association for
Information System, Vol. 13, Issue 4, pp. 188-235.

Hovorka, D.S., & Peter, S. (2022). Speculatively engaging future(s): four
theses. MIS Quarterly, 45(1), 461-466.

Lalot, F., Ahvenharju, S., Minkkinen, M., and Wensing, E. (2020). Aware of
the Future? Development and Validation of the Futures Consciousness
Scale. European
Journal of Psychological Assessment (2020), 36(5), 874–888.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000565.

Markus, M. L., & Mentzer, K. (2014). Foresight for a responsible future
with ICT. Information Systems Frontiers, 16(3), 353-368.

Niederman, F., Ferratt, T.W., Trauth, E.M. (2016). On the Co-Evolution of
Information Technology and Information Systems Personnel. Database for
Advances in Information Systems; 47(1), 29–50.
https://doi-org.ezp.slu.edu/10.1145/2894216.2894219.

Susskind, D. (2020). A World Without Work: Technology, Automation, and How
We Should Respond. New York, Henry Holt and Company.

Walsham, G. (2012). Are we making a better world with ICTs? Reflections on
a future agenda for the IS field. Journal of Information Technology, 27(2),
87-93.

Willcocks, L. (2020). Robo-Apocalypse cancelled? Reframing the automation
and future of work debate. Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 35(4)
286–302. DOI: 10.1177/0268396220925830
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://isworld.org/pipermail/aisworld_isworld.org/attachments/20250128/87903574/attachment.htm>