How does artificial intelligence (AI) re-shape the temporal experience of work? We argue that AI does not determine work tempo on its own. Its temporal force is configured by leaders and enacted by workers. Building on structuration theory, we develop a process model in which leaders configure AI systems along the dimensions of temporal authority and interaction frequency, generating AI-driven time pressure that workers navigate through temporal job crafting. Whether this synchronization becomes subjugating or agentic depends on leaders' temporal leadership, and the resulting individual and collective outcomes feed back to prompt continual re-configuration, with no optimal end. Our work contributes a non-deterministic account of AI and time, re-positions temporal leadership as socio-technical governance, and extends entrainment theory by linking micro-level adaptation to macro-level collaborative dynamics.
Organizational silence (a state in which certain issues are not addressed in an organization) prevents open discussion among employees, hampers error detection and innovation, and contributes to the endurance of inefficacy and toxic work places. Applying a cultural lens, we develop a framework for understanding the environment in which organizational silence occurs. We propose that organizational silence cultures develop if silence deems adequate to solve adaptation problems, that they manifest at three layers in the form of artifacts, shared values and norms, and implicit basic assumptions, and that they persist through the combined operation of withholding, deafness, and censorship. Using an integrative review, we examine the propositions of our framework and show its usefulness to synthesize and advance knowledge. We identified adaptive functions organizational silence fulfils and derived four organizational silence culture types, explain how they manifest at three cultural layers, and how withholding, deafness, and censorship make them persist.
Impression management is often portrayed as a self-serving strategy for personal gain. We propose that impression management can also operate as a humanistic act-one in which actors generate favorable impressions through non-exploitative efforts to satisfy the psychological needs of audiences. Drawing on self-determination and signaling theories, we theorize that expressions of mindfulness, curiosity, and encouragement function as relational signals that fulfill audiences' needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence. When these signals are received as clear, reliable, and need-supportive, they generate experiences of validation, interest, and confidence that foster favorable impressions. We introduce the beacon metaphor to organize this process, illustrating how impression management can shift from instrumental self-presentation to need-supportive signaling, and we conceptualize impression formation as a reciprocal process whereby audience responses operate as countersignals. Our model shifts attention to the audience's experience of signaling and explains impression management as a relational, need-based process that is dynamically co-constructed.
Organizational change has long been understood as a problem of human resistance, often attributed to self-interest, misunderstanding, or low tolerance for uncertainty. Yet such explanations remain superficial, describing the symptoms of resistance rather than its sources. This paper argues that resistance to change is not merely psychological or cultural, but a manifestation of deeper constraints embedded in human cognition, organizational systems, and the structure of causality itself. Drawing on insights from cognitive neuroscience, systems theory, and complexity science, a multilevel framework is proposed to explain why change is inherently difficult to implement and sustain. At the human level, neurocognitive mechanisms such as loss aversion and synaptic strength bias individuals toward familiar routines. At the organizational level, systems principles such as homeostasis and free-energy minimization drive collective structures to preserve predictability and stability. At the causal level, the nonlinear dynamics of complex systems render cause-and-effect relationships opaque, making effective intervention uncertain. Together, these forces create a deep architecture of resistance that persists despite managerial effort or strategic intent. The paper concludes by discussing implications for theory and practice, suggesting that effective change requires designing interventions that align with, rather than oppose, these intrinsic constraints.
This article introduces the Cyclic Theory of Work-Family Identity Integration (WFII), which conceptualizes WFII, the perceived compatibility between work and family identities, as a critical mechanism for understanding and addressing inequities. Identity integration involves subjective sensemaking, but social environments tied to social identities, such as parenthood, gender, and cultural background, impose unique challenges to integrating work and family identities. We theorize that WFII reflects both individual differences and intergroup disparities, with the latter perpetuating structural biases through a self-reinforcing cycle. Crucially, WFII's malleability as a form of subjective sensemaking makes it a promising pathway for reducing inequities. By leveraging evidence from psychological interventions that create lasting effects, this framework underscores the complementary role of psychological approaches alongside contextual changes. Merging insights from work-family research, identity integration theories, and intervention scholarship, this theory offers strategies to disrupt inequities and promote equitable work and family outcomes across diverse populations.
