Running Head: AI & EMOTION

AI Boosts Performance but Affects Employees' Emotion

Abstract

Drawing on Lazarus’s appraisal theory, the current research provides an integrative review of

AI (artificial intelligence) and discusses its implication on emotion. Although prior studies have

praised the merits of AI-M (AI-driven management), how AI-M affects employees and their

emotion is not always clear. To respond to the knowledge gap, we conduct a new research and

seek for answers through the amalgamation and analysis of both theoretical viewpoints and

empirical studies. Through this process, we have learnt that AI-M brings diverse triggers of

negative emotion, affecting both managers and employees. To employees, AI-M may lead to job

insecurity and less career development opportunities. To managers, AI-M may take over the

ownership of decision-making and compromise their influence in the workplace. In order to cope

with negative emotion, we review the literature of emotional intelligence (EI) and propose three

EI-embedded strategies to the employees. We also propose three managerial schemes, enabling

managers to guide their subordinates in coping with negative emotion. Research findings not only

bring new insights into the AI-emotion literature, but also support managers in alleviating AI-M’s

impact on employees. The article concludes with the directions for future research.

Keywords: AI; Emotion; Emotional Intelligence; Employees; Management.

1
 Introduction

Artificial intelligence (AI) appears both interesting and ubiquitous in the modern life. AI has

been applied to marketing strategies, energy saving, weather forecast, risk analysis, customer

services, education and business solutions (Brown, Ling & Gurdeniz, 2017; Jaiswal & Arun,

2021; Tuli, Gill, Xu et al., 2022). AI processes smart technology, assisting both entrepreneurs and

organizations in delivering better-quality service and more efficient performance (Chang, Abdalla

& Lasyoud, 2021; Smith & Anderson, 2014; Haefnera, Wincenta, Parida, & Gassmann, 2021).

Recently AI has started to show its influence in the field of employee management; for instance,

managers have improved employee performance through the AI-driven techniques, such as

performance-tracking and KPI-monitoring software (Ernst & Young, 2018; Vrontis, Christofi,

Pereira et al., 2021). Different from the conventional approach that focuses on the target

achievement, AI-Driven Management (AI-M) adopts a more holistic and interactive approach,

enabling both managers and subordinates to monitor the performance progress more effectively,

from the initial goal-setting stage to the final completion stage (Chang, 2020; Gonzales, Capman,

Oswald et al., 2019). Businesses and enterprises also adopt big-data in their employee

management practices, with a view that AI offers better insights into how to execute and operate

in performance appraisal, staff recruitment and succession planning and performance

management (Pan, Froese, Liu et al., 2021; Wang, Wang & Huang, 2017). Inspired by the

aforementioned AI studies, we are intrigued to know whether AI affects employees, and if the

answer is positive, how?

In the current research, we focus on the emotion of employees, with the following rationale.

On the one hand, emotion is a subjective and conscious experience that is characterized by

psycho-physiological expressions, biological reactions and mental states (Kleinginna &

Kleinginna, 1981; Lazarus, 1991). Emotion is reciprocally influential with mood, temperament,

personality, disposition, and motivation (Ortony et al., 1988; Pankseep, 2005). More specifically,

negative emotion refers to an affective state that is characterized by physiological and

2
neuro-hormonal changes arising from a challenging situation, leading to feelings of stress,

anxiety, anger, loss, disappointment, and sadness (Lampert & Phelps, 2013; Lazarus, 1998).

Negative emotion is contagious and detrimental, causing various behavioral and physiological

outcomes (Goleman, Boyatzis & Mckee, 2002). Although different in nature, previous research

has implied that emotion is crucial to the individuals and affects their life.

On the other hand, emotion has an ability to affect employees’ attitudes and behaviors,

generating different impact on their organizational commitment, job loyalty and lying tendency at

work (Celse et al., 2016). Emotion is related with employees’ organizational identification and

deviance behavior in the workplace (Chang et al., 2013). More specifically, emotion reacts to the

stimuli and affects health swiftly (Gross, 1998), and people with stable emotion can better cope

with threat and stress (Haplerin et al., 2009). Emotion is also related to the individual differences;

to be exact, people express their emotion differently and hence different outcomes may follow

(Ortony et al., 1988). Following this logic, Goleman (1998) explains that emotional intelligence

is crucial to the expression of opinion and behavior. Compared to the managers with lower EI,

those with higher EI are more capable of inspiring and motivating their subordinates, which in

turn improves both employee engagement and job commitment (Goleman et al., 2002). Similarly,

Goleman (1998) claims that employees with higher EI are more welcomed by their colleagues

and often keep good interaction with their managers. Although prior studies have different

research aims and objectives, jointly they have conveyed a message that emotion is vital to the

employees and affects their workplace.

Overall, scholars generally appreciate the importance of emotion at work, but actually little is

known about the influence of AI-M on emotion. Prior studies have attempted to analyze the role

of emotion from personnel perspectives (e.g., Celse et al., 2016; Jaiswal, Arun & Varma, 2021),

but whether their findings are applicable to the AI-managed workplace is not always clear.

Previous research has investigated the formation of emotion and clarified its implication on

behavior (e.g., Mayer et al., 1999; Turner et al., 2002), but whether the formation is affected by
3
AI-M is barely known. To respond to these knowledge gaps, we have therefore conducted a new

research and our goals are threefold: i). To explore the benefits and limitations of AI-driven

management; ii). To analyze and critically discuss the potential relationship between AI-M and

emotion; and, finally, iii). Based on the research findings, we are keen to advance the knowledge

of AI-M, hence bringing new insights into the AI-emotion literature.

Literature review

What is emotion? Is emotion an internal perception or external behavior? Is emotion related

to conscious- or unconscious-experience? In order to answer these questions, scholars have

conducted a variety of studies and proposed numerous perspectives. Each perspective has its

unique character and merits, interpreting the nature of emotion from different viewpoints.

Broadly speaking, scholars have attempted to explain the construct of emotion through three

perspectives. These are: feeling-, motivation- and appraisal-perspectives.

From the feeling-perspective, emotions are intentional feelings of importance, which could be

either pleasant or unpleasant (Pugmire, 1998). Emotional feelings are ‘inextricably intertwined

with the world-directed aspect of emotion, so that an adequate account of an emotion’s

intentionality… will at the same time capture an important aspect of its phenomenology’ (Goldie,

2002: 242). From the motivation-perspective, emotions are irreducible and related to judgments

and perceptions, which are crucial to central motive states and behavioral outcomes (Frijda,

1986). From the appraisal-perspective, emotions are extracted from individual appraisals of

events, such as subjective evaluations and explanations of events; simply put, emotions are

determined by personal appraisals of the stimulus, in which the appraisals lead to different

reactions in different people (Lazarus, 1991).

