This paper explores how digital futures take shape in and through interactions with generative AI, focusing on ChatGPT as an active collaborator in speculative ethnographic research. Moving beyond the framing of AI as either a tool or a disruptor, I argue that ChatGPT — and similar technologies — should be understood as agents within evolving socio-technical fields, co-creating the very futures we seek to imagine. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork from a "work futures" workshop — where twelve participants collaboratively envisioned and staged speculative workplaces set in 2050 at the Emerging Technologies Research Lab, Monash University — as well as intensive co-authoring engagements with ChatGPT, I examine how AI contributes to shaping these imaginaries. Rather than simply answering questions, ChatGPT dynamically influenced discussions, storylines, and decision-making processes. To conceptualise these interactions, I introduce conversational choreography — an approach that attends to the iterative, performative exchanges between humans and AI. Through these exchanges, meanings, roles, and speculative possibilities take shape. By analysing these choreographies, I argue that AI is not external to the social worlds we study but actively involved in configuring future imaginaries, roles, and relations. In doing so, this paper contributes to current debates on how to study sociodigital intra-actions and emergent futures, offering conversational choreography as a methodological tool for ethnographically engaging with AI in participatory and speculative settings. Ultimately, I reflect on what it means to engage AI not only as a research subject but as a collaborator in imagining and performing possible futures.

This paper shares initial findings from an ethnographic pilot study exploring how advanced digital transformations, particularly through Generative AI (GenAI), are reshaping the work of tech professionals in the digital and creative industries. Adopting a socio-technical and future-focused perspective, the study critically examines how these professionals explore, challenge, and at times reinforce techno-optimistic narratives while engaging in everyday practices that both question and sustain digitalisation narratives. By acknowledging the complexities, inconsistencies, and unpredictabilities inherent in advanced digital transformation, this paper underscores the necessity of dismantling misleading visions of automated futures, emphasising the real experiences and anticipatory practices of tech workers. It scrutinises what this panel identifies as "bullshit digitalisation"—practices driven by hype rather than substantial progress—and seeks alternative frameworks for critical reflection, enabling the emergence of socio-technical visions of diverse futures. Overall, the paper aligns with a future-oriented social science agenda, highlighting the importance of anticipating and critically addressing the social and technical consequences of digital transformation, centring on human experiences and agency.

The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital technologies on the world of work is often framed in terms of broad, universal consequences. But to what extent do such narratives overlook the everyday negotiations, contestations, and adaptations through which technology is actually integrated into professional life? Prevailing perspectives tend to downplay human agency, instead attributing technological change to an abstract and often deterministic notion of economic or technological agency. In contrast, this paper examines how professionals at the forefront of digitalisation—particularly those in the digital and creative industries, including architects, designers, programmers, CEOs, and COOs—make sense of generative AI’s incorporation into their daily work. Drawing on a series of in-depth interviews, we highlight how AI adoption is not merely a matter of large-scale structural transformation but unfolds through subtle, often contested, micro-level organisational shifts.

By situating these insights within the broader discourse on technological change, we challenge and problematise three key perspectives that have shaped scholarly and policy-oriented understandings of digitalisation’s effects on labour markets. First, the Skill Biased Technical Change (SBTC) hypothesis suggests that technological advancements primarily benefit highly skilled workers, fostering an overall upskilling of the workforce. Second, the Routine Biased Technological Change (RBTC) perspective points to job polarisation, whereby routine-based middle-wage occupations—regardless of skill level—are increasingly displaced by automation. Finally, a third, more disruptive perspective envisions a future in which AI and robotics extend beyond routine tasks to replace even highly qualified professionals, raising concerns about large-scale structural unemployment.

Drawing on insights from Science and Technology Studies (STS), sociology of expectations, and labour market sociology, we demonstrate that the impact of AI is not uniform. Instead, technological change is socially embedded and contingent upon a range of organisational imaginaries and interactional dynamics. Our findings reveal that the integration of AI is shaped by workplace negotiations in which professionals redefine and contest its role, often navigating tensions between creativity and efficiency. By shifting analytical focus from broad systemic shifts to the lived realities of AI adoption, this article contributes to a more nuanced understanding of digitalisation in practice and challenges deterministic narratives that portray technological transformation as an inevitable trajectory. In doing so, we provide insights relevant to policymakers, business leaders, and scholars seeking to better understand the future of work in an era of AI-driven change.

