This chapter explores how the Regulation for Artificial Intelligence (AI Act) sets the tone for the normative and institutional direction taken by the European Union – effectively “calling the tune” for how AI systems should be governed. Drawing on institutional theory and Max Weber’s concepts of value and instrumental rationality, the authors conducted a value-oriented thematic analysis. As such, it uncovers an axiologically informed map that elicits the ideals expressed through the regulatory rhetoric in recitals, which precede the legally binding provisions. The study employed AI-assisted qualitative analysis, which enabled the tracing of values based on linguistic clues in the documents used to justify the proposed regulation. The authors categorized these values into four groups: foundational (e.g., dignity and freedom), substantive (e.g., safety and prosperity), instrumental per se (e.g., risk and innovation), and epistemic (e.g., transparency and accountability). The findings show a common harmony in the identified values related to the basic societal fabric that must be preserved, and what AI systems must be in order not to corrupt it. However, they also reveal a tension between two regulatory overtones: a cautious one focused on addressing current concerns and a more aspirational one promoting AI-mediated change. The dominant tone leans toward restraint, suggesting a “two steps back, one step forward” approach.

Previous research in business and management history has identified the Icarus paradox, which describes how organisations may fall due to overconfidence and hubris. We build upon previous research on paradoxes in business history and introduce the notion of an inverted Icarus paradox. Using rich archival sources coded in a relational database, we show how an entrant firm, Comvik, outmanoeuvred an established government monopoly in the non-market domain from 1980 to 1990, despite inferior resources and a weak market position. The government monopoly Televerket faced an inverted Icarus paradox; it could not leverage its strengths and political connections as they were stuck in a David versus Goliath narrative where public opinion was more sympathetic to the entrant firm Comvik. 

This study examines how disadvantaged foreign subsidiaries that lack the requisite resources and mandate respond to therealization that a greener technology, a form of digital innovation, is about to disrupt their business. Specifically, we foc us on asubsidiary that lacks the requisite resources and mandate for change and yet detects an important technological shift. We drawon the subsidiary issue-selling literature to explore how this subsidiary attempts to mobilize headquarters’ attention andengagement in its interests and concerns. We identify three evolutionary issue-framing mechanisms: matters of fact, concern,and urgency. These mechanisms, influenced by the subsidiary, its local strategic network, and its headquarters, shape the issue-selling process over time. Our study challenges established assumptions about subsidiary roles in MNEs and highlights theircritical role in identifying and addressing technological disruptions, thereby pushing the boundaries of current IB research. Ithighlights the critical role of foreign subsidiaries in identifying and addressing digital and technological disruptions. It shows howeven disadvantaged subsidiaries can mobilize headquarters’ attention and engagement in their interests and concerns throughissue-selling. It suggests that MNEs need to create a more supportive environment for foreign subsidiaries to engage in issue-selling, especially when it comes to technological disruptions.