arXiv subjects

Fergus Kidd

Publications and source records attributed to Fergus Kidd.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Work Design and Multidimensional AI Threat as Predictors of Workplace AI Adoption and Depth of Use

Artificial intelligence tools are increasingly embedded in everyday work, yet employees' uptake varies widely even within the same organization. Drawing on sociotechnical and work design perspectives, this research examines whether motivational job characteristics and multidimensional AI threat perceptions jointly predict workplace AI adoption and depth of use. Using cross-sectional survey data from 2,257 employees, we tested group differences across role level, years of experience, and region, along with multivariable predictors of AI adoption and use depth, specifically frequency and duration. Across models, job design, especially skill variety and autonomy, showed the most consistent positive associations with AI adoption, whereas threat dimensions exhibited differentiated patterns for depth of use. Perceived changes in work were positively associated with frequency and duration, while status threat showed a negative but not consistently significant relationship with deeper use. Findings are correlational given the cross-sectional and self-report design. Practical implications emphasize aligning AI enablement efforts with work design and monitoring potential workload expansion alongside adoption initiatives.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Safety First: Psychological Safety as the Key to AI Transformation

Organizations continue to invest in artificial intelligence, yet many struggle to ensure that employees adopt and engage with these tools. Drawing on research highlighting the interpersonal and learning demands of technology use, this study examines whether psychological safety is associated with AI adoption and usage in the workplace. Using survey data from 2,257 employees in a global consulting firm, we test whether psychological safety is associated with adoption, usage frequency, and usage duration; and whether these relationships vary by organizational level, professional experience, or geographic region. Logistic and linear regression analyses show that psychological safety reliably predicts whether employees adopt AI tools but does not predict how often or how long they use AI once adoption has occurred. Moreover, the relationship between psychological safety and AI adoption is consistent across experience levels, role levels, and regions, and no moderation effects emerge. These findings suggest that psychological safety functions as a key antecedent of initial AI engagement but not of subsequent usage intensity. The study underscores the need to distinguish between adoption and sustained use and highlights opportunities for targeted organizational interventions in early-stage AI implementation.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Revisiting UTAUT for the Age of AI: Understanding Employees AI Adoption and Usage Patterns Through an Extended UTAUT Framework

This study investigates whether demographic factors shape adoption and attitudes among employees toward artificial intelligence (AI) technologies at work. Building on an extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), which reintroduces affective dimensions such as attitude, self-efficacy, and anxiety, we surveyed 2,257 professionals across global regions and organizational levels within a multinational consulting firm. Non-parametric tests examined whether three demographic factors (i.e., years of experience, hierarchical level in the organization, and geographic region) were associated with AI adoption, usage intensity, and eight UTAUT constructs. Organizational level significantly predicted AI adoption, with senior employees showing higher usage rates, while experience and region were unrelated to adoption. Among AI users (n = 1,256), frequency and duration of use showed minimal demographic variation. However, omnibus tests revealed small but consistent group differences across several UTAUT constructs, particularly anxiety, performance expectancy, and behavioral intention, suggesting that emotional and cognitive responses to AI vary modestly across contexts. These findings highlight that demographic factors explain limited variance in AI acceptance but remain relevant for understanding contextual nuances in technology-related attitudes. The results underscore the need to integrate affective and organizational factors into models of technology acceptance to support equitable, confident, and sustainable engagement with AI in modern workplaces.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

The Architecture of AI Transformation: Four Strategic Patterns and an Emerging Frontier

Despite extensive investment in artificial intelligence, 95% of enterprises report no measurable profit impact from AI deployments (MIT, 2025). In this theoretical paper, we argue that this gap reflects paradigmatic lock-in that channels AI into incremental optimization rather than structural transformation. Using a cross-case analysis, we propose a 2x2 framework that reconceptualizes AI strategy along two independent dimensions: the degree of transformation achieved (incremental to transformational) and the treatment of human contribution (reduced to amplified). The framework surfaces four patterns now dominant in practice: individual augmentation, process automation, workforce substitution, and a less deployed frontier of collaborative intelligence. Evidence shows that the first three dimensions reinforce legacy work models and yield localized gains without durable value capture. Realizing collaborative intelligence requires three mechanisms: complementarity (pairing distinct human and machine strengths), co-evolution (mutual adaptation through interaction), and boundary-setting (human determination of ethical and strategic parameters). Complementarity and boundary-setting are observable in regulated and high-stakes domains; co-evolution is largely absent, which helps explain limited system-level impact. Our findings in a case study analysis illustrated that advancing toward collaborative intelligence requires material restructuring of roles, governance, and data architecture rather than additional tools. The framework reframes AI transformation as an organizational design challenge: moving from optimizing the division of labor between humans and machines to architecting their convergence, with implications for operating models, workforce development, and the future of work.

cs.CY↗