This paper presents preliminary findings from an ethnographic pilot study examining how advanced digital transformations, particularly Generative AI (GenAI), are reshaping the work of tech professionals in Sweden's digital and creative industries. Adopting a socio-technical and futures-oriented perspective, the study explores how these professionals engage with and adapt to GenAI, balancing opportunities for innovation with the challenges of integrating it into their daily workflows. The research highlights how these individuals scrutinise, challenge, and sometimes endorse techno-optimistic narratives while grappling with the complexities and uncertainties of embedding GenAI into practice. By focusing on the lived experiences and anticipatory practices of tech workers at the forefront of digital transformation, the study reveals how GenAI is not only transforming creative industries but also reshaping professional expectations, routines, and socio-technical practices. These findings provide a grounded, localised perspective on the subtle yet significant ways in which generative AI technologies influence innovation pathways. The paper underscores the value of engaging directly with practitioners to understand the social dynamics steering these changes and to critically assess how technology redefines the nature of creative work.

Sweden is increasingly considering the possibility of automating public administration. Data-driven process automation is believed to help make administrative tasks more efficient and goal-driven. However, implementing these systems, or preparing for their implementation, involves a transformation in organisational practices and principles. These practices are adapted to imaginaries of automation technologies, often stemming from the digital industries. When the organisational logic of public administration clashes with the promises of emerging automation technologies, new organisational forms and temporalities take shape, here referred to as click-level bureaucracy and duct-tape solutionism.

Based on digital ethnographic research with stakeholders from approximately ten Swedish municipalities, this paper explores how these new organisational forms and temporalities take shape. Two central and interrelated ideas anchor this exploration. Firstly, the future will necessitate automation to prevent the public sector from collapsing as it is perceived as dysfunctional and in need of repair. Secondly, we must prepare for an automated future by transforming today's work forms and routines to be compatible with machine communication when needed.

The interaction between these two lines of thought reveals that preparations involve constant repair work, yet these efforts are rarely deemed satisfactory. Instead, they become temporary, makeshift solutions that continually defer the anticipated future. In this sense, repair becomes a form of future-making where the future is persistently delayed, making it a perpetually moving target while at the same time building up a new form of bureaucracy that requires novel competencies and forms of management that necessarily involves representation from the digital industries.

This paper explores the Swedish public sector's response to an impending demographic crisis, particularly the challenges posed by an ageing population. It scrutinises the paradoxical perception of automation, especially Robotic Process Automation (RPA), as both a panacea and a stopgap measure. The paper identifies two main themes: the pressing need to rejuvenate the public sector through automation to avert potential collapse, and the reshaping of current work practices to suit an automated, albeit uncertain, future. At the core of this analysis is the idea of automation as a continual journey, not a final solution. This journey is akin to a form of repair work, where automation technologies act as provisional, duct-tape solutions, perpetually pushing the boundaries of the future. The paper argues that the role of automation extends beyond the mere elimination of human labour; it is about its transformation. Automation emerges as a catalyst for organisational change, enforcing uniformity and challenging traditional, individualised work methods. In summary, this paper highlights the nuanced use of metaphors of breakage and repair in steering the public sector's organisational transformation. It positions automation as a pivotal yet elusive concept, emphasising the complexity and temporality of solutionism in the face of uncertain futures.

