Zoe Jonassen
Title
Prof. Ph.D.
Last Name
Jonassen
First name
Zoe
Email
zoe.jonassen@unisg.ch
ORCID
Phone
+41 71 224 3057
12 results
Now showing 1 - 10 of 12
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Good Lessons Despite Bad Feelings: How Boundary-Spanning Teams Learn from Collaboration Failure(Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS), 2025-10-15); Scopus© Citations 1 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Humanness and Advanced Technologies in Organizations: On Being Truly Human While Working with AI(Academy of Management, 2024-08-12); - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Managing Boundaries in the New World of Work(Academy of Management, 2024-08); Philip RogiersThis symposium draws attention to novel insights around how employees navigate boundaries in the new world of work. The four papers included in this symposium move beyond the traditional treatment of boundaries at the domain level of work and home (or in some cases work and family) to introduce a much-needed nuanced view of boundaries around tasks, digital technology, diverse teams, organizations, and multiple role-demands. First, Lauren Howe will present a paper investigating how workers make decisions about controlling (i.e., limiting access to or revealing) aspects of their identities in video calls, which shows important disconnects between what workers experience as authentic and what observers perceive as authentic. Second, Laura Giurge will present a paper documenting the performance and well-being benefits of crafting temporal boundaries around work and non-work activities. Third, Zoe Jonassen will present a theoretical paper on the conditions and practices that enable boundary-spanning teams to learn and innovate across organizational boundaries even when collaborations fail. Finally, Philip Rogiers will offer a theoretical paper on how people navigate multiple role demands by engaging in “bounded contributions”—that is, restricting one’s time spent across various roles—to navigate a progressively more boundaryless world made up of multiple competing role demands. Collectively, these papers aim to spark conversations that recognize emerging aspects of boundaries. More broadly, this symposium illustrates how ignoring the diverse and complex nature of boundaries, enhanced in part by technology and workplace innovations, can be costly for employees and organizations who want to maintain a competitive advantage as well as for management scholars who care about expanding our understanding of how technology and workplace innovations are revolutionizing boundaries among different aspects of our lives.Type:journal articleJournal:Academy of Management ProceedingsVolume:2024Issue:1 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Leader Emergence in Nascent Venture Teams: The Critical Roles of Individual Emotion Regulation and Team Emotions(Blackwell Publishing Limited, 2020-01); ; ; ; Type:journal articleJournal:Journal of Management StudiesVolume:57Issue:5Scopus© Citations 36 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Suppress or Reappraise Your Emotion? Leader Emergence in Nascent Venture Teams(Academy of Management Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510, 2018); ; ; Fang He, ViviannaType:journal articleJournal:Academy of Management Global ProceedingsIssue:2018 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, How Boundary-Spanning Teams Learn Across Organizational Boundaries When Facing Collaboration FailureType:conference paperJournal:Academy of Management ProceedingsVolume:2024Issue:1 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Large Language Model–Based Responses to Patients’ In-Basket Messages(2024); Soumik MandalImportance Virtual patient-physician communications have increased since 2020 and negatively impacted primary care physician (PCP) well-being. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) drafts of patient messages could potentially reduce health care professional (HCP) workload and improve communication quality, but only if the drafts are considered useful. Objectives To assess PCPs’ perceptions of GenAI drafts and to examine linguistic characteristics associated with equity and perceived empathy. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional quality improvement study tested the hypothesis that PCPs’ ratings of GenAI drafts (created using the electronic health record [EHR] standard prompts) would be equivalent to HCP-generated responses on 3 dimensions. The study was conducted at NYU Langone Health using private patient-HCP communications at 3 internal medicine practices piloting GenAI. Exposures Randomly assigned patient messages coupled with either an HCP message or the draft GenAI response. Main Outcomes and Measures PCPs rated responses’ information content quality (eg, relevance), using a Likert scale, communication quality (eg, verbosity), using a Likert scale, and whether they would use the draft or start anew (usable vs unusable). Branching logic further probed for empathy, personalization, and professionalism of responses. Computational linguistics methods assessed content differences in HCP vs GenAI responses, focusing on equity and empathy. Results A total of 16 PCPs (8 [50.0%] female) reviewed 344 messages (175 GenAI drafted; 169 HCP drafted). Both GenAI and HCP responses were rated favorably. GenAI responses were rated higher for communication style than HCP responses (mean [SD], 3.70 [1.15] vs 3.38 [1.20]; P = .01, U = 12 568.5) but were similar to HCPs on information content (mean [SD], 3.53 [1.26] vs 3.41 [1.27]; P = .37; U = 13 981.0) and usable draft proportion (mean [SD], 0.69 [0.48] vs 0.65 [0.47], P = .49, t = −0.6842). Usable GenAI responses were considered more empathetic than usable HCP responses (32 of 86 [37.2%] vs 13 of 79 [16.5%]; difference, 125.5%), possibly attributable to more subjective (mean [SD], 0.54 [0.16] vs 0.31 [0.23]; P < .001; difference, 74.2%) and positive (mean [SD] polarity, 0.21 [0.14] vs 0.13 [0.25]; P = .02; difference, 61.5%) language; they were also numerically longer (mean [SD] word count, 90.5 [32.0] vs 65.4 [62.6]; difference, 38.4%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .07) and more linguistically complex (mean [SD] score, 125.2 [47.8] vs 95.4 [58.8]; P = .002; difference, 31.2%). Conclusions In this cross-sectional study of PCP perceptions of an EHR-integrated GenAI chatbot, GenAI was found to communicate information better and with more empathy than HCPs, highlighting its potential to enhance patient-HCP communication. However, GenAI drafts were less readable than HCPs’, a significant concern for patients with low health or English literacy.Type:case review (law)Journal:JAMA Network OpenVolume:7Issue:7Scopus© Citations 77 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Humanizing AI: Should We Theorize About AI Assistants as Tools or Coworkers in Management Research?(Academy of Management Conference, 2025-07-27) - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Humane and Symbiotic or Parasitic: Emotional and Ethical Perspectives of Human-Technology Interactions(Academy of Management Conference, 2025-07-29); - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Capturing Emotions in an Era of AI: From Experiments to Ethnography(Academy of Management Conference, 2025-07-27);