Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the initial reactions and perceptions of knowledge workers to a planned implementation of robotic process automation (RPA). Using purposive sampling, we conduct a case study in an industry in which workers’ jobs are notoriously vulnerable to automation: we study an accounting firm that is planning to introduce RPA into their core accounting processes. While our informants did raise the expected concerns about job security and loss of control over work, the initial reactions to the technology were surprisingly positive. The informants even expressed enthusiasm and genuine curiosity towards the capabilities of RPA. Overall, our results challenge the views outlined in previous academic literature and popular press concerning the fears and anxieties associated with the introduction of automation technologies in information-intensive knowledge work. To conclude, we theorize on the emerging positively dispersed uncertainty concerning the nature of RPA and the relativistic nature of worker reactions that potentially impact workplace atmosphere.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Cognitive automation leverages different algorithms and technology approaches to analyze unstructured data such as natural language processing, text analytics, data mining, semantic technology and machine learning (Lacity et al. 2018).
- 2.
While the word robot may bring to mind an image of a physical machine, RPA refers to software that automates service tasks previously performed by humans (Asatiani and Penttinen 2016; Lacity and Willcocks 2016). Software robots emulate human execution of tasks (Hallikainen et al. 2018). Instead of interacting with other software through application program interfaces, the software is rules based and interacts with the graphical user interface: typing login credentials to specified fields, moving and clicking a mouse, copying and pasting text from one window to another (Penttinen et al. 2018a).
- 3.
Link to one of the videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjdLAqgwMKA.
- 4.
See, for example, Penttinen et al. (2018b) or the e-invoicing market reports in Koch (2014) or the Eurostat statistics in https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat.
References
Abdinnour-Helm, S., Lengnick-Hall, M. L., & Lengnick-Hall, C. A. (2003). Pre-implementation attitudes and organizational readiness for implementing an enterprise resource planning system. European Journal of Operational Research, 146(2), 258–273.
Akst, D. (2013). Automation anxiety. The Wilson Quarterly Summer, 3, 1–13.
Argote, L., Goodman, P. S., & Schkade, D. (1983). The human side of robotics: How workers react to a robot. Sloan Management Review, 16(1), 1–33.
Asatiani, A., & Penttinen, E. (2016). Turning robotic process automation into commercial success - Case OpusCapita. Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases, 6(2), 1–8.
Asatiani, A., Penttinen, E., Rinta-Kahila, T., & Salovaara, A. (2019). Implementation of automation as distributed cognition in knowledge work organizations: Six recommendations for managers. In 40th International Conference on Information Systems, Munich (pp. 1–16).
Atkinson, R. D. (2012). US manufacturing decline and economic development prospects. Economic Development Journal, 11(3), 5.
Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3), 3–30.
Bainbridge, L. (1983). Ironies of automation. Automatica, 19(6), 775–779.
Beaudry, A., & Pinsonneault, A. (2005). Understanding user responses to information technology: A coping model of user adaptation. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 493–524.
Blaker, K., White, L., & Poyser, W. (2013). Dispensary assistants’ attitudes and perceptions regarding automated dispensing machines in community pharmacies. International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management, 14(1/2), 90.
Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007). The sage handbook of grounded theory. Sage.
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014) The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. WW Norton & Company.
Bygstad, B. (2016). Generative innovation: A comparison of lightweight and heavyweight IT. Journal of Information Technology, 32(2), 180–193.
Cain Miller, C. (2016). The long-term jobs killer is not China. It’s automation. [WWW Document]. The New York Times. Retrieved April 17, 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs-killer-is-not-china-its-automation.html.
Carr, N. (2015). The glass cage: How our computers are changing us, 1 edn. W. W. Norton & Company.
Chao, G. T., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1986). Employee perceptions on the implementation of robotic manufacturing technology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(1), 70–76.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, United Kingdom: SAGE Publications.
Davis, L. E. (1962). The effects of automation on job design. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 2(1), 53–71.
Delehanty, G. E. (1966). Office automation and the occupation structure. IMR; Industrial Management Review (pre-1986) 7(2), 99.