In the realm of Swedish public administration, there is a growing recognition of automation as a fertile ground for innovation and efficiency. This paper, drawing upon ethnographic research with key stakeholders in Swedish municipalities, investigates how the public sector is responding to an anticipated demographic crisis, with a particular focus on the challenges presented by an ageing population. It critically examines the dual role of automation, especially Robotic Process Automation (RPA) and Generative AI, perceived simultaneously as a comprehensive remedy and a makeshift solution. Central to this exploration are two predominant themes: firstly, the urgent necessity to rejuvenate the public sector through automation to prevent an impending collapse, and secondly, the need to adapt current work practices to an automated yet unpredictable future. This paper posits that automation represents a continuous journey of adaptation, rather than a definitive endpoint. This journey is metaphorically likened to ongoing repair work, where automation technologies function as flexible, 'duct-tape' solutions, continually extending the horizons of what is possible in public administration. The analysis delves into the transformative role of automation, arguing that its impact goes beyond the mere reduction of human labour. Instead, automation is seen as a catalyst for organisational change, promoting standardisation and challenging the entrenched norms of individualised work methods. In conclusion, this paper demonstrates how the use of metaphors related to breakage and repair can be used to understand the public sector's organisational transformation. It offers insights into how the anticipated futures of automation are shaping the future of public administration in Sweden, not just as a tool for efficiency, but as a key driver of organisational evolution and adaptation.

This introductory chapter presents an overview and a synthesis of the chapters in the The De Gruyter Handbook of Automated Futures. Divided into sections on Imaginaries, Interactions, and Impact, the handbook presents a research agenda that explores futures, automation, and change from social scientific perspectives. These sections serve as heuristic sites for reframing narratives on automation, investigating human and algorithmic interactions, and exploring engaging ways for the social sciences, humanities, and design to participate in shaping automated futures. The Imaginaries section deconstructs dominant narratives of automated futures, emphasising historical antecedents and ideological tensions. Interactions delve into the complex dynamics between humans and automated systems, highlighting strategies to infuse automation with human dimensions and promote inclusivity. Impact focuses on making automated futures sustainable and ethical, advocating for innovative methodologies and interdisciplinary collaboration. Finally, this chapter offers insights into how the handbook can inspire into envisioning, understanding, and shaping automated futures in a playful and designerly manner. It encourages critical reflection, ethical engagement, and participatory approaches to ensure the development of inclusive, equitable, and sustainable automation futures.

How does automation affect us, our environment, and our imaginations? What actions should we take in response to automation? Beyond grand narratives and technology-driven visions of the future, what more can automation offer?

With these questions in mind, The De Gruyter Handbook of Automated Futures provides a framework for thinking about and implementing automation differently. It consolidates automated futures as an inter- and transdisciplinary research field, embedding the imaginaries, interactions, and impacts of automation technology within their social, historical, societal, cultural, and political contexts. Promoting a critical yet constructive and engaging agenda, the handbook invites readers to collaborate with rather than resist automation agendas. It does so by pushing the agenda for social science, humanities and design beyond merely assessing and evaluating existing technologies. Instead, the handbook demonstrates how the humanities and social sciences are essential to the design and governance of sustainable sociotechnical systems. Methodologically, the handbook is underpinned by a pedagogical approach to staging co-learning and co-creation of automated futures with, rather than simply for, people. In this way, the handbook encourages readers to explore new and alternative modes of research, fostering a deeper engagement with the evolving landscape of automation. 

This paper discusses the "Collaborative Foresight" process, which is an initiative organized by the authors in partnership with Media Evolution, a Swedish organization based in Malmö. The foresight cycle in focus aimed to explore potential futures of work with emerging AI technologies by engaging a diverse group of experts and community members in forecasting and “futuring” activities, following the methodology offered by Media Evolution. The authors actively participated in this cycle, which allowed for a thorough examination of the methodologies utilized in such foresight exercises.

At the heart of our investigation is the dynamic tension between "future-makers" - those actively shaping possible futures, and "future-takers" - individuals adapting to these projected scenarios. Our study explores how the interplay and evolving tensions between these roles are influenced by the structure of foresight practice and the facilitator's practices. We investigate how this approach fosters a participatory environment where participants are encouraged to not only predict but also contribute actively to the creation of future work paradigms within the boundaries of the foresight cycle structure.

Our analysis focuses on the methodology of the foresight cycle, highlighting its role as a facilitative and inhibitory tool that requires participants to oscillate between the imaginative realms of future-making and the practicalities of future-taking. The research illuminates the importance of questioning initiatives such as collaborative foresighting and their role in shaping industry narratives about the future of work.