W7128474010 Peer-reviewed research AI × management and organizations

The Acceleration of Artificial Intelligence: Rethinking Organization and Work in an Era of Rapid Technological Change

Dominic Chalmers · Richard ‘Rick’ Hunt · Stella Pachidi · Kristina Potočnik · David Townsend

Also recorded as: doi:10.1111/joms.70063

Journal of Management Studies · 2026-02-10

Recorded claims
3
coded from the inspected source
Evidence classes
2
crossref-api-metadata, publisher-search-result
Recorded limitations
6
stated, never hidden

From the hash-bound evidence releases

Recorded claims

Each claim states what the inspected source says, at the recorded location—bounded by its scope and graded by its confidence. Nothing here is a synthesis across works.

The abstract differentiates predictive, generative, agentic, and embodied AI systems and argues that they reshape organizational expertise, judgement, coordination, authority, and institutional adaptation in distinct ways.

confidence: moderate crossref-api-metadata apw-c1-obot-journals

Scope: publisher-deposited abstract metadata observed 2026-08-20

The article differentiates predictive, generative, agentic, and embodied AI and maps their distinct implications for expertise, judgment, coordination, authority, and institutional adaptation.

confidence: high crossref-api-metadata apw-c1-obot-journals

Scope: abstract-level

The publisher issue roster classifies this as an original article whose title frames rapid AI change in relation to organization and work.

confidence: moderate publisher-search-result apw-c1-obot-journals

Scope: publisher issue-roster title and article-type metadata

Structured relationships

In-corpus citations

Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.

Cites (42)

Cited by (0)

No in-corpus incoming citation is available in the current enrichment coverage.

Boundaries

Limitations & independence

Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.

Recorded limitations

  • Crossref public API abstract-level evidence only; full text was not inspected.
  • Publisher HTML was not inspected after a representative Wiley DOI page returned HTTP 403.
  • Crossref metadata only; full text was not inspected.
  • The publisher surface was not queried after the lane’s quarantined dynamic-challenge response; no independent publisher-page verification was attempted.
  • The direct Wiley TOC returned HTTP 403; the retained public-search rendering supplied title, authors, date, pages, and article type.
  • No abstract or full text was inspected, so the claim is limited to title-level metadata.

Source independence

corroborated:crossref-api-metadata