In the current research, we have adopted the appraisal-perspective to discuss the construct of

emotion, with the following reasons. To begin with, compared to other two perspectives, the

appraisal-perspective offers a clearer cognitive construct of emotion, allowing the diagnosis and

4
interpretation of emotion (Ortony, Clore & Collins, 1988). Second, through the

appraisal-perspective, researchers are able to measure the elements of emotion and analyze its

subtle influence (Scherer, 2005; Kuo & Chang, 2021), which is important to the current research

and helps interprete the relationship between emotion and AI-M (AI-driven management). Third,

one widely-accepted way to understand the construct of emotion is through the examination of

emotion components, such as evaluative-, physiological-, phenomenological-, expressive-,

behavioral- and mental-components. Through the appraisal of different components, researchers

can further discuss the construct of emotion and analyze its impact on behavior (see full

discussion in: Prinz, 2004).

The literature on the appraisal-perspective has expanded considerably over the past two

decades, primarily under the influence of Richard S Lazarus (1991, 1998, 2001). Lazarus (1998)

defines emotions according to 'core-relational-themes' which are intuitive summaries of the

moral appraisals (e.g. of relevance, goal conduciveness) involved in different emotions. These

themes may help define both the function and eliciting conditions of the emotion. Specifically,

Lazarus (1991) identifies five distinct themes, including: Anger (a demeaning offense against me

and mine), fear (facing an immediate, concrete, and overwhelming physical danger), sadness

(having experienced an irrevocable loss), disgust (taking in or being too close to an indigestible

object or idea) and happiness (making reasonable progress toward the realization of a goal). At

the heart of Lazarus's theory is what he called appraisal; to be exact, before emotion occurs,

people make an automatic, often unconscious, assessment of what is happening and what it may

mean for them or those they care about (Lazarus, 1991). That is, emotion is not only rational but

also a necessary component of survival, an informative and imperative element in guiding one’s

thought and behavior in daily life (Goleman, 1995).

Following this line of research, Pankseep (2005) defines emotion as a biological state

associated with the nerve systems, which are brought on by both neuro- and

physiological-changes. Scholars indicate that emotion is associated with temperament,

5
disposition, and behavioral motifs (Cabral & Almeida, 2020; Kuo et al., 2020). According to the

component process model (Scherer, 2005), emotion comprises five elements, including: cognitive

appraisal, bodily symptoms, action tendencies, expression and feelings. Scherer claims that

emotional experience requires all components to be coordinated and synchronized for a short

period of time, and that the expression of emotion is driven by one’s appraisal processes.

Similarly, Kleinginna and Kleinginna (1981) describe emotion as a complex set of interactions

between subjective and objective factors, regulated by the neural-hormonal system. Moreover,

emotion has versatile roles and affects people in many ways; for instance, it helps rising affective

experiences, generating cognitive processes, activating physiological adjustments to the arousing

conditions, and leading to the goal-directed behavior (Goleman, 1995; Goleman, 1998). To sum

up, although different in nature, prior studies altogether have conveyed a message that emotion is

based on evaluative and subjective appraisals, deriving from one's judgement of circumstances,

interpretation of mood, as well as the interaction with the environmental factors.

Aligning with the development of emotion-oriented research, scholars are also intrigued to

know the role of emotion in the workplace. Scholars have conducted conceptual and empirical

studies, producing both informative and meaningful research findings. Scholars first claim that

emotion facilitates a healthy balance between one’s negative- and positive-energy; that is,

emotion acts as a buffer, venting out unpleasant energy and hence protecting one’s well-being

(Gross & John, 2003). Scholars also indicate that emotion does not confine itself at the individual

level. Although emotion may commence from individuals, its effect is often wide and contagious;

for instance, positive emotion from one employee can generate positive momentum and affects

other colleagues, which in turn promotes team stability and teamwork (Goleman, Boyatzis &

Mckee, 2002; Gomez-Mejia, Balkin & Cardy, 2008; Itegboje & Chang, 2021). Although different

in nature, prior studies jointly have affirmed the importance of emotion in the workplace; that is,

emotion is crucial to both employees, colleagues and their organizations.

6
 AI, AI-M and employee’s emotion

During the literature review, we have learnt that emotion is an influential factor to the

employees, affecting their feelings, behaviors as well as overall performance. Based on the

analysis of prior studies, we have also learnt that understanding emotion and its implication on

employees is not only necessary, but also practical to any managerial practitioners. Since AI has

exercised its influence into practices and policies of employee management (c.f. Ernst & Young,

2018; Vrontis, Christofi, Pereira et al., 2021), analyzing emotion in the context of AI-driven

management has become a vital and timing matter. We believe it is necessary to conduct a new

research in this important field, as both employees, managers and their organizations can benefit

from the research findings. In the current research, more specifically, we ponder whether

AI-driven management (AI-M) is related to employee’s emotion. Particularly, we ask: Does AI-M

affect employee’s emotion in anyway? If the answer is positive, we wonder: Is there anything that

managers should know before they implement AI-M ? In the following section, we would like to

seek for answers to the aforementioned questions through scrutinizing the relationship across AI,

AI-M and employee’s emotion. Details follow.

Based on our observation, AI has gradually exercised its influence into the field of employee

management. Researchers also have noticed the potential of AI-M and discussed its applicability

in personnel management (e.g., Jaiswal et al., 2019; Gonzales et al., 2019; Vrontis et al., 2021;).

For instance, AI-M helps managers to analyze the best performance models and understand how

employees interact with AI (Ernst & Young, 2018). AI-M assists managers in understanding how

different digital-technology can be constructed and implemented into the existing managerial

practices (Malik et al., 2019). Inspired by this line of research, Chang (2020) proposes an APM

model, explaining how AI-M helps produce competitive advantages at the organizational level.

Due to the influence of AI-M, employees shall upskill themselves in data analysis, complex

cognitive and continuous learning skills (Jaiswal et al., 2019).

Regardless of its opportunities and numerous merits, however, AI-M may still affect
7
employees and their organizations in different ways. For instance, AI may replace human labor in

mechanical and routine tasks of a job, such as manual and non-heuristic duties (Huang & Rust,

2018). When bearing the likelihood of job-replacement in mind, employees easily develop

concerns about their job security and career development, leading to the negative feeling about

AI-M (Chang, 2020). Some managers may also worry about the possibility that AI may

compromise their job roles and affect their influence in the workplace; to be specific, AI has an

ability to take over the ownership and responsibility of decision-making (Duchessi, O'Keefe &

o'Leary, 1993), and AI acts as career threat rather than opportunity in the eyes of some managers

(Chang, Abdalla & Lasyoud, 2021). After reviewing the findings from conceptual research and

empirical studies, our proposition is: although AI-M has many merits, it still affects emotion in

various ways. AI-M may carry different triggers of negative emotion to both employees and their

managers. For the sake of clarity, we have presented potential triggers in Table I, explaining the

characteristics of different triggers and their subtle influences.