Engelbart, D. (1962). Augmenting human intellect: A conceptual framework. Contract, 49(3578), 80.
Faunce, W. A., Hardin, E., & Jacobson, E. H. (1962). Automation and the employee. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 340(1), 60–68.
Ford, M. (2015). Rise of the robots: Technology and the threat of a jobless future. Basic Books.
Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280.
Fung, H. P. (2014). Criteria, use cases and effects of information technology process automation (ITPA). Advances in Robotic and Automation, 3(3), 1–11.
Gnambs, T., & Appel, M. (2019). Are robots becoming unpopular? Changes in attitudes towards autonomous robotic systems in Europe. Computers in Human Behavior, 93, 53–61.
Gohmann, S. F., Guan, J., Barker, R. M., & Faulds, D. J. (2005). Perceptions of sales force automation: Differences between sales force and management. Industrial Marketing Management, 34(4), 337–343.
Hallikainen, P., Bekkhus, R., & Pan, S. L. (2018). How OpusCapita used internal RPA capabilities to offer services to clients. MIS Quarterly Executive, 17(1), 41–52.
Herold, D. M., Farmer, S. M., & Mobley, M. I. (1995). Pre-implementation attitudes toward the introduction of robots in a unionized environment. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 12(3), 155–173.
Hoos, I. R. (1960). The impact of office automation on workers. International Labour Review, 82, 363.
Horvitz, E. (1999). Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems the CHI is the Limit—CHI’99 (pp. 159–166).
Jacobson, E., Trumbo, D., Cheek, G., & Nangle, J. (1959). Employee attitudes toward technological change in a medium sized insurance company. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43(6), 349.
Jones, E. L. I., Sundaram, S., Chin, X. Y., & Chin, W. W. (2002). Factors leading to sales force automation use: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 22(1993), 145–156.
Keillor, B. D., Bashaw, E. R., & Pettijohn, C. E. (1997). Salesforce automation issues prior to implementation: The relationship between attitudes toward technology, experience and productivity. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 12(3), 209–219.
Keynes, J. M. (1933). Economic possibilities for our grandchildren. essays in persuasion, 358–373.
Lacity, M., Scheepers, R., & Willcocks, L. P. (2018). Cognitive automation as part of Deakin University’s digital strategy. MIS Quarterly Executive, 17(2), 4.
Lacity, M., & Willcocks, L. (2016). Robotic process automation at Telefónica O2. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15(1), 21–35.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping, stress, appraisal, and coping.
Licklider, J. C. R. (1960). Man-computer symbiosis. IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics HFE-1 (1), 4–11.
Majchrzak, A., & Cotton, J. C. (1988). A longitudinal study of adjustment to technological change: The case of job transfers from mass to computer-automated batch production. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61(1), 43–66.
Olson, M. H., & White, N. H. (1979). Impact of office automation on society: Implications for education, policy and research.
Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative evaluation and research methods, qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). London: SAGE Publications.
Penttinen, E., Kasslin, H., & Asatiani, A. (2018a). How to choose between robotic process automation and back-end system automation? In 26th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2018 (pp. 1–14).
Penttinen, E., Halme, M., Lyytinen, K., & Myllynen, N. (2018b). What Influences Choice of Business-to-Business Connectivity Platforms? International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 22(4), 479–509.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (2005). Language and meaning: Data collection in qualitative research. Journal of Counseling Psychology.
Salovaara, A., Lyytinen, K., & Penttinen, E. (2019). High reliability in digital organizing: Mindlessness, the frame problem, and digital operations. MIS Quarterly, 43(2), 555–578.
Sills, A. (2016). ROSS and Watson tackle the law [WWW Document]. IBM Watson Blog. Retrieved April 17, 2018, from https://www.ibm.com/blogs/watson/2016/01/ross-and-watson-tackle-the-law/.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: SAGE Publications.
Sutton, S. G., Holt, M., & Arnold, V. (2016). “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated”—Artificial intelligence research in accounting. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 22, 60–73.
