Search results

This paper aims to provide empirical evidence on adopting artificial intelligence (AI), including generative AI, in knowledge management (KM) processes and its impact on organisational decision-making. Specifically, the study addresses three key research questions: RQ1: How is (generative) AI adopted within KM processes in organisations? RQ2: What factors influence the adoption of AI in these processes, either facilitating or inhibiting it? RQ3: How does AI adoption in KM processes affect organisational decision-making?

An explorative investigation has been conducted through semi-structured interviews with KM and AI experts from a worldwide sample of 52 mostly private, large and for-profit organisations. Interviews have been analysed through a mixed thematic analysis.

The study provides an original framework in which the three investigated concepts are interconnected according to a dual relationship: linear and retroactive and 20 factors affecting AI adoption within KM processes.

The provided model guides managers in improving their organisational decision-making through AI adoption in KM processes. Moreover, according to the rational decision-making model, the authors propose a six-step systematic procedure for managers.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that simultaneously addresses AI, KM and decision-making and provides an integrated framework showing the relationships between them, allowing organisations to better and practically understand how to ameliorate their decision-making through AI adoption in KM processes.

The recent pandemic (COVID-19) and the continuous ICT advancements have resulted in increased levels of technostress. On this basis, the present work tried to explore how technostress influences employees’ turnover intention with the mediation of work-exhaustion. Deploying the theoretical lens of job demands-resources theory, the authors also aim to investigate the part that positive psychological capital (PsyCap) has to play as a moderator in between technostress and work-exhaustion.

The study utilizes a time-lagged methodological design; data was gathered from 544 Indian IT employees. Additionally, PLS-SEM was used to carry out the aforementioned moderation-mediation analysis.

All the hypotheses proposed were confirmed. It was found that technostress significantly impacts employees’ turnover intention. Additionally, work-exhaustion does mediate the relationship between technostress and employees’ turnover intention. Furthermore, PsyCap did play the role of a moderator between Technostress and work-exhaustion.

This paper provides an augmented understanding of technostress in IT organizations and highlights the role of personal resources in aiding employees’ to deal with technostress.

This study is one of the early studies to highlight the role of positive psychological capital in mitigating the impact of technology-induced exhaustion and employees’ turnover intention.

Quality 4.0 is being presented as the new stage of quality development. However, its overlying concept and rationale are still hard to define. To better understand what different authors and studies advocate being Quality 4.0, a systematic literature review was undertaken on the topic. This paper presents the results of such review, providing some avenues for further research on quality management.

The documents for the systematic literature review have been searched on the Scopus database, using the search equation: [TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Quality 4.0”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (Quality Management” AND (“Industry 4.0” OR “Fourth Industr*” OR i4.0))]. Documents were filtered by language and by type. Of the 367 documents identified, 146 were submitted to exploratory content analysis.

The analyzed documents essentially provide theoretical discussions on what Quality 4.0 is or should be. Five categories have emerged from the content analysis undertaken: Industry 4.0 and the Rise of a New Approach to Quality; Motivations, Readiness Factors and Barriers to a Quality 4.0 Approach; Digital Quality Management Systems; Combination of Quality Tools and Lean Methodologies and Quality 4.0 Professionals.

It was hard to find studies reporting how quality is actually being managed in organizations that already operate in the Industry 4.0 paradigm. Answers could not be found to questions regarding actual practices, methodologies and tools being used in Quality 4.0 approaches. However, the research undertaken allowed to identify in the literature different ways of conceptualizing and analyzing Quality 4.0, opening up avenues for further research on quality management in the Industry 4.0 era.

This paper offers a broad look at how quality management is changing in response to the affirmation of the Industry 4.0 paradigm.