< Table I Near Here >

As it is shown in Table I, we have presented numerous triggers of negative emotion into two

broad categories. These are: employees’ viewpoints and managers’ viewpoints (we acknowledge

the limitation of our categorical approach and will discuss its implication later). At the first

categories, we discuss the characteristics of triggers at the individual level, explaining how

different triggers affect individual employees. At the second category, we discuss the

characteristics of triggers at the managerial and organizational level, explaining how different

triggers affect managers and their organizations. On the basis of core relational themes (appraisal

theory; Lazarus, 1991 & 1998), we then link potential triggers to the corresponding themes,

explaining the influence of triggers on emotion. By doing so, we believe the relationships

between potential triggers and corresponding emotional responses can be established and

examined in a systematic manner.

8
 Take the first trigger for instance, when employees perceive a threat of labor replacement,

they may develop a feeling of fear, such as the fear of job-share, job-taken-over, or even job-lost.

According to Chang (2019), job-share means that some of the job tasks are shared by the AI,

whereas job-taken-over means that some of the job tasks are replaced by the AI, allowing

employees to work on separate tasks, such as more cognition-demanding or judgment-required

tasks. In the situations of ‘job-share’ and ‘job-taken-over’, although employees are still employed

by the organization, employees may feel a bit uncertain and worry about their future career

opportunity (Chang, 2019); after all, the autonomy and ownership of jobs are not completely

decided by the employees themselves, but affected by the AI (Wang et al., 2017). Moreover,

‘job-lost’ means that the jobs are completely replaced by the AI, in which human workers are no

longer required and hence become unemployed. As a result, the unemployed people may feel

unfair about the situation and develop a feeling of anger. Further details are outlined in Table I.

In view of what has preceded, we have learnt that AI is not always welcomed at work, and

that AI-M is like a double-edged sword in employee management. On the one hand, AI-M assists

organizations in improving the overall performance, leading to better organizational competitive

advantages (Ernst & Young, 2018; Vrontis et al., 2021). On the other hand, however, AI-M also

possesses the ability to take over the ownership of decision-making and contains some risks of

job redundancy, affecting one’s career opportunities and well-being (Chang, 2020; Duchessi et al.,

1993; Jaiswal et al., 2021). AI-M may sound omnipotent, but its side-effect requires close

attention from the managerial side. Our proposition is: if not handled well, the abrupt

implementation of AI-oriented policies and practices may cause negative emotion to both

employees and managers; and, consequently, every member in the organization will suffer.

Solution to the negative emotion: Emotional intelligence

Given that emotion is significant to the employee (Celse et al., 2016) and negative emotion is

detrimental in the workplace (Goleman et al., 2002), this article now turns to review the strategies

9
that managers may possibly adopt, assisting their employees in coping with negative emotion. In

particular, we recommend the construct of emotional intelligence (EI; Goleman, 1998) and our

proposition is: employees with higher EI are more capable of dealing with negative emotion, and

managers can also adopt EI-embedded strategies to support their employees in coping with

negative emotion. Our rationale is further discussed below.

EI, EQ (emotional quotient) and EIQ (emotional intelligence quotient) are interchangeable

terms, in which EI is defined as an ability to recognize, understand and manage one’s emotion

(Goleman, 1998). One decade later, Colman (2008) revises the definition to one’s ability to

monitor his/her own emotions, as well as those of other people, to discriminate between different

emotions, and to label them appropriately. The evolution of definitions has conveyed two

meaningful messages: First, in Goleman’s definition, the construct of emotional intelligence is

like a trait, such as a unique individual character, or a dimension of one’s personality; and,

Second, in Colman’s definition, EI possess a wider scope and carries deeper influence on

behavior. EI not only helps individuals to judge one’s and other’s emotions, but also integrates

the observational and evaluative cues in interpreting emotion and its influence. EI involves the

assessment of emotional states, expression of emotions, as well as the behavioral demonstrations

(Higuera, 2018). Although different in nature, prior studies jointly have conveyed an important

message that EI is associated with subjective evaluation and decision-making process. Following

the same logic, we may propose that EI is related to behavior and, to some extent, EI may have an

ability to generate subtle impact on behavior. Our proposition is: EI can be interpreted as a

trait-based ability, helping individuals to conduct subjective evaluation on their own and other’s

emotions (this viewpoint is congruent with Goleman’s and Colman’s definitions). At the same

time, more relevant to the current research, EI may also help individuals to decide what to do, and

how to do, following their own interpretation of emotions (this viewpoint is congruent with

Higuera’s research findings).

Aligning with the research of emotion, scholars are intrigued to know the composition of EI,
10
but their views remain inconclusive; for instance, the trait model explains that EI is composed of

multi components, such as self-awareness, behavioral dispositions and perceived abilities

(Petrides & Furnham, 2001). Scholars also claim that self-awareness affects people’s

decision-making and ethical standard (Chang, Max & Celse, 2021). Next, the ability model

highlights the imperativeness of individual's ability in processing emotional information, which is

then used to help people to navigate the social environment (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2004).

Finally, the emotion recognition model focuses on the process of identifying human emotion

(Bänziger, 2014); more specifically, scholars indicate that EI is involved with the capacity to: i).

perceive emotion; ii). integrate emotion to facilitate thought; iii). understand emotions and; iv). to

regulate emotions to promote personal growth (MacCann, Joseph, Newman & Roberts, 2014). To

sum up, although prior studies have analyzed the composition of EI through different viewpoints,

jointly they have offered preliminary credence to support a relationship between EI and emotion.

That is to say, previous research has affirmed a phenomenon that EI plays a salient and

imperative role in adjusting people’s thought and behavior.

Actually, among conceptual research and empirical studies, the relationship between EI and

its influence has received some academic attention. In daily life events, for instance, people with

higher EI tend to have better mental health, well-being, leadership skills, and overall performance

(Goleman, 1995; Joseph & Newman, 2010). People with higher EI often interpret their life

problems (e.g., life challenges and career obstacles) more optimistically, and they are willing to

consider whether their problems could be converted into opportunities (Stoltz, 1997). Moreover,

EI has shown its merits in the workplace too; for example, employees with higher EI are more

likely to observe the variance in their own emotions, acting as a preventive mechanism of burnout

(Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 1999). Goleman (1998) indicates that EI is more practical and

valuable than intelligence quotient (IQ) in management, as leaders with higher EI are more

capable of understanding their subordinates’ emotional changes, facilitating a healthier

interaction between managers and subordinates. To summarize, prior studies have conveyed an
11
important message that, when people have higher EI, they are more likely to understand what

happens and where they stand in their environment. EI helps people to stay calm and evaluate the

reality from a more objective and positive manner; that is, EI provides people with important

psychological comfort and energy to deal with the problems and challenges that they have

experienced (Mayer et al., 1999). Overall, empirical studies have offered ample support to our

proposition that employees with higher EI are more capable of dealing with negative emotion.

