Workshop Theme

In the workshop, we seek to unpack the meaning of human-machine partnerships (HMP) by highlighting that how we define HMP will shape how we design technologies in/for the future of work. We discuss social and design implications in various professional and organizational settings and explore how we can broaden and redefine HMP. Encouraging interdisciplinary perspectives, we aim to develop a taxonomy of HMP by which we can broaden our relationship with embodied AI agents [5] and also evaluate and reconsider existing theories, methodologies, and epistemologies in HMP research. The following list of themes and questions will be addressed, subject to adjustment based on the interests and perspectives of participants:

1. Unpacking the Meaning of Partnerships between Humans and Machines

Building on the discourse of human-AI partnerships (e.g., [15]), we revisit the vision of a new human-machine symbiosis (e.g., [12]) to advance the meaning of human-embodied AI agent collaboration. Fifty years ago, J.C.R. Licklider published the paper, “Man-Computer Symbiosis,” which anticipated a “very close coupling between the human and the electronic members of the partnership.” The stronger agency of emerging technologies in recent years necessitates the reimagination and reestablishment of the meaning of that symbiotic partnership and its implications for the design of emerging technologies. How can this partnership benefit both employers and employees and how can we alleviate the concerns of non-managerial workers about being replaced by new technologies?

2. Agency and Autonomy of Human and Embodied AI Agents

Emerging technologies have increasingly pervaded our workplaces with new abilities in various domains. For example, new collaborative robots with more sensors and learning capabilities can now work alongside workers, unlike the previous industrial robots that were segregated from workers. They are considered as a core technology that brings the new vision of manufacturing 4.0. As these robots work with workers [9, 22], they are considered co-workers, colleagues, and assistants, posing questions about the evolving roles of human and embodied AI agents in workplaces. How will the divisions of labor between human workers and these technologies be shifted? In the future of work settings, the interaction between humans and embodied AI agents will be a multifold interaction. How does an embodied AI agent’s presence affect how humans interact with each other? How do embodied AI agents shape human workers’ team and organizational contexts [40], such as power dynamics? How will they differ over short- and long-term interaction? Recent scholarship has focused on human agency in future work settings, such as worker-centered design, managerial vision [12], etc. There is a lack of similar attention to technology agencies [3], particularly our focus on the agency of embodied AI agents.

3. Political and Ethical Implications of Embodied AI Agent Design

With the increasing implementation of embodied AI agents in workplaces, it is inevitable that the roles of human workers will be redesigned around the augmentation of human capabilities. What are the desired outcomes of a collaboration with machine workers, and how can we empower human workers? Integrating human workers in the process of adopting new technologies is often emphasized in the discussion of empowering workers [4, 43]. How can we provide human workers, who are new to these emerging technologies, with a feeling of integration and participation? How can we support human workers to collaborate with embodied AI agents? How do we ethically create new tasks for human workers and new work distribution between humans and machines (e.g., food delivery robots operated remotely by human workers [13])? How should we redesign contemporary workplace technologies for human-machine collaboration as a social intervention to existing power dynamics between managerial and non-managerial workers?

4. Epistemological and Methodological Challenges in the Future of Work with Machines

The workplace has been a primary field site for CSCW researchers, and workplace studies have developed the conceptual and technological foundation of CSCW [32, 35, 37]. Given that many workplaces are not already based in stationary places, specifically the unsettled and temporary workplaces of knowledge workers [10, 14], it has been a new challenge to capture practices and experiences of work with embodied AI agents. For example, with what methods can we study workers when a physical workplace no longer exists, as in the case of mobile workers? How can researchers maintain long-term relationships with field sites, when one considers the power dynamics within organizations? Another challenge is to understand cultural, social, and organizational factors that affect the future of work with new technologies. Previous experimental studies have shown that the presence of robots shapes human performance [1, 17, 28]. How does the embodied non-anthropomorphic presence, shape, or behavior of AI agents [24] influence human performance in collaboration? How can we leverage workers’ knowledge into technological design to avoid their de-skillization?

[1] Matt Beane and Wanda J Orlikowski. 2015. What difference does a robot make? The material enactment of distributed coordination. Organization Science 26, 6 (2015), 1553–1573.