The Economist. (2016). Automation and Anxiety [WWW Document]. The Economist. Retrieved April 17, 2018, from https://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21700758-will-smarter-machines-cause-mass-unemployment-automation-and-anxiety.
Vaughan, K., & MacVicar, A. (2004). Employees’ pre-implementation attitudes and perceptions to e-learning a banking case study analysis. Journal of European Industrial Training, 28(5), 400–413.
Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. SAGE Publications.
Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power. New York: Basic Books.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
1.1 Appendix 1: Interview Questionnaire
Interview guide for specialist interviews
Respondent’s background information
-
Age and education?
-
Prior work experience?
-
Positions held at AccComp?
-
Current responsibilities at AccComp?
General questions of daily work
-
What systems are you currently using in your work and for what purposes? Do you move information from one system to another manually?
-
AccComp implemented a new accounting information system recently. Has your work changed after the implementation of the new system? How has it changed?
-
Does the system(s) that you use have the necessary features to be able to carry out your work?
-
What is your estimate of the ratio of data that you receive in paper or digital format?
Initial reactions to and acceptance of new technology
-
Tutorial videos of RPA:
-
Thinking about the tutorial videos about a software robot, have you heard of or used that kind of software robot before?
-
What kind of initial feelings do software robots evoke in you?
-
Did your understanding of what software robots are and how they work change after you watched the video?
-
Do you see the software robot as a positive or negative thing regarding your work, and if so, why?
-
Let’s look at this list of different financial accounting processes. What processes in this list do you handle at work?
-
Can you take me through the [specific financial accounting from the list] process step-by-step and describe it in as much detail as possible? For example, how you enter information into the system, what problems you might encounter, what is repetitive and routine in the process where you can just “switch your brain off,” when do you need to focus to get the information right in the system, and so on.
-
Follow up: Do you follow a clear workflow list written by someone else, or have you yourself formed an informal workflow in your work?
-
How often do you react to unpredictable anomalies in your work that require a lot of thinking and attention? Can you handle those situations alone, or do you need help from someone else?
-
How many clients do you have at the moment, and do you feel you have enough time to handle your work without feeling overloaded at all times?
-
Can you describe how you solved a problematic situation(s) that you encountered in the accounting system(s) or overall?
-
Have you noticed that a small error would lead to a bigger error? Can you give an example?
-
-
Do you report errors forward, and if so, how do you do it?
-
What parts of your work tasks do you especially enjoy?
-
If you consider that a software robot can take over some of your tasks, what would you do with the time that is left over? Would you, for example, want to take more clients or concentrate more deeply on current clients, aim for a better work position that has a higher salary, or possibly something else?
-
Is it a good thing if repetitive mechanical work decreases or is even eliminated from your work? If so, why?
-
Are you more willing to embrace a new, more efficient accounting system that you can set to automate some tasks, or a software robot? For what reasons?
-
Do you consider software robots to be a progressive, innovative solution to be used in knowledge work?
-
If you think on a more general level, how easy or hard do you find it to adapt to technological changes?
-
How do you feel about learning new skills, for example, learning how to use a new software to set up software robots to run certain tasks, as in the videos?
-
Would you be ready to change your work description and take new tasks to handle, for example, teaching a software robot how to carry out work tasks?
-
Would it be harder to keep up your skills that you need in work if a software robot handled some of your tasks in a [specific financial accounting process]?
-
Overall, do you feel that you are informed well enough of these software robots and their actual impacts on work? What would you want to know more about?
-
Would it be important for you that you can participate in the software robot design process?
-
If yes: In what ways would you want to participate, and what kind of impact would you aim to have by participating in the design process?
-
Interview guide for manager interviews
Respondent’s background information
-
Education?
-
Prior work experience?
-
Positions held at AccComp?
-
Current responsibilities at AccComp?
General questions
-
Does AccComp follow certain management principles, for example, Lean, Six Sigma or TQM?
-
What kind of role does technology have at AccComp, and do you follow your field of work’s latest technological developments?
-
What kind of message does the C-suite aim to give about the role of technology within the organization?
-
Does AccComp have an automation strategy?