Following the literature review and discussion above, we have learnt that EI is not only

crucial to the employee, but also offers them an opportunity to understand their emotion and

cognate influences. For the same reason, the current research is keen to recommend two types of

strategies, aiming to assist employees in coping with their negative emotion (see Table II for

summary). As it is shown in Table II, the first type is EI-embedded and targeted at the individual

level, whereas the second type is for the managerial level, allowing managers to guide their

subordinates in coping with negative emotion. The first type (employee’s strategies) comprises

three strategies, including: cognitive reframing, classical conditioning process, and positive

reinforcement. The second type (manager’s strategies) comprises three schemes, including:

focus-group scheme, mentor-mentee scheme, and pilot scheme. Details follow.

< Table II Near Here >

Cognitive reframing

Cognitive reframing is a psychological technique that consists of identifying and then

changing the way situations, experiences, events, ideas, and/or emotions are viewed (Robson Jr &

Troutman-Jordan, 2014). Cognitive reframing is like a tactic that trains people to think differently

about difficulties that they cannot actually change, and then adopt a more positive attitude to find

out the marginal benefit. Cognitive reframing is related to the appraisal theory (problem-focused

coping; Lazarus, 1991); specifically, when the problem cannot be resolved immediately, the

problem-evaluating process matters; and, when the problem can be evaluated with limited

interference of emotion, it is more likely to be resolved.

12
 For instance, if doing mundane jobs under the sunshine is unavoidable and unpleasant,

reframing the situation can help. One way to do this is by thinking: ‘I got an opportunity to leave

the tedious office and embrace fresh air outside, so doing the jobs under the sunshine is not that

bad’. In the future workplace, AI will become influential and ubiquitous across sectors (Ernst &

Young, 2018; Vrontis et al., 2021); as such, avoiding AI seems not the best strategy for the

employees. Following the logic of cognitive reframing, we recommend employees to get

themselves familiar with AI and, if possible, upskill themselves with digital knowledge and

continuous learning skills (Jaiswal et al., 2021). In particular, if AI does imply negative impact, it

would be practical and sensible for employees to explore its potential benefit and maximize such

benefit. By doing so, employees will be able to appreciate AI’s benefit and concurrently vent out

their AI-related negative emotions, restoring their confidence in the AI-M workplace.

Classical conditioning process

Classical conditioning process involves learning about the association of two or more events

(Turkkan, 1989); for example, if events A and B often emerge about the same time, when event A

emerges, people would expect event B to follow. According to Turkkan (1989), when two events

(or stimuli) generally occur together, encountering one can bring the other to mind; and due to

effect of expectancy, people tend to interpret such events more neutrally. The neutral effect of

‘classical conditioning process’ can be further explained through the appraisal theory (Lazarus,

1991); more specifically, if the problem (such as AI challenges in the AI-M workplace) and

cognitive outcome (such as negative emotion) often occur together, people shall appraise the

association between the two events more neutrally; in other words, when people are able to

‘expect’ the outcome of AI challenges in advance, people shall be less affected by the outcome.

Following the logic of ‘classical conditioning process’, we advise employees to adopt a more

proactive attitude to respond to the potential side-effect of AI-M. Our proposition is: when people

are willing to associate AI-M with its side-effect (i.e., putting two events together), they would be
13
more likely to interpret such side-effect in a neutral manner; as a result, people would feel more

psychologically prepared to respond to the side-effect. Based on above reasoning, the ‘classical

conditioning process’ offers a protective mechanism, acting as psychological buffer and

preparedness (Wills & Isasi, 2007). As such, when people could expect what problems may arise,

or when people are told what may come in advance, they would feel more confident and

better-prepared in coping with the problems. Our viewpoint is: the implementation of AI-M needs

to be planned carefully, as abrupt implementation may cause problems and bring triggers of

negative emotion (Duchessi et al., 1993; Chang, 2019). For the same reason, if managers can

inform their employees of the possibility that AI-M may cause problems (such as negative

emotion), allowing employees to associate AI-M with negative emotion in advance, we believe

that employees would be more prepared and feel more confident in dealing with the arrival of

negative emotion.

Positive reinforcement

Behavior can be strengthened through positive reinforcement when something pleasant or

desirable occurs following the behavior (Schwartz & Reisberg, 1991); the heartland of positive

reinforcement is: when people receive the reward after performing a particular behavior, they

tend to associate the behavior with the reward and, consequently, they will repeat the same

behavior more often. The aforementioned association and its influence can be further explained

by the component process model (Scherer, 2005). Scherer indicates that emotion comprises

different elements, such as cognitive appraisal, bodily symptoms, action tendencies, expression

and feelings. Emotional experience requires different components to be coordinated and

synchronized for a short period of time, and the expression of emotion is often driven by one’s

appraisal processes (Scherer, 2005). Following this logic, it is reasonable to infer that, apart from

the effect of positive rewards (such as receiving rewards after performing a particular behavior),

positive emotion can also increase the frequency of such behavior.

14
 As aforementioned in the literature review, managers and organizations are keen to apply AI

in their business operations and personnel management (Gonzales et al., 2019; Malik et al., 2019).

Therefore we encourage employees to adopt a more positive attitude and appreciate the potential

rewards during their interaction with AI. After all, AI does bring positive merits to the individual

employees, such as time-saving, efficiency-improvement, and accuracy-enhancement in their job

duties (Ernst & Young, 2018; Vrontis et al., 2021). Our reasoning is: when employees understand

the potential of AI and receive its benefits (such as positive reward), they would be more likely to

form a positive emotion about AI, and they would be more willing to interact with AI. When

employees accumulate more positive experiences in interacting with AI, they are more likely to

develop their confidence in applying AI into their job duties. It is also important to note that,

compared to the people with limited AI-experience, people with AI-knowledge and positive

attitude will be more welcomed in the future job markets (Jaiswal et al., 2021).

Reflection of employee’s strategies

The three strategies proposed above do not target the sources of ‘negative emotion’ directly;

instead, they have offered employees alternative perspectives to neutralize the influence of AI on

emotion (e.g., positiveness, optimism, positive emotion). One might argue, for instance, that these

strategies do not tackle with the sources directly, so their coping efficacy might be questionable;

nevertheless, we believe these strategies are still valid for two reasons. First, emotion is not a

constant variable but flows with the environmental factors (Cabral & Almeida, 2020). Second,

emotion is not a physical element and cannot be removed easily (Pankseep, 2005). Rather than

tackling with the negative emotion directly, adding more positive- and optimistic-elements to

neutralize the negative emotion seems more feasible (We are aware of the drawback of such

neutralization approach and will discuss its implication later).

Following the discussion of three EI-embedded strategies, this article now turns to introduce

three emotion-coping schemes, which can be adopted to deal with the negative emotion resulted
15
from AI-M organizations and workplace. The three schemes are proposed for the managerial

level, allowing managers to guide their subordinates in coping with negative emotion. The three

schemes include: focus-group scheme, mentor-mentee scheme, and pilot scheme. Details follow:

Focus-group scheme

In plain language, focus-group is a group-oriented activity, discussing on pre-assigned

theme(s). Morgan (1996) indicates that the discussion could be guided by a moderator, or

following the natural interaction between group members, hence providing rich information to

the participants. Focus-group allows participants to share views and exchange experiences in a

flexible and socially supportive way (Morgan, 1996). As such, prior to the implementation of

AI-M, we recommend managers to conduct focus-group for their employees, in which managers

can introduce the information of AI-M and, simultaneously, gather employees’ expectation and

concerns of AI-M. Managers can use focus-group to analyze the readiness of the employees for

AI-M, guiding their employees to prepare for the implication of AI-M. Moreover, during the

implementation of AI-M, managers may also use focus-group to collect feedback from the

employees, monitoring the progress of AI-M from employees’ perspectives more accurately.

