Preview: not announced. Search engines asked not to index.

Proposal pack · RO-LD03-08 v1

In small Greek firms, does generative AI stay a personal tool or change how teams work?

To keep this as a PDF or print it, use your browser's Print command (Ctrl+P, or Cmd+P on a Mac) and choose "Save as PDF". Links print with their addresses. This pack gathers what the opportunity page already holds; nothing in it is new.

Read this first. This is a research hypothesis drafted by Claude (SocioLens Project Lead), AI-drafted from the LD-03 debate as an undergraduate-scale project, after the 17 October 2026 reader tests found no opportunity a final-year student could take on on 18 October 2026, not a finding. Not yet reviewed. Every check so far was done by AI; no person or domain expert has checked it yet. The literature screen below was done by AI web search and can miss relevant work. Version v1, permanent address https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/opportunities/ro-ld03-08/v1/.

Untested beyond the original setting Undergraduate thesis Low cost Partly addressed

Research question

In small firms in Greece outside tourism (for example accounting offices, shops, small manufacturers and software companies), who uses generative AI and for which tasks, and has any firm changed how work is divided, checked or handed over because of it?

Why it matters

LD-03 asks why gains for individual users do not add up to gains for organizations. Its case studies, of Chinese newsrooms, three German organizations and a large software company, find generative AI used as a personal tool, or adopted unevenly, without changes to team work, and the authors of a survey of European public managers describe use without policies. Small firms are absent from this evidence, and the only Greek interview study found concerns hotels. A small case study can show whether the same pattern appears in firms with few staff and no IT department.

Evidence that motivates it

  1. In 27 interviews in regional Chinese newsrooms, journalists used generative AI frequently in their own tasks, but its use stayed disconnected from team workflows, hindered by structural barriers and a reluctance to share practices, and no formal mechanism coordinated individual use. (LD03-SL-C07 v1.0)
    In regional Chinese newsrooms, journalists used generative AI often in their own tasks, but its use stayed disconnected from team workflows.
    Cites: Xiao et al. (2026), “Can GenAI Move from Individual Use…”
  2. In a case study of three German organizations, generative AI was used mainly as a personal assistant rather than changing team processes, the effort of validating its output partly offset efficiency gains, and policies written in response to regulation without regard to actual use led to gaps between policy and practice and to shadow IT. (LD03-SL-C08 v1.0)
    In three German organizations, generative AI was used mainly as a personal assistant rather than changing team processes.
    Cites: Neumann et al. (2026), “Between Policy and Practice…”
  3. In paired interviews with 54 developers in 27 teams at a large software company committed to AI adoption, the authors identify a 'Productivity Pressure Paradox': management expected rapid productivity gains without supporting learning, which left developers without the time to build the skills that would save time. (LD03-SL-C09 v1.0)
    Developers at a large software company described management expecting rapid gains without supporting learning.
    Cites: Miller et al. (2026), “‘Maybe We Need Some More…”
  4. The authors of a survey of 576 public managers in seven EU member states describe public servants using generative AI to draft reports, refine policy proposals and generate content, often without explicit approval or institutional policies, which they call 'shadow use'; the abstract does not say how much of this the survey itself measured. (LD03-SL-C10 v1.0)
    The authors of a survey of public managers in seven EU member states describe public servants using generative AI to draft reports and content, often without explicit approval or institutional policies.
    Cites: Tangi et al. (2025), “A Silent Partner: The Shadow…”

Claims are shown as they read on the day this pack was built; claim pages keep every earlier version.

A possible design

Case studies of four to six small firms (under 50 staff) in two or three sectors. In each, interview the owner or manager and one or two employees, and ask for recent concrete examples: a task done with AI, who checked it, and whether anyone else's work changed as a result. Where a firm has a written rule or note on AI use, ask to see it. Compare individual and team use across firms with thematic analysis, and say which patterns from the debate's case studies appear here and which do not.

Data needed

Access to four to six firms through personal networks, the university careers office or a local chamber of commerce; about 10 to 15 interviews; consent and anonymisation under the university's ethics procedure.