-
Do the business and IT functions work together? If so, how much and in what kind of matters?
Initial reactions to and acceptance of new technology
Tutorial video of RPA
-
If you think of the tutorial video about software robotics, have you heard of or seen that kind of software robot in action before?
-
Did your image of what software robots are and how they work change after you watched the video?
-
What kind of initial feelings software robots evoke in you?
-
When you think of the video, do you see the software robot as a positive or negative thing regarding financial management work in the company? If so, why?
-
If you consider that a software robot can take over some financial management tasks, how would you allocate the financial management professionals’ time that is left over?
-
Do financial accounting specialists have the expertise to, for example, teach software robots how to handle work tasks or the willingness to learn new skills?
-
Are your workers aware of the possibilities and changes that come with software robots? Have you heard them talking about these software robots or similar topics?
-
Do you have a roadmap for implementing RPA yet?
-
If yes: Have you done an RPA proof of concept yet?
-
-
Do you have a communications plan to inform about the software robots?
-
If yes: How long before you decide to start implementing them are you going to begin communicating about software robots?
-
Do you already know what you want to achieve with robotic process automation in your unit?
-
How easy or hard do you find it to adapt to new technological changes from your own and the organization’s point of view?
-
Do you consider software robots to be a progressive, innovative solution to be used in knowledge work?
-
When you think of recruitment for financial management positions (e.g., accountants, payments receivable clerks), what characteristics and/or skills do you emphasize in recruiting for these positions?
-
How much do you anticipate the changing needs in skill sets when recruiting new personnel?
-
How have the specialist teams been composed? Does your team have diverse expertise?
-
How independent are, for example, accountants and payments receivable clerks in their work?
-
Do the specialists follow a clear workflow list written by someone else, or have they formed an informal workflow when they carry out their tasks?
-
Do you rotate clients or tasks from time to time between your subordinates, or do they work on the same client and tasks all the time?
-
Do you take pre-emptive actions to prevent errors from happening in work?
-
Have you noticed that a small error could lead to a bigger error? Can you give an example?
-
Do you think that errors could be better anticipated or avoided with training?
-
What kind of training or retraining do you provide for workers?
1.2 Appendix 2: Informant Profiles
Name | Age; education | Familiarity with RPA | Attitude towards technology | Pre-implementation perceptions of RPA |
---|---|---|---|---|
Specialist Susan | 41; business college graduate | Had heard about RPA around a year ago, examples of purchase invoice process development. Not familiar with true implications on work processes | Technological change does not frighten Susan; she has cautious attitude, “let’s see [what it can do].” | Positive codes: enhanced productivity Negative codes: job security, technical difficulties, loss of control over work |
Specialist Elizabeth | 63; business college graduate | Not familiar with RPA prior to interview | Is glad to learn new skills, even coding | Positive codes: new opportunities at work, upgrade of jobs, reduced errors Negative codes: job security, fragmentation of work processes, loss of control over work, potential deskilling Neutral codes: RPA’s cognitive capabilities, expansion of responsibilities |
Senior specialist Jane | 56; BBA | Not familiar with RPA prior to interview | Works primarily in development, so the threshold for taking on new technologies is not so high | Positive codes: reduced errors, upgrade of jobs, new opportunities at work Negative codes: job security, fragmentation of work processes Neutral codes: expansion of responsibilities |
Specialist Emily | 32; BBA | Not familiar with RPA prior to interview | Is quite knowledgeable about systems (other than RPA), follows developments with interest, and finds it easy to adopt new information technology and systems | Positive codes: upgrade of jobs, reduced errors, new opportunities at work Negative codes: job security |
Specialist Margaret | 56; business college graduate | Not familiar with RPA prior to interview | Does not mind learning to use new systems; on the contrary, she finds it interesting | Positive codes: even out peaks in workload Negative codes: job security, simplification of work tasks (neg) |