Mentor-mentee scheme

Mentoring is a common development tool, in which a mentor (more experienced member of

staff) supports a mentee (less experienced member) through knowledge-sharing activities. Viney

and Mckimm (2010) explains that a good mentor-mentee scheme allows mentors to support the

development of mentees and, when undertaken properly, mentoring can be a highly effective

empowerment tool, supporting mentees to solve problems and progress in their career. During the

implementation of AI-M, when managers detect that their subordinates are influenced by AI-M,

we advise managers to consider a mentor-mentee scheme in two steps: First, managers shall

identify the staff who can better cope with AI-M’s influence and train these employees to become
16
mentors. Second, after the mentors are well trained and equipped with mentoring skills, managers

may assign the mentors to the concerned mentees, i.e., those who are struggling with or affected

by AI-M. In addition, managers shall provide a clear framework that outlines the details of

mentor-mentee schemes; for example, duties of mentors and mentees, frequency and duration of

meetings. A clear framework helps both mentors and mentees appreciate their respective roles

during the mentoring activities, facilitating the effectiveness of mentoring schemes (Viney &

Mckimm, 2010). It is our hope that, with the support from the mentor-mentee schemes, mentees

can cope with AI-M’s influence more effectively.

Pilot scheme

Pilot scheme is a small activity which is carried out as a test to see if an idea may work.

Bryman and Bell (2006) explains that a pilot scheme helps prove the viability of a proposed idea,

analyzing the potential obstacles and identifying its possible solutions. Following this logic, we

advise managers to consider a pilot scheme prior to the implementation of AI-M, with three

benefits. First, in the field of employee management, a pilot scheme allows managers to observe

the influence of a proposed policy in a small-scale context (Mathis, Jackson, Valentine & Meglich,

2017). Our viewpoint is: if managers can pilot AI-M through a small sample, they shall be able to

estimate whether AI-M generates any negative impact on their workforce, business operations or

other aspects of the organization. Second, if AI-M does carry side-effect and cause problems to

the employees, fixing the problems within a small-scale context would be easier. As a rule of

thumb, bigger problems usually mean higher cost, so the expense of rectifying smaller problems

would be more economical and bearable. Third, a pilot scheme usually offers a chance of

trial-and-error, enabling managers to find out the best way to reach a desired result. Scholars

have commented that AI and its application on employee management is still at its infancy stage

(Malik et al., 2019; Vrontis et al., 2021), so running pilot schemes shall help managers to explore

the best applicability of AI-M.

17
Reflection of manager’s strategies

Overall, we have proposed three strategies at the managerial level, providing managers

different ways to support their employees. The first strategy (focus-group scheme) provides

employees a great opportunity of experience-sharing between group members. For those who

suffer from AI-M’s influence (such as negative emotion), they can learn the coping skills from

their colleagues and apply skills to themselves immediately. The second strategy (mentor-mentee

scheme) offers a more personal support in problem solving (such as solving negative emotion).

With the guidance from more experienced mentors, the mentees (i.e., those who suffer from

AI-M’s influence) shall feel more confident in dealing with their negative emotion. The third

strategy is more proactive, as managers could use pilot schemes to probe whether AI-M may

cause any problems to the employees (such as negative emotion). To sum up, although different

in nature, the three strategies aforementioned are all practical and inexpensive, allowing

managers to guide their subordinates in coping with negative emotion.

Conclusion

Drawing on multi-disciplinary literature (e.g., appraisal theory, EI theory and component

process model), the current research provides an integrative review of AI and discusses its

implication on emotion. Prior studies indicate that AI-driven management (AI-M) has great

potential in personnel management, such as better managerial practices (Ernst & Young, 2018;

Vrontis et al., 2021) and more holistic appraisals (Chang, 2019; Gonzales, Capman, Oswald et al.,

2019). Although prior studies have demonstrated the merits of AI-M, how AI affects employee

management is not always clear, and how AI-M affects emotion is still unknown. To respond to

these knowledge gaps, we conduct a new research and seek for answers through the

amalgamation and analysis of both conceptual research and empirical studies. Research findings

are meaningful in several ways, bringing innovative and valuable insights into the AI and

18
employee management literature.

To begin with, the current research has found that AI-M may imply diverse triggers of

negative emotion, affecting both employees and their managers. During the literature review, we

have examined and critically discussed the causal nexus between AI and employee’s emotion.

Specifically, we have learnt that AI-M may affect employees in their perception of job security,

career development and well-being (Huang & Rust, 2018; Vrontis et al., 2021). We have also

found that managers may suffer from AI-M in the aspects of workplace influence,

decision-making responsibility and career opportunity (Duchessi et al., 1993; Chang, 2019). That

is, AI-M can become a salient trigger of negative emotion.

Next, as it is analyzed in the literature review, scholars generally agree that people with

higher EI (emotional intelligence) are more capable of coping with negative emotion (Joseph &

Newman, 2010; Mayer et al., 1999). Individuals with higher levels of EI are more likely to have

better interpersonal relationship in the workplace, leading to higher job satisfaction, better

well-being ad career satisfaction (Goleman, 1995; Goleman, 1998; Kuo & Chang, 2021).

Following this logic, we have proposed three EI-related strategies to the individual employees.

These are: cognitive reframing, classical conditioning process, and positive reinforcement.

Although different in nature, these three coping strategies all assist employees in dealing with

their negative emotion. Based on the literature review, we have also learnt that EI is a crucial and

significant element in neutralizing negative emotion, supporting employees in the context of

AI-M. These findings have advanced the knowledge of the ‘EI-emotion coping’ relationship.

Moreover, as discussed in the literature review, the concerns (of job insecurity and

compromised career opportunity) may result in negative consequence, such as poor job

satisfaction and deteriorated well-being (Goleman, 1995; Chang, 2020). These concerns may also

become triggers of negative emotion (as outlined in Table I). In order to deal with negative

emotion, we have proposed three coping schemes (focus-group, mentor-mentee and pilot),

enabling managers to support their subordinates in coping with negative emotion. Based on our
19
knowledge, the current research is the first of its kind in analyzing AI’s implication on emotion,

and we have offered practical solutions in coping with negative emotion. The proposed coping

schemes have important implication on employee management, particularly in the context of

AI-M. It is our hope that, when implementing AI-M, both managers and organization can benefit

from our research findings in their managerial policies and practices.

