Professor Sabine Pfeiffer has been a member of the Board of Directors since 2023 and succeeds Professor Alexander Pretschner as Chair; Professor Pretschner has played a key role in shaping the development of the bidt over many years and remains a member of the board. Sabine Pfeiffer is a sociologist of work and holds the Chair of Sociology, specialising in technology, work and society, at Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg (FAU). For many years, her research has focused on the interplay between people, technology and organisation, as well as on the digital transformation of the world of work.
In this interview, Pfeiffer discusses what appeals to her about her new role, why she wants to raise the profile of the ‘Work and Economy’ thematic area at the bidt, and what experiences have shaped her perspective on digital transformation. She also explains why, although AI is changing many things, human judgement, specialist knowledge and responsibility remain all the more important for that very reason.
By loading the video, you agree to YouTube’s privacy policy.
Learn more
What factors ultimately convinced you to take on the chairmanship of the Board of Directors?
I find this exciting role very appealing. I find the very idea that Bavaria is home to an institute like the bidt extremely compelling: an interdisciplinary research institute that not only examines digital transformation from an academic perspective, but also seeks dialogue with politics, business and society. It is precisely this inter- and transdisciplinary character that has always particularly appealed to me about the bidt.
That is why I was already delighted when I was approached some time ago about joining the Board of Directors. The fact that the opportunity has now arisen to take on the chairmanship is a great opportunity for me. I have been conducting research into issues relating to digitalisation for many years, have also gained experience in non-university research contexts, and have worked extensively in research management. In that respect, this role fits very well with my academic profile and with what drives me.
What’s more, I’m really looking forward to making a difference together with the fantastic team at the bidt. At the moment, I can hardly imagine a more rewarding role.
Which area would you like to see the bidt focus on more in future?
One area I’d like to see given greater focus at the bidt over the next few years is work and the economy. There is already a broad range of interdisciplinary research on this topic at the bidt, which would provide a good starting point. At the same time, the question of the extent to which digitalisation is having an impact on the economy in Bavaria is highly relevant to many other topics. That is why I would like to bring this area more to the fore.
Looking back, which experience in your professional or academic development has proved particularly valuable?
There are, of course, many such experiences. I believe the most important one is my initial vocational training as a toolmaker. This provided a very valuable foundation for my later research as a sociologist. During this training, you learn precision, patience and a detailed understanding of exactly how process engineering works in metal manufacturing. Research requires patience and precision just as much.
This connection became particularly clear to me when the debate surrounding Industry 4.0 arose. It brought together two strands that, at first, seemed completely unrelated: my earlier professional experience in industry and my academic work on digitalisation. Looking back, it was precisely this connection that proved so valuable, as it enabled me to view digital transformation not merely in abstract terms.
What was an ‘aha’ moment in your research that changed your perspective on digital transformation?
I had such a moment relatively early on in the current AI debate, just as ChatGPT and other applications were becoming widespread in everyday working life. There was a conflict with project partners on one project. One of my colleagues then came to me, having asked an AI to draft several possible email replies: a more de-escalating version, a more neutral one, and an escalating version. What I found interesting was that, despite these suggestions, he came to me and asked: ‘Which of these should we go with now? This was an experienced professional in the thick of their career, someone who was capable of assessing the situation and yet still chose to involve an additional source in this decision-making process. That’s when I realised: something is changing here. When people consult an AI first when making everyday decisions at work, and aren’t necessarily any more certain afterwards – that’s interesting!
What uncomfortable truth about AI and digitalisation needs to be stated more often?
The most important thing at the moment is that, when it comes to AI, you can’t emphasise this often enough: AI makes predictions – and I actually need to check everything it outputs. And that presupposes that I must be in a position to check it.
The idea that humans no longer need to be able to do anything themselves, because AI can do everything, is quite a big illusion. Yet many people fall for this illusion because AI – particularly in its linguistic output – is very convincing at presenting even the most untrue things as true. It simply cannot be emphasised often enough that something can sound good and still be completely wrong.
We need to learn to deal with this: we’re dealing with a technology that doesn’t simply ‘not work’ – which I’d notice straight away – but which always appears to be working. Even when it spits out nonsense. I don’t think any of us have got used to that yet.