Specialist Jenny | 35; business college graduate | Other than having noticed some articles in the popular press, was not familiar with RPA prior to interview | Positive attitude towards technological change. Is cautious about the long-term impacts [of technology implementation], but adopting new technologies is not a problem | Positive codes: upgrade of jobs, simplification of work tasks (pos) |
Specialist Helen | 45; BBA | Not familiar with RPA prior to interview | When prompted about her attitude towards technology, Helen stated that “You get used to everything, everything changes.” | Positive codes: upgrade of jobs, enabling more in-depth analysis of accounting Negative codes: job security Neutral codes: RPA’s cognitive capabilities |
Specialist Sarah | 29; BBA | Has read news about RPA replacing workers, e.g., in claims handling. Not very familiar with the technology; however, understands that they are rules based | Adapts well to technological changes; the older she gets, the more training she feels is necessary | Positive codes: upgrade of jobs, RPA driving BPR, enabling more in-depth analysis of accounting. Negative codes: job security, loss of control over work. |
Specialist Christine | 51; vocational school graduate | Not familiar with RPA prior to interview | Adapts relatively well to new systems. Has been involved in many system changes during the last 10 years | Positive codes: enhanced productivity, upgrade of jobs, enabling more in-depth analysis of accounting. |
Team lead John | 48; BBA | Has heard the term RPA but is not familiar with the technology | Some technological changes are easier than others. If there exist good documentation and guidelines, then it is easy. Depends much on the user interface, as most of accounting software has the same functionalities and just the user interface varies | Positive codes: even out peaks in workload, simplification of work tasks (pos), enhanced productivity Negative codes: hazardous work processes. |
Director Lisa | 52; MSc Econ | Has read white papers and attended seminars on RPA. Understands the business case but is not familiar with RPA in practice | Depends on the usability, if it is intuitive and Lisa does not need to spend time searching for functionalities [then it is easy]. If there is a testable prototype of a system, then Lisa is interested; if not, then she might feel reserved | Positive codes: reduced errors, RPA driving BPR, RPA as marketing tool Negative codes: need to reallocate workers to new tasks |
Vice president Robert | 60; MSc Econ | Somewhat familiar with RPA. | In Robert’s position, he feels that he needs to actively adopt new technologies. Overall, he is excited about them but would not want to adopt beta versions of systems; he likes to adopt mature, established systems | Positive codes: upgrade of jobs, easy implementation, heavyweight vs lightweight automation Negative codes: job security |
Manager Mary | 50; MSc Econ | Understands quite well what RPA is | Takes what is coming at her. Is used to system changes. Finds it natural, in her position, to learn how to use new systems | Positive codes: upgrade of jobs, even out peaks in workload, enhanced productivity, reduced errors |
1.3 Appendix 3: Coding Scheme
Coding stages | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Description | Example quote | Open coding | # | Axial coding | # | Thematic coding (reference) |
Informant expresses enthusiasm regarding RPA | “Software robots create suppliers in the system, receive invoices, do the postings, interpret the content of the invoice and send them out for approval. So in my mind, there are endless opportunities, and that we are in the forefront thinking about this and taking them into use.” (Team lead John) | Enthusiasm | 4 | Upgrade of jobs | 28 | Upgrade of jobs (Blaker et al. 2013; Chao and Kozlowski 1986; Herold et al. 1995) |
Informant feels that RPA will lead to an expansion of responsibilities | “How can one person work with the robot? [I mean] the human expert would need to master large and wide work entities if the robot replaced much of the manual work.” (Specialist Elizabeth) | Expansion of responsibilities | 2 | Opportunities to move to managerial and supervisory roles (Chao and Kozlowski 1986) | ||
Informant feels that RPA could provide new opportunities at work | “With RPA in place, I could take more customer companies.” (Specialist Elizabeth) | New opportunities at work | 3 | |||
Informant feels that RPA might lead to simplification of work tasks with positive consequences | “[the implementation of RPA] could generate insights on how to “straighten out” our processes … then, RPA could take care of the routine tasks.” (Specialist Jenny) | Simplification of work tasks (pos) | 2 | |||