Last but not least, following the reviews of previous research findings, we have learnt that the

design and implementation of AI-M is crucial to both employees and their organizations, in

which managers play an important role in executing AI-M (Chang, 2020). We have also found

that, if the AI-M is not handled well, employees may develop concerns over job security and

career development opportunity (Duchessi et al., 1993; Chang, 2019). To some extent, these

empirical findings are congruent with the prediction of job replacement model (Huang & Rust,

2018), thus providing an important line of support to the AI-job replacement literature. Yet, recent

studies actually claim that job replacement phenomenon may not necessarily happen if employees

are willing to upskill themselves in data analysis, complex cognitive and continuous learning

skills (Jaiswal, Arun & Varma, 2021), and if employees regards AI-M as career opportunity rather

than threats (Chang, Abdalla & Lasyoud, 2021). To integrate both previous and recent studies, the

current research has critically discussed the characteristics of AI-M and analyzed its positive- and

negative-impact on employees, hence contributing to the ‘AI-M and employees’ literature.

Suggestions and limitation

During the analysis of coping strategies, we recommend a neutralization approach to cope

with negative emotion, and our analytic rationale is based on the variance of emotion (Cabral &

Almeida, 2020) and its removability (Pankseep, 2005). Nevertheless, adopting a neutralization

approach does not eradicate the sources of negative emotion. As long as the sources remain intact,

the chance of negative emotion still exists. For the same reason, we therefore encourage

managers to pilot AI-M in advance of the full-scale application. By doing so, at least, managers
20
shall be able to locate the sources of negative emotion more accurately and offer intervention

strategies in a timely manner.

The current research does not consider the possibility of positive emotion resulted from AI-M.

Our viewpoint is: if AI-M causes positive emotion, both employees, managers and their

organizations shall be pleased about it; after all, positive outcomes (such as positive emotion) are

generally welcomed in the workplace. From a different but similar perspective, one might assume

that negative emotion is only detrimental in the workplace. However, scholars seem to have

different views about the function of negative emotion. For example, feelings of shame, guilt, and

embarrassment may lead to positive outcomes for employees and organizations, such as better

communication between sellers and customers (Kim & Sullivan, 2019) and more organizational

citizenship behaviors (Turnipseed & Vandewaa, 2012). Future researchers may conduct new

studies, analyzing both positive- and negative-function of negative emotion.

The current research does not consider individual differences during the analysis of

emotion-coping. Given that individual differences are crucial in behavior (Gomez-Mejia, Balkin

& Cardy, 2008), we recommend future studies to include individual differences as research

variables, perhaps by examining the implication of individual differences on emotion-coping.

Similarly, the current research does not consider different composition (e.g., nature, elements) of

emotional intelligence during the discussion of EI. Whether different composition of EI affects

the efficacy of emotion-coping is still unknown. Future research may adopt different emotion

models to continue this line of research, such as trait model (Petrides & Furnham, 2001), ability

model (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2004) and recognition model (Bänziger, 2014).

21
 References

Bakker, A.B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art.

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22 (3): 309-328.

Bänziger, T. (2014). Measuring emotion recognition ability. In: Michalos, A.C. (ed.).

Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research. Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer. pp.

3934-3941. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_4188. ISBN 978-9400707535.

Ben Ze’ev, A. (2000). The subtlety of emotions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Brown, J., Ling, T., & Gurdeniz, E. (2017). Managing next generation of AI in Banking. New

York: Oliver Wyman - Marsh & McLenna.

Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2006). Business Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

ISBN-13: 978-0199284986.

Cabral, J. C. C., & de Almeida, R. M. M. (2020). From social status to emotions: Asymmetric

contests predict emotional responses to victory and defeat. Emotion. Online First:

[Link]

Celse, J., Chang, K., Max, S., & Quinton, S. (2016). The reduction of employee lying behavior:

Inspiration from a study of envy in part-time employees. Journal of Strategy and Management,

9 (2): 118-137.

Chang, K. (2019). Has the era of artificial intelligence (AI)-driven management arrived yet: The

case of Fudan University Student Canteen. (In Chinese). Fudan Development Institute (FDDI).

Shanghai, CHINA: Fudan University.

Chang, K. (2020). Artificial intelligence in personnel management: The development of APM

Model. The Bottom Line, 33 (4): 377-388.

Chang, K., Abdalla, Y.A., & Lasyoud, A.A. (2021). Artificial intelligence in personnel

management: Opportunities and challenges to the Higher Education Sector. (Ref #35).

EAMMIS 2021. Istanbul, Turkey: Bridges Foundation and Istanbul Medeniyet University.

22
Chang, K., Kuo, C.C., Su, M., & Taylor, J. (2013). Dis-identification in organization and its role

in the workplace. Industrial Relations, 68 (3): 479-506.

Chang, K., Max, S., & Celse, J. (2021). Employees' lying behavior and the role of self-awareness.

International Journal of Organizational Analysis. DOI: 10.1108/IJOA-12-2020-2513.

CIPD (2019). Artificial intelligence and automation in the workplace. London: Chartered Institute

of Personnel and Development. (Access: 21st August 2019)

[Link]

Colman, A. (2008). A dictionary of psychology (3 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Duchessi, P., & O'Keefe, R.M. (1995). Understanding expert systems success and failure. Expert

Systems with Applications, 9 (2): 123-133.

Duchessi, P., O'Keefe, R., & O'Leary, D.E. (1993). A research perspective: AI, management and

organizations. Intelligent Systems, 2 (3): 151-159.

Elsbach, K. D. (2001). Coping with hybrid organizational identities. In: J. Wagner (Ed). Advances

in Qualitative Organization Research (Vol 3, pp. 59-90). Oxford: Elservier.

Ernst & Young. (2018). The new age: Artificial intelligence for human resource opportunities and

functions. London: Ernst & Young LLP.

Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

George, C. (2010). Psychological contract: Managing and developing professional groups.

Maidenhead, G.B.: Open University Press.

Goldie, P. (2002). Emotions, feelings and intentionality. Phenomenology and the Cognitive

Sciences, 1 (3): 235-254.

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it matters more than IQ. New York: Bantam.

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of

emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Balkin, D.B., & Cardy, RL. (2008). Management: People, performance,
23
 change (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Gonzales, M.F., Capman, J.F., Oswald, F.L., Theys, E.R., & Tomczak, D.L. (2019). Where’s the

I-O? Artificial intelligence and machine learning in talent management systems. Personnel

Assessment and Decision, 5 (3): 33-44

Grace, K., Salvatier, J., Dafoe, A., Zhang, B., & Evans, O. (2018). When will AI exceed human

performance? Evidence from AI experts. Oxford: Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford

University.

Gross, J. (1998). Antecedent-and response-focused emotion regulation: Divergent consequences

for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74

(1): 224-237.

Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes:

Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 85 (2): 348-362.

