Large Language Models and the Future of Organization Theory

Joep Cornelissen, Markus A. Höllerer, Eva Boxenbaum, Samer Faraj, Joel Gehman
{"title":"Large Language Models and the Future of Organization Theory","authors":"Joep Cornelissen, Markus A. Höllerer, Eva Boxenbaum, Samer Faraj, Joel Gehman","doi":"10.1177/26317877241239056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this editorial essay, we explore the potential of large language models (LLMs) for conceptual work and for developing theory papers within the field of organization and management studies. We offer a technically informed, but at the same time accessible, analysis of the generative AI technology behind tools such as Bing Chat, ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini, to name the most prominent LLMs currently in use. Our aim in this essay is to go beyond prior work and to provide a more nuanced reflection on the possible application of such technology for the different activities and reasoning processes that constitute theorizing within our domain of scholarly inquiry. Specifically, we highlight ways in which LLMs might augment our theorizing, but we also point out the fundamental constraints in how contemporary LLMs ‘reason’, setting considerable limits to what such tools might produce as ‘conceptual’ or ‘theoretical’ outputs. Given worrisome trade-offs in their use, we urge authors to be careful and reflexive when they use LLMs to assist (parts of) their theorizing, and to transparently disclose this use in their manuscripts. We conclude the essay with a statement of Organization Theory’s editorial policy on the use of LLMs.","PeriodicalId":511988,"journal":{"name":"Organization Theory","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organization Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877241239056","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this editorial essay, we explore the potential of large language models (LLMs) for conceptual work and for developing theory papers within the field of organization and management studies. We offer a technically informed, but at the same time accessible, analysis of the generative AI technology behind tools such as Bing Chat, ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini, to name the most prominent LLMs currently in use. Our aim in this essay is to go beyond prior work and to provide a more nuanced reflection on the possible application of such technology for the different activities and reasoning processes that constitute theorizing within our domain of scholarly inquiry. Specifically, we highlight ways in which LLMs might augment our theorizing, but we also point out the fundamental constraints in how contemporary LLMs ‘reason’, setting considerable limits to what such tools might produce as ‘conceptual’ or ‘theoretical’ outputs. Given worrisome trade-offs in their use, we urge authors to be careful and reflexive when they use LLMs to assist (parts of) their theorizing, and to transparently disclose this use in their manuscripts. We conclude the essay with a statement of Organization Theory’s editorial policy on the use of LLMs.
大型语言模型与组织理论的未来
在这篇社论文章中,我们探讨了大型语言模型(LLMs)在组织与管理研究领域的概念工作和理论论文开发方面的潜力。我们对必应聊天、ChatGPT、克劳德和双子座等工具背后的人工智能生成技术进行了技术分析,这些工具是目前使用的最著名的语言模型。我们在本文中的目的是超越之前的工作,对此类技术在我们学术研究领域中构成理论化的不同活动和推理过程中的可能应用进行更细致的思考。具体而言,我们强调了法学硕士可能增强我们理论化的方式,但我们也指出了当代法学硕士 "推理 "方式的基本限制,为此类工具可能产生的 "概念性 "或 "理论性 "产出设置了相当大的限制。鉴于使用 LLMs 时令人担忧的取舍问题,我们敦促作者在使用 LLMs 来辅助(部分)理论研究时要谨慎和自省,并在手稿中透明地披露使用情况。最后,我们将阐述《组织理论》关于使用LLMs的编辑政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信