Informant feels that using RPA will lead to upgrade of jobs | “Now it feels that we don’t have time to analyze the numbers; [with RPA] we could also analyze book-keeping data, and we could serve our clients better by saying, hey, this is your solvency ratio, I prepared this for you.” (Specialist Sarah) | Upgrade of jobs | 17 | |||
Informant views RPA as a way to even out peaks in workload | “… we need to get things done by the third day of any given month … so the first week is very hectic … [the work process] would be smoother with RPA.” (Specialist Margaret) | Even out peaks in workload | 3 | Even out peaks in workload | 13 | Enhanced productivity enabled by automation of labor-intensive tasks (Blaker et al. 2013) |
Informant feels that productivity would be increased through RPA implementation | “I think the time required for one client would decrease, so you would need to take something to compensate for that. You cannot just think that, ok, I am going to take a bit longer coffee break. So you would take more clients.” (Specialist Susan) | Enhanced productivity | 6 | |||
Informant feels that RPA can ignite business process development (BPR) and digitization initiatives | “[With RPA], we would like to improve our pace in developing automation. … we have the as-is situation and then to-be situation, and we would like to get to the to-be situation quicker with RPA.” (Director Lisa) | RPA driving BPR and digitization of work processes | 4 | |||
Informant perceives RPA as something that will enable him/her to conduct more thorough analysis of accounting data | “I could use the time that is freed up to search for discrepancies in the figures because now we have had to leave the small differences hanging there in the balance sheet, because we have not had time [to correct them], and they may have been there since 2012 when I was not even the book-keeper for this client.” (Specialist Sarah) | Enabling more in-depth analysis of accounting | 3 | Enabling more in-depth analysis of accounting | 6 | Informating (Zuboff 1988) |
Informant discusses RPA as a means to document work processes | “… we talk about work documentation. Often, accountants have some documentation for their own tasks … sometimes we need to shift work between our two offices, and then, we have at least two invoice processing systems in place.” (Senior specialist Jane) | Documentation tool | 3 | |||
Informant feels that the amount of errors would be reduced with RPA | “Some of my work, such as processing these energy invoices, is very routine-like. You type in the invoice number and first find the contract number, then you type it in, dates, due dates, reference number, amount, VAT code and VAT, then row information, basic fee, energy fee, and then you accept. That’s routine. And prone to errors because you do it by hand. Now that’s being developed [through RPA].” (Specialist Emily) | Reduced errors | 8 | Reduced errors | 8 | |
Informant fears that RPA might have detrimental effects on job security | “I am not sure if I am correct, but these software robots will probably remove a lot of jobs, and the residual work is expert work that requires higher education.” (Specialist Elizabeth) | Job security | 9 | Job security | 10 | Job security (Blaker et al. 2013; Chao and Kozlowski 1986; Herold et al. 1995) |
Informant feels that RPA implementation might require the reallocation of workers to new tasks | “There might be challenges in relocating the persons whose jobs are being automated. Will all of them be able to become, through retraining, experts on RPA?” (Director Lisa) | Need to reallocate workers to new tasks | 1 | |||
Informant feels that RPA will lead to fragmentation of work processes | “… no, I don’t think it would be difficult [to learn to interact with RPA], but I do think that the nature of the work would change a lot. The work would be fragmented and divided such that in the end, humans would just search for errors in the system. This is a big prejudice.” (Specialist Elizabeth) | Fragmentation of work processes | 2 | Loss of control over work through fragmentation of work | 22 | Black boxing (Argote et al. 1983; Gohmann et al. 2005; Majchrzak and Cotton 1988) |
Informant expresses fear that RPA might lead to hazardous work processes | “In accounting, a person handling purchase invoices and doing book-keeping and handling payments, that person cannot be the same [due to the Finnish accounting legislation]. … this would be a type of dangerous work task combination if robots were handling all of these [tasks].” (Team lead John) | Hazardous work process - lack of validation | 1 | |||
Informant fears that RPA might result in a loss of control over work | “I think it would be more difficult to track down if the robot has made a mistake – more difficult to track down those mistakes than the ones that I make.” (Specialist Sarah) | Loss of control over work | 4 | |||