Haefnera, N., Wincenta, J., Parida, V., & Gassmann, O. (2021). Artificial intelligence and

innovation management: A review, framework, and research agenda. Technological

Forecasting & Social Change, 162. doi: [Link]

Halperin, E., Canetti-Nisim, D., & Hirsch-Hoefler, S. . (2009). The central role of groupbased

hatred as an emotional antecedent of political intolerance: Evidence from israel. Political

Psychology, 30 (1): 93-123.

Harris, I., Jennings, R.C., Pullinger, D., Rogerson, S., et al. (2011). Ethical assessment of new

technologies: a meta-methodology. Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in

Society, 9 (1): 49-64.

Higuera, V., (2018). What you need to know about emotional intelligence. Healthline. (Accessed.

17th December 2020). [Link]

Huang, M. H., & Rust, R. T. (2018). AI in service. Journal of Service Research, 21 (2): 155-172.

Itegboje, J., & Chang, K. (2021). Agency workers and their equivocal roles – Wandering
24
 employees. Labor History, 62 (2): 115-133.

Jaiswal, A., & Arun, C.J. (2021). Potential of artificial intelligence for transformation of the

education system. International Journal of Education and Development, 17(1): 142-158

Jaiswal, A., Arun, C.J., & Varma, A. (2021). Rebooting employees: upskilling for artificial

intelligence in multinational corporations. International Journal of Human Resource

Management. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2021.1891114

Jordan, H. (2019). The line manager's role in mental wellbeing. HR Magazine. (Aug ed). London:

MAG.

Kaushik, S. (2011). Artificial Intelligence. Delhi, India: Cengage Learning.

Keystone Consulting. (2017). Big-Data and its role on the efficacy of human resource

management. Investigative Report. Shanghai, CHINA: Keystone Consulting Ltd.

Kim, Y.K., & Sullivan, P. (2019). Emotional branding speaks to consumers’ heart: the case of

fashion brands. Fashion and Textiles, 6 (2): 1-16.

Kleinginna, P. R., & Kleinginna, A. M. (1981). A categorized list of emotion definitions, with a

suggestion for a consensual definition. Motivation and Emotion, 5 (4): 345-371.

Kolbjornsrud, V., Amico, R., & Thomas, R.J. (2016). The promise of artificial intelligence:

Redefining management in the workplace of the future. New York: Accenture Institute for

High Performance.

Kuo, C.C., & Chang, K. (2021). Relational-contract: The secret of career success. Sharjah:

University of Sharjah’s Institutional Repository. Reference: 101866-01.

Kuo, C.C., Chang, K., Kuo, T.K., & Chen, S. (2020). Workplace gossip and employee cynicism:

The moderating role of dispositional envy. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 62 (4): 537-552.

Kuo, C.C., & Chang, K. (2021). Machiavellianism, workplace envy, and their impact at work.

Chinese Journal of Psychology, 63 (1): 99-120.

Lampert, K., & Phelps, E. A. (2013). Neuroeconomics of emotion and decision making. In P.

Glimcher & E. Fehr (Eds.), Neuroeconomics: Decision Making and the Brain (pp. 219-236).
25
 London: Academic Press.

Lazarus, R.S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN

978-0195092660.

Lazarus, R. S. (1998). Fifty years of the research and theory of R. S. Lazarus: An analysis of

historical and perennial issues. Mahwah, N.J.: LEA. ISBN 978-0805826579

Lazarus, R. S. (2001). Relational meaning and discrete emotions. In: K. R. Scherer., A. Schorr., &

T. Johnstone. (Eds.), Series in affective science. Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory,

methods, research. (p. 37-67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Macey, W., & Scgeneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and

Organizational Psychology, 1 (1): 3-30

MacCann, C., Joseph, D.L., Newman, D.A., & Roberts, R.D. (2014). Emotional intelligence is a

second-stratum factor of intelligence: evidence from hierarchical and bifactor models.

Emotion, 14 (2): 358-374.

Malik, A., Budhwar, P., Srikanth, NR & Varma, A. (2019). May the bots be with you!

Opportunities and challenges of artificial intelligence for rethinking human resource

management practices. Annual Conference, British Academy of Management.

Mathis, R.L., Jackson, J.H., Valentine, S.R., & Meglich, P. (2017). Human resource management

(15th edn). London: CENGAGE Learning.

Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional

standards for an intelligence. Intelligence, 27 (4): 267-298.

Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D.R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory, findings, and

implications. Psychological Inquiry, 15 (3): 197-215.

McCloy, R.A., Purl,J.D., & Banjanovic, E.S. (2019). Turnover modeling and event history

analysis. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 12 (3): 320-325.

McKinney, S.M., Sieniek, M., Shetty, S., (2020). International evaluation of an AI system for

breast cancer screening. Nature, 577 (1): 89-94.

26
Morgan, D.L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22 (1): 129-152.

Mullins, L.J. (2016). Management and organizational behavior. (11th ed.). Essex, England:

Pearson.

O'Leary, D.E. (1993). The impact of manager philosophy on knowledge management systems.

Intelligent Systems, 17 (2): 111-126.

Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., & Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. New York,

NY: Cambridge University Press.

Pan, Y., Froese, F., Liu, N., Hu, Y.Y., & Ye, M. (2021). The adoption of artificial intelligence in

employee recruitment: The influence of contextual factors. International Journal of Human

Resource Management. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2021.1879206

Panksepp, J. (2005). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions.

Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 9. ISBN: 978-0-19-509673-6.

Petrides, K.V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation to

established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15 (6): 425-448.

Prinz, J. (2004). Gut reactions: A perceptual theory of emotion. New York: OUP.

Pugmire, D. (1998). Rediscovering emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ISBN:

0748611266.

Robert, D., & Davenport, T. O. (2002). Job engagement: Why it's important and how to improve

it. Employment Relations, 29 (3): 21-29.

Robbins, S.P., & Judge, T. (2012). Organizational behavior. (15th ed). London: Pearson.

Robson Jr, J.P., & Troutman-Jordan, M. (2014). A concept analysis of cognitive reframing.

Journal of Theory Construction and Testing, 18 (2): 55-59.

Rousseau, D.M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee

Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2 (2): 121-139.

Scherer, K.R. (2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science

Information, 44 (4): 693-727.

27
Schwartz, B. &. Reisberg, D. (1991). Learning and Memory. New York: Notron.

Spurthis, K. (2018). AI versus Humans. ATG World. (Accessed: 25 May 2019)

[Link]

Stoltz, P. G. (1997). Adversity quotient: Turning obstacles into opportunities. Canada: John

Willey and Sons, Inc.

Stoltz, P. G. (2002). Adversity quotient at work: Finding your hidden capacity for getting things

done. New York: Harper Collins.

Tsohou, A., M. Karyda, S. Kokolakis., et al. (2015). Managing the introduction of information

security awareness programms in organizations. European Journal of Information Systems, 24

(1): 38-58.

Tsaousis, I., & Nikolaou, I. (2005). Exploring the relationship of emotional intelligence with

physical and psychological health functioning. Stress and Health, 21 (2): 77-86.