[2] Amy Cheatle, Hannah Pelikan, Malte Jung, and Steven Jackson. 2019. Sensing (Co)Operations: Articulation and Compensation in the Robotic OperatingRoom.Proc.ACMHum.-Comput.Interact.3,CSCW,Article225(Nov.2019),26pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359327

[3] EunJeong Cheon, Shenshen Han, and Norman Makoto Su. 2021. Jarvis in Motion: A Research Artifact for Circulating Lifestyle Values in Public. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (2021), 1–27.

[4] ChristopherAChung.1996.Humanissuesinfluencingthesuccessfulimplementationofadvancedmanufacturingtechnology.JournalofEngineering and Technology Management 13, 3-4 (1996), 283–299.

[5] Kate Darling. 2021. The New Breed: How to Think About Robots. Penguin UK.

[6] Jeanne Dietsch. 2010. People meeting robots in the workplace. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine 17, 2 (jun 2010), 15–16. https://doi.org/10.

1109/MRA.2010.936950

[7] Lynn Dombrowski, Adriana Alvarado Garcia, and Jessica Despard. 2017. Low-wage precarious workers’ sociotechnical practices working towards

addressing wage theft. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 4585–4598.

[8] PelleEhn.2019.ScandinavianDesign:OnParticipationandSkill.InParticipatoryDesign.CRCPress,41–77. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203744338-4

[9] Shirley Adriane Elprama, Charlotte IC Jewell, An Jacobs, Ilias El Makrini, and Bram Vanderborght. 2017. Attitudes of factory workers towards

industrial and collaborative robots. In Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction.

113–114.

[10] Ingrid Erickson and Mohammad Hossein Jarrahi. 2016. Infrastructuring and the challenge of dynamic seams in mobile knowledge work. In

Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on Computer-Supported cooperative work & social computing. 1323–1336.

[11] SarahE.Fox,VeraKhovanskaya,ClaraCrivellaro,NiloufarSalehi,LynnDombrowski,ChinmayKulkarni,LillyIrani,andJodiForlizzi.2020.Worker- Centered Design: Expanding HCI Methods for Supporting Labor. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing

Systems(Honolulu,HI,USA)(CHIEA’20).AssociationforComputingMachinery,NewYork,NY,USA,1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.3375157

[12] Sarah E Fox, Kiley Sobel, and Daniela K Rosner. 2019. Managerial Visions: stories of upgrading and maintaining the public restroom with IoT. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–15.

[13] Conor Grant. 2019. Human-guided burrito bots raise questions about the future of robo-delivery. https://thehustle.co/kiwibots-autonomous-food- delivery/

[14] Jeff Hemsley, Ingrid Erickson, Mohammad Hossein Jarrahi, and Amir Karami. 2020. Digital nomads, coworking, and other expressions of mobile work on Twitter. First Monday (2020).

[15] Lilly C. Irani and M. Six Silberman. 2013. Turkopticon: Interrupting Worker Invisibility in Amazon Mechanical Turk. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Paris, France) (CHI ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2470742

[16] Mohammad Hossein Jarrahi. 2018. Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Work: Human-AI Symbiosis in Organizational Decision Making. Business Horizons(aug2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.03.007

[17] Malte F Jung, Jin Joo Lee, Nick DePalma, Sigurdur O Adalgeirsson, Pamela J Hinds, and Cynthia Breazeal. 2013. Engaging robots: easing complex human-robot teamwork using backchanneling. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work. 1555–1566.

[18] Vera Khovanskaya, Lynn Dombrowski, Jeffrey Rzeszotarski, and Phoebe Sengers. 2019. The Tools of Management: Adapting Historical Union Tactics to Platform-Mediated Labor. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (2019), 1–22.

[19] RochelleLaPlante,MSixSilberman,andIndustriegewerkschaftMetall.2016.Buildingtrustincrowdworkerforums:Workerownership,governance, and work outcomes. Proceedings of WebSci16. ACM (2016), 35–63.

[20] J. C.R. Licklider. 1960. Man-Computer Symbiosis. IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics HFE-1, 1 (1960), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/ THFE2.1960.4503259

[21] Sara Ljungblad, Jirina Kotrbova, Mattias Jacobsson, Henriette Cramer, and Karol Niechwiadowicz. 2012. Hospital robot at work: something alien or an intelligent colleague?. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work. 177–186.