Informant expresses concerns on potential deskilling resulting from RPA implementation | “With RPA in place, you would not learn how to do accounting in the same way [as without RPA]. You would need to get that learning experience from elsewhere.” (Specialist Elizabeth) | Potential deskilling | 12 | |||
Informant feels that RPA might lead to simplification of work tasks with negative consequences | “I would not want to just monitor what the RPA does. That’s not my… if I am at work, I need to have something [concrete] to do. Otherwise, I get bored.” (Specialist Margaret) | Simplification of work tasks (neg) | 2 | |||
Informant fears that RPA might cause technical difficulties | “As someone working in accounting, you are of course worried that are they [RPA rules] correct, and what if something goes wrong? When will we catch it and notice it?” (Specialist Susan) | Technical difficulties | 1 | |||
Informant discusses RPA’s cognitive capabilities | “It was shown that the RPA could learn the task that is given and programmed. I don’t know what happens if there is a problem. … Can the RPA go forward and navigate and search somewhere else?” (Specialist Helen) | RPA’s cognitive capabilities | 2 | Perplexity of what a “robot” is | 15 | |
Informant questions whether he/she can trust the capabilities of RPA | “I feel more comfortable trusting the data that I have entered into the system … maybe if I would use robot and see with my own eyes on the screen [what it does], then that would increase my level of trust [in RPA]. (Specialist Susan) | Trust | 2 | |||
Informant is unsure about the capabilities of RPA | “If we start from there, where robots have traditionally been implemented in manufacturing, the contrast to these kinds of robots that would “think,” it is difficult to grasp.” (Manager Mary) | Uncertainty - curiosity of the capabilities of RPA | 11 | |||
Informant discusses his/her attitude towards technology in general | “I am positive towards new technology. I want to stay on top of things.” (Specialist Jenny) | Attitude towards technology | 19 | Respondent background | 41 | N/A |
Informant discusses his/her familiarity with RPA prior to the research project | “I am not well aware of [what] RPA [is]. What is the true impact. I have not followed companies that have implemented it or how it has made processes quicker.” (Specialist Susan) | Familiarity with RPA | 22 | N/A | ||
Informant discusses an application area that he/she finds suitable for RPA | “I would implement RPA in the purchase invoice handling process, in the front part of that process. On the video, RPA went into the e-mail, so it should be able to retrieve [purchase invoice] data from there.” (Manager Mary) | Application area | 4 | N/A | N/A | |
Informant finds RPA easy to implement | “In that robotics example, when there are several software programs, they do not need to be integrated; instead, you operate on top of the software, which has not been possible before.” (Vice president Robert) | Easy implementation | 1 | N/A | N/A | |
Informant considers his/her preferences over front-end vs. back-end automation | “[In back-end automation], the challenge is integration, which is a pain. [RPA is a delight]. The robot sits on top of existing IT infrastructure and starts move between systems without [requiring heavy] integration. That, in my mind, is the biggest issue changing the landscape.” (Vice president Robert) | Front-end vs. back-end automation | 9 | N/A | Lightweight vs. heavyweight automation (Bygstad 2016) | |
Informant feels the need to ensure domain knowledge in the development of RPA | “[When developing RPAs], it would be good to have someone involved who really understands accounting and its requirements. If it is developed simply by engineers who have not done accounting, then it might not work as they initially planned.” (Specialist Helen) | Need to ensure domain knowledge in development of RPA | 1 | N/A | N/A | |
Informant feels that RPA could be used as a marketing tool towards customers | “Our vision includes the digital dimension, and automation is related to this digitalization. It is an important part of our strategy and customer promise. And I see that these software robots are a part of digitalization.” (Director Lisa) | RPA as marketing tool | 2 | N/A | N/A |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Asatiani, A., Penttinen, E., Ruissalo, J., Salovaara, A. (2020). Knowledge Workers’ Reactions to a Planned Introduction of Robotic Process Automation—Empirical Evidence from an Accounting Firm. In: Hirschheim, R., Heinzl, A., Dibbern, J. (eds) Information Systems Outsourcing. Progress in IS. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45819-5_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45819-5_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-45818-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-45819-5
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)