Tuli, S., Gill, S.S., Xu, M., et al. (2022). HUNTER: AI based holistic resource management for

sustainable cloud computing. Journal of Systems and Software, 184(2022), 111-124

Turkkan, J.S. (1989). Classical conditioning: The new hegemony. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,

12 (1): 121-179.

Turner, N., Barling, J., & Zacharatos, A. (2002). Positive psychology at work. In: C. R. Snyder &

Shane J. Lopez (Eds.), The Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 715-726). New York:

Oxford University Press.

Turnipseed, D.L., & Vandewaa, E. (2012). Relationship between emotional intelligence and

organizational citizenship behavior. Psychological Reports, 110 (3): 899-914.

Viney, R.,. & Mckimm, J. (2010). Mentoring. British Journal of Hospital Medicine, 71(2): 106-109.

Vrontis, D., Christofi, M., Pereira, V., Tarba, S., Makrides, A., & Trichina, E. (2021). Artificial

intelligence, robotics, advanced technologies and human resource management: a systematic

review. International Journal of Human Resource Management. DOI:

10.1080/09585192.2020.1871398.
28
Wang, Z.Z., & Nie, R. (2018). The effect of health quotient management within the interaction

model of client health behavior on maternal health outcome. Proceedings of the ICMESS.

[Link]

Wang, A.M., Wang, T.L., & Huang, C.J. (2017). BigData on human resource management:

Model, theory and application. Beijing, CHINA: Tsinghua University Press.

Wills, T.A., & Isasi, C.R. (2007). Buffering effect. In: R.F. Baumeister & & K.D. Vohs (Eds.).

Encyclopedia of Social Psychology. London: Sage. ISBN:9781412916707

Wisskirchen, G., Biacabe, B.T., Bormann, U., Muntz, A., et al. (2017). Artificial intelligence and

robotics and their impact on the workplace. London: IBA Global Employment Institute.

Author Bio
Kuo-Tai Cheng is Professor of Public Administration and Policy at the National Tsing Hua
University in Taiwan. He works on issues of public utility privatisation, regulatory governance,
regulatory capture, and governance mechanism. His books, “Regulatory Governance: Theory and
Practice” (Chinese), and “Evidence-based Policy Studies” (Chinese). He is currently working on
testing theories of public service motivation across different contexts and research on
government-owned enterprises.

Kirk Chang is Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Research Convenor in the School of
Business and Law, University of East London. He is a HR consultant and mediator at the HC HRM
Consultancy Ltd., specialising in the facilitation of organizational performance and enhancing the
workplace experience for employees. His clients include private sectors, SMEs, local councils, NGO
charities and the NHS. Prof. Chang received his Ph.D. in Occupational Psychology (Manchester)
and was awarded his first lectureship in 1995. He is a knowledge disseminator, learning facilitator
and research practitioner in academic enterprise. His current duties involve supervising scholarly
activities, leading business consultancy and managing research development. Prof. Chang is a
Chartered Scientist of the British Science Council (CSci), Academic Fellow of Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development (FCIPD), Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (FHEA), Member
of the British of Academy of Management (BAM), Member of the International Association of
Applied Psychology (IAAP), Chartered Psychologist (CPsychol) and Associate Fellow (AFBPsS) of
the British Psychological Society. His research interests are in the areas of organisational
leadership, employee behaviour and performance management. He has also published book
chapters, book reviewing reports and peer-reviewed journal articles in both British and
international journals, and presented research papers at conferences in fifteen different countries
around the world.

29
Table I
Potential triggers of negative emotion
Viewpoints Manifestation Core relational
themes†
Employee’s AI-M may imply triggers of negative emotion at the individual level:
viewpoints • AI has an ability to replace human labor in mechanical and routine tasks of a job, such as manual and Fear, Anger
non-heuristic duties.
• AI-M implies the likelihood of job-replacement, in which employees may develop concerns about their Fear, Disgust
job security and career development opportunity, leading to the negative feeling about AI-M.
• Negative feeling in the workplace (e.g., job insecurity, limited career opportunity) may cause poor job Fear, Anger, Sadness
satisfaction and deteriorated well-being.

Manager’s AI-M may imply triggers of negative at the managers’ level:

viewpoints • AI has an ability to take over the ownership and responsibility of decision-making in managerial policies Disgust, Sadness
and practices.
• AI may compromise managers’ job roles and affect their influence in the teams, groups and the Fear, Anger, Sadness
organization.
• AI acts as career threat rather than opportunity in the eyes of some managers. Fear, Disgust

Note. AI = Artificial intelligence; AI-M = AI-driven management.

†
. The core relational themes are proposed by the Appraisal Theory (Lazarus, 1991 & 1998), including: Anger (a demeaning offense against me
and mine), Fear (facing an immediate, concrete, and overwhelming physical danger), Sadness (having experienced an irrevocable loss), Disgust
(taking in or being too close to an indigestible object or idea) and Happiness (making reasonable progress toward the realization of a goal).

30
Table II
Summary of employee’s and manager’s strategies
Level Manifestation

Employee’s • Cognitive reframing: This is a psychological tactic that trains people to

strategies think differently about the challenge(s) that they cannot actually change. If
AI-M implies some negative impact in the workplace, individuals may find
out its potential benefit and maximize such benefit.

• Classical conditioning process: When two things generally occur together,

encountering one can bring the other to mind; when the association is
established, people tend to interpret such association more neutrally. When
employees are told what problems (such as AI-M’s side-effect) might
come, they would feel more confident and better-prepared in coping with
the problems.

• Positive reinforcement: Behavior can be strengthened through positive

reinforcement when something desirable occurs following the behavior.
When employees understand the potential of AI and receive its benefits,
they are more willing to interact with AI. When employees have more
experience in interacting with AI, they are more likely to develop their
confidence of applying AI into their job duties.

Manager’s • Focus-group scheme: First, prior to the implementation of AI-M,

strategies focus-groups help managers to evaluate the readiness of their employees for
AI-M, in which managers can provide further information and support,
guiding their employees to prepare for the potential impact of AI-M.
Second, during the implementation of AI-M, managers may use
focus-groups to collect feedback from the employees, monitoring the
progress of AI-M from employees’ perspectives.

• Mentor-mentee scheme: During the implementation of AI-M, managers

may provide a clear framework that outlines the details of mentor-mentee
schemes, such as duties of mentors and mentees, frequency and duration of

31
 mentoring meetings. A clear framework helps both mentors and mentees
appreciate their respective roles during the mentoring activities, facilitating
the effectiveness of schemes. With the support from the mentor-mentee
schemes, mentees can cope with AI-M’s influence more effectively.

• Pilot scheme: With a sensible pilot scheme in place, managers are able to
estimate whether AI-M generates subtle impact on their workforce,
business operations or any other aspects of the organization. Pilot schemes
also offer a chance of trial-and-error, enabling managers to find out the
best way to reach a desired result and understand the best applicability of
AI-M.

Note. AI = Artificial intelligence; AI-M = AI-driven management.

32