Feasibility

Undergraduate thesis. Very low; interviews in person or by video call and free transcription software. Owners may describe intended rather than actual use, so interview at least one employee per firm and ask for examples. The findings describe these firms only. RO-LD03-06 asks the related question of policy against practice in larger organizations.

Has this been done?

Partly done already: related work covers some of this question (first-pass screen of 18 October 2026; not yet checked in depth).

One interview study covers owner-managers of small hotels in a Greek tourist destination and their views of ChatGPT, and Finnish theses interview marketing staff in small firms, who start with individual chat tools. Greek surveys report how many firms use AI, not how its use is organised. No interview study was found of small Greek firms outside hospitality that asks whether generative AI changed how teams work. The search was web-based and partial.

Where the search could not reach. Screened by four web searches (three in English, one in Greek) on the date shown; neither nearest work could be opened, Greek university repositories were not searched, and management and tourism databases were only reached through web search. Absence of a hit is not proof that the work does not exist.

Before building a project on it, run your own search in a scholarly database such as Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar or SSRN.

Nearest work found

References

Sources behind the motivating claims:

BibTeX

The first entry cites this opportunity; then its nearest work; then the sources above. Nearest work and sources are recorded as reference strings, so each goes in whole as the title; add authors and year from the original before you cite it.

@misc{sociolens_ro_ld03_08_v1,
  author = {{SocioLens project}},
  title = {In small Greek firms, does generative AI stay a personal tool or change how teams work?},
  year = {2026},
  date = {2026-10-18},
  howpublished = {\url{https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/opportunities/ro-ld03-08/v1/}},
  note = {Research opportunity RO-LD03-08, version v1}
}

@misc{ro_ld03_08_nearest_1,
  title = {Koukopoulos, Vrechopoulos and Lazaris, "Managers' perceptions on Generative AI-based services' role in SMEs hotels", International Hospitality Review, doi:10.1108/IHR-06-2025-0057},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1108/IHR-06-2025-0057},
  note = {Reference as recorded by SocioLens; authors, title and year are not separated; Judged from an abstract, summary or search listing only; Some details not confirmed}
}

@misc{ro_ld03_08_nearest_2,
  title = {Generative AI in SME marketing, thesis in the Finnish Theseus repository (author and title not confirmed)},
  url = {https://theseus.fi/handle/10024/911861},
  note = {Reference as recorded by SocioLens; authors, title and year are not separated; Judged from an abstract, summary or search listing only; Some details not confirmed}
}

@misc{src_sl_xiao_hu_xiao_cao_shen_chi_2026,
  title = {Xiao, Hu, Xiao, Cao \& Shen, “Can GenAI Move from Individual Use to Collaborative Work?,” Proceedings of CHI 2026},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3772318.3790984},
  note = {Reference as recorded by SocioLens; authors, title and year are not separated}
}

@misc{src_sl_neumann_et_al_xp_2026,
  title = {Neumann, Bischof, Hinz et al., “Between Policy and Practice: GenAI Adoption in Agile Software Development Teams,” XP 2026, LNBIP},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-22375-3_18},
  note = {Reference as recorded by SocioLens; authors, title and year are not separated}
}

@misc{src_sl_miller_et_al_icse_2026,
  title = {Miller, Choudhuri, Ulloa et al., “‘Maybe We Need Some More Examples:’ Individual and Team Drivers of Developer GenAI Tool Use,” Proceedings of ICSE 2026},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3744916.3773155},
  note = {Reference as recorded by SocioLens; authors, title and year are not separated}
}

@misc{src_sl_tangi_rodriguez_muller_combetto_epart_2025,
  title = {Tangi, Rodriguez Müller \& Combetto, “A Silent Partner: The Shadow Presence of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Public Administrations,” Electronic Participation (ePart 2025), LNCS},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-02515-9_5},
  note = {Reference as recorded by SocioLens; authors, title and year are not separated}
}

Back to the opportunity · All research opportunities