[22] JosephE.Michaelis,AmandaSiebert-Evenstone,DavidWilliamsonShaffer,andBilgeMutlu.2020.CollaborativeorSimplyUncaged?Understanding Human-Cobot Interactions in Automation. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376547

[23] Bilge Mutlu and Jodi Forlizzi. 2008. Robots in organizations: The role of workflow, social, and environmental factors in human-robot interaction. In HRI 2008 - Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction: Living with Robots. 287–294. https://doi.org/10. 1145/1349822.1349860

[24] Nicolas Nostadt, David A Abbink, Oliver Christ, and Philipp Beckerle. 2020. Embodiment, presence, and their intersections: teleoperation and beyond. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI) 9, 4 (2020), 1–19.

[25] Hannah R. M. Pelikan, Amy Cheatle, Malte F. Jung, and Steven J. Jackson. 2018. Operating at a Distance - How a Teleoperated Surgical Robot ReconfiguresTeamworkintheOperatingRoom.Proc.ACMHum.-Comput.Interact.2,CSCW,Article138(Nov.2018),28pages. https://doi.org/10. 1145/3274407

[26] Noopur Raval and Paul Dourish. 2016. Standing Out from the Crowd: Emotional Labor, Body Labor, and Temporal Labor in Ridesharing. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work amp; Social Computing (San Francisco, California, USA) (CSCW ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2820026

[27] Alessandro Roncone, Olivier Mangin, and Brian Scassellati. 2017. Transparent role assignment and task allocation in human robot collaboration. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 1014–1021.

[28] Shruti Sannon, Brett Stoll, Dominic DiFranzo, Malte Jung, and Natalya N Bazarova. 2018. How personification and interactivity influence stress- related disclosures to conversational agents. In companion of the 2018 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing. 285–288.

[29] Allison Sauppé and Bilge Mutlu. 2014. Design Patterns for Exploring and Prototyping Human-robot Interactions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1439–1448. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557057

[30] Brian Scassellati and Bradley Hayes. 2014. Human-robot collaboration. AI Matters 1, 2 (2014), 22–23.

[31] Noam Scheiber. 2019. Inside an Amazon Warehouse, Robots’ Ways Rub Off on Humans. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/03/business/economy/

amazon- warehouse- labor- robots.html

[32] KjeldSchmidt.2008.TheCriticalRoleofWorkplaceStudiesinCSCW(2000).Springer,London,149–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-068-1_7

[33] Sarah Sebo, Brett Stoll, Brian Scassellati, and Malte F Jung. 2020. Robots in groups and teams: a literature review. Proceedings of the ACM on

Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW2 (2020), 1–36.

[34] Julie Shah, James Wiken, Brian Williams, and Cynthia Breazeal. 2011. Improved human-robot team performance using chaski, a human-inspired

plan execution system. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interaction. 29–36.

[35] Susan Leigh Star and Anselm Strauss. 1999. Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer supported

cooperative work (CSCW) 8, 1 (1999), 9–30.

[36] Katherine Van Wezel Stone. 2001. Employee Representation in the Boundaryless Workplace. Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 77 (2001), 773.

[37] Lucy Suchman. 1995. Making work visible. Commun. ACM 38, 9 (1995), 56–64.

[38] Leila Takayama and Janet Go. 2012. Mixing metaphors in mobile remote presence. In Proceedings of the acm 2012 conference on computer supported

cooperative work. 495–504.

[39] Peter-Paul Verbeek. 2005. What Things Do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. Penn State University Press.

[40] Janet Vertesi. 2015. Seeing like a rover: How robots, teams, and images craft knowledge of mars. University of Chicago Press.

[41] J Vertesi, Adam Goldstein, Diana Enriquez, Larry Liu, and Katherine T Miller. 2020. Pre-Automation: Insourcing and Automating the Gig Economy.

Sociologica 14, 3 (2020), 167–193.

[42] Ning Wang, David V Pynadath, and Susan G Hill. 2016. Trust calibration within a human-robot team: Comparing automatically generated

explanations. In 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). IEEE, 109–116.

[43] Patrizia Zanoni and Maddy Janssens. 2007. Minority employees engaging with (diversity) management: An analysis of control, agency, and

micro-emancipation. Journal of Management Studies 44, 8 (2007), 1371–1397.