Purpose This study aims to examine how organizations construct shared meanings around artificial intelligence (AI) in leadership development through a symbolic interactionist lens, addressing the underexplored social and interpretive dimensions that influence implementation success. Design/methodology/approach The research uses an interpretive review of interdisciplinary literature spanning organizational behavior, leadership studies and information systems. Drawing on pragmatist thought from Blumer and Mead to contemporary scholars, the analysis identifies key mechanisms of technological meaning-making in organizational contexts. Findings Four mechanisms facilitate shared technological understanding: (...) negotiated social construction of AI meaning, personalized symbolic interaction with AI systems, creation of new symbolic environments through virtual/augmented reality (e.g. immersive leadership simulations where avatars interact in crisis scenarios) and development of AI literacy through collective interpretation. Successful AI integration depends on organizations’ ability to facilitate collective meaning-making processes rather than technological sophistication alone. Practical implications Organizations implementing AI-enabled leadership advancement should focus on creating psychological safety zones through regular AI exploration sessions, facilitating cross-hierarchical dialogue via structured reflection protocols and establishing ethical frameworks through participatory processes. The study provides an implementation framework addressing both technical and social dimensions. Originality/value This study contributes a novel theoretical framework integrating symbolic interactionism with contemporary pragmatist thought, revealing the fundamentally social nature of technological implementation and providing context-sensitive approaches for diverse organizational settings. (shrink)

Purpose This paper aims to conceptualize “synthetic ethics” as a theoretical framework within posthuman leadership contexts, examining how algorithmic systems mediate ethical reasoning in organizations. Design/methodology/approach A narrative literature review methodology synthesizes insights from posthumanist theory, business ethics and AI governance to develop an understanding of synthetic ethics in posthuman leadership contexts. Findings This study argues that algorithmic governance can be understood as generating hybrid forms of moral agency through human–AI interaction that extend beyond conventional anthropocentric ethics. Leadership functions increasingly (...) emerge from human–AI assemblages, challenging traditional notions of responsibility, accountability and ethical decision-making. Practical implications Organizations must develop new governance structures, leadership competencies and ethical frameworks to navigate posthuman leadership arrangements. This includes implementing transparency mechanisms, such as periodic algorithmic audits or bias-impact reviews, reconfiguring decision-making processes and cultivating ethical awareness for human–AI collaboration. Originality/value This paper introduces “synthetic ethics” as a novel theoretical construct for understanding the emergent ethical frameworks arising from human–AI collaborations in leadership roles. It contributes to business ethics by addressing the anthropocentric bias in existing frameworks and proposing more inclusive approaches that accommodate the distributed nature of agency in algorithmically governed organizations. (shrink)

The integration of artificial intelligence into organizational governance has raised debate about its appropriateness in leading human employees. This research examines whether AI should assume leadership roles through the lens of Chinese paternalistic leadership and Confucian principles. Drawing on Erkal and Vandekerckhove’s (2024) framework of management evolution, we distinguish between management functions and leadership capabilities to evaluate AI’s potential role. A narrative literature review methodology synthesized research on AI capabilities and Chinese paternalistic leadership practices between 2010 and 2024, drawing exclusively (...) from English-language scholarship. The findings indicate that while AI demonstrates remarkable capabilities in management functions such as data analysis and process optimization, it faces insurmountable limitations in replicating the complex cultural and emotional intelligence requirements inherent in Chinese paternalistic leadership. Fundamental principles such as ren 仁 (rén) (benevolence), yi 义 (yì) (righteousness), li 礼 (lǐ) (propriety), and xiao 孝 (xiào) (filial piety) demand sophisticated levels of cultural understanding and emotional intelligence that current AI systems cannot effectively replicate. The integration of these principles creates emergent leadership properties that transcend modular computational approaches. While AI can support certain management functions, its role must remain auxiliary to human leadership, particularly in contexts where relationship-based leadership traditions are influential. This study contributes by introducing a culturally grounded perspective to the AI governance debate, examining how Chinese management concepts function when interpreted through English-language scholarship, and addressing critical gaps in understanding the distinction between management and leadership in AI implementation. (shrink)

This theoretical article explores the convergence of Eastern philosophical traditions, particularly Taoist water wisdom, with Indigenous knowledge systems to propose a conceptual framework for situationally grounded and ethically reflective artificial intelligence (AI) integration in organisational contexts. Through a narrative literature review spanning Eastern philosophy, Indigenous knowledge traditions, and AI implementation research, we advance a “Water Wisdom” framework that offers alternative perspectives to prevailing Western cultural logics of technological transformation. The theoretical synthesis articulates five interrelated principles that guide situated pathways of (...) organisational AI integration: yielding as strength, following natural pathways, adaptive persistence, reflective stillness, and transparent clarity. This work contributes to expanding cross-cultural perspectives in AI scholarship by centring non-Western philosophical traditions and furnishes conceptual tools for reimagining organisational relationships with AI technologies beyond current instrumentalist models. (shrink)