arbiter
JournalsAccount

Beyond stuck in the middle: Application context and role integration of automated leadership in traditional organizations

Annabel Jünke & Frederik Möller

Electronic Markets2026https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-026-00891-2article
AJG 2ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming traditional organizational structures, challenging established leadership paradigms, and reshaping human–machine collaboration in the workplace. As automated leadership agents gain prominence, understanding their expected role and contextual application becomes crucial. Based on 24 qualitative interviews with leaders (31 h total) and three focus groups with employees (4.5 h), this study explores the role integration and application context of automated leadership agents in traditional organizations. Our findings reveal that automated leadership agents are expected to assume multiple roles, such as algorithmic authority , collaborative co-leader , automated leader-assistant , and obedient operator , within the same organizational environment and are positioned in middle management. These role expectations introduce a high risk of role conflict and ambiguity. The findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding and offer practical guidance for traditional organizations aiming to integrate automated leadership agents successfully.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-026-00891-2

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{annabel2026,
  title        = {{Beyond stuck in the middle: Application context and role integration of automated leadership in traditional organizations}},
  author       = {Annabel Jünke & Frederik Möller},
  journal      = {Electronic Markets},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-026-00891-2},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Beyond stuck in the middle: Application context and role integration of automated leadership in traditional organizations

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.