Publications

Peer reviewed publications

Roos, C. (2026). Resisting Big Tech: Countergovernance and the future of AI democracy. In N. A. Smuha, V. Hendrickx, & J. Petroons (Eds.), Blog symposium 2026 (Law, Ethics and Policy of AI Blog, KU Leuven) (p. 34).

Roos, C. (2026). Resisting Big Tech: Countergovernance and the future of AI democracy. In N. A. Smuha, V. Hendrickx, & J. Petroons (Eds.), Blog symposium 2026 (Law, Ethics and Policy of AI Blog, KU Leuven) (p. 34). https://www.law.kuleuven.be/ai-summer-school/blogpost/Blogposts/symposium-on-ai-and-democracy_law-ethics-and-policy-of-ai-blog_march.pdf

This article examines Big Tech as a form of political power that reshapes democratic life and the governance of artificial intelligence. It argues that contemporary AI governance regimes privilege corporate and state interests while failing to protect collective rights, particularly those of marginalized communities. Drawing on empirical cases from Brazil, Canada, and the United States, the article demonstrates how platform infrastructures, weakened content moderation, data extractivism, and military entanglements reinforce structural inequalities and expand corporate influence beyond traditional state boundaries. Building on agonistic democratic theory and the concept of countergovernance, the article proposes a shift from consensus-driven and design-centered approaches toward institutionalized forms of contestation, oversight, and collective judgment. It highlights how civil society mobilizations, legal actions, and grassroots organizing can challenge corporate dominance, disrupt political fatalism, and reclaim democratic agency in AI governance. The analysis further engages with the concept of AI countergovernance to emphasize the need to address not only technological systems, but also the political and economic infrastructures that sustain them.

Melo, C. de O., & Roos, C. (2024, April). Desenhando organizações com equidade: Inovações de gênero para além do 50:50. Computação Brasil. https://doi.org/10.5753/compbr.2021.44.4436

Melo, C. de O., & Roos, C. (2024, April). Desenhando organizações com equidade: Inovações de gênero para além do 50:50. Computação Brasil. https://doi.org/10.5753/compbr.2021.44.4436

This article examines the limitations of gender parity approaches in organizational contexts, arguing that numerical targets such as the “50:50” model are insufficient to achieve substantive gender equity. Drawing on empirical data from the Brazilian technology sector and interdisciplinary research on gender and work, the article demonstrates how structural barriers emerge across the entire career pipeline, from early socialization and education to hiring, retention, and advancement, resulting in persistent inequalities despite formal commitments to diversity. The analysis highlights how organizational cultures, recruitment practices, and evaluation systems often reproduce gender biases, contributing to exclusionary environments that disproportionately affect women, particularly those from marginalized backgrounds. It engages with the concept of gendered innovations to propose a shift toward redesigning organizational structures and processes through an intersectional lens, incorporating diverse lived experiences into decision-making and institutional design. The article further emphasizes the role of transparency, accountability, and public policy frameworks, such as gender mainstreaming, in fostering more sustainable and systemic change. It concludes that advancing gender equity requires coordinated efforts across organizations, ecosystems, and governance structures, moving beyond symbolic representation toward transformative institutional redesign.

Media and Policy Publications (selection)

Roos, C. (2025, March 14). O perigo de abandonar a inclusão. Você RH.https://vocerh.abril.com.br/coluna/carine-roos/o-perigo-de-abandonar-a-inclusao/

Roos, C. (2025, March 14). O perigo de abandonar a inclusão. Você RH. https://vocerh.abril.com.br/coluna/carine-roos/o-perigo-de-abandonar-a-inclusao/

This article examines the recent rollback of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) initiatives in major corporations in the United States, arguing that such retrenchment exposes the fragility of commitments grounded primarily in market-based justifications. It shows how the “business case” for diversity, while historically used to legitimize inclusion, reduces it to an instrument of organizational performance, rendering it vulnerable to shifting political and economic pressures. Drawing on examples from the technology, finance, and entertainment sectors, the article demonstrates how corporations have scaled back or restructured EDI programs, revealing the lack of structural commitment to equity. The analysis highlights how these dynamics reproduce existing inequalities, particularly through limited gains for privileged groups of women while excluding marginalized populations, such as Black women, from meaningful access to leadership and fair compensation. It further argues that sustainable inclusion requires embedding EDI within organizational governance through accountability mechanisms, transparency, and intersectional policies that address systemic barriers across hiring, retention, and career progression. The article concludes that leadership plays a critical role in resisting this backlash by reaffirming diversity as a non-negotiable value rather than a contingent strategy. In the absence of structural commitments, EDI risks becoming symbolic and reversible, undermining the possibility of building more just and equitable workplaces.

Roos, C. (2025). Desumanização algorítmica: Qual o impacto da gestão automatizada nas mulheres que trabalham no mercado digital? HSM Management.https://hsmmanagement.com.br/desumanizacao-algoritmica-qual-o-impacto-da-gestao-automatizada-nas-mulheres/

Roos, C. (2025). Desumanização algorítmica: Qual o impacto da gestão automatizada nas mulheres que trabalham no mercado digital? HSM Management. https://hsmmanagement.com.br/desumanizacao-algoritmica-qual-o-impacto-da-gestao-automatizada-nas-mulheres/

This article examines the rise of algorithmic management and its implications for the transformation of work, with a particular focus on its gendered impacts. It argues that the increasing reliance on automated decision-making systems in digital labor platforms contributes to processes of dehumanization by reducing workers to quantifiable metrics while disregarding contextual, social, and ethical dimensions of labor. The analysis highlights how these dynamics disproportionately affect women, who are overrepresented in precarious, low-paid, and algorithmically managed sectors, while remaining underrepresented in supervisory and decision-making roles. It further shows how algorithmic systems often fail to account for unpaid care work and structural inequalities, reinforcing existing gender hierarchies and limiting opportunities for advancement. Building on this critique, the article advocates for the integration of ethical principles into the design and governance of algorithmic systems, emphasizing transparency, human oversight, and worker participation. It argues that more equitable forms of algorithmic governance must address intersectional inequalities and incorporate continuous evaluation mechanisms to mitigate harm. The article concludes that ensuring dignity and fairness in digitally mediated labor requires rehumanizing management practices and embedding social justice considerations at the core of technological systems.

Roos, C. (2024, February 16). Um roadmap para a sua empresa eliminar de vez a cultura “tech bro”. IT Forum.https://itforum.com.br/noticias/roadmap-empresa-eliminar-a-cultura-tech-bro/

Roos, C. (2024, February 16). Um roadmap para a sua empresa eliminar de vez a cultura “tech bro”. IT Forum. https://itforum.com.br/noticias/roadmap-empresa-eliminar-a-cultura-tech-bro/

This article examines the persistence of gendered and racialized inequalities in the technology sector, focusing on how the so-called “tech bro” culture operates as a structural barrier to the entry, retention, and advancement of women and non-binary individuals. Drawing on empirical data and qualitative insights, the article demonstrates how discriminatory hiring practices, exclusionary workplace cultures, and unequal access to career progression reproduce systemic patterns of marginalization, particularly for Black women and other underrepresented groups. The analysis highlights how these dynamics are embedded in organizational practices and broader industry norms that privilege masculine, white, and exclusionary models of leadership and innovation. It further critiques the performative nature of many equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives, arguing that without structural transformation, such efforts fail to produce lasting change. Building on these findings, the article proposes a comprehensive roadmap for organizations, centered on anti-racist and anti-misogynistic recruitment strategies, inclusive workplace cultures, equitable career development, and the normalization of flexible work arrangements. It emphasizes the role of leadership in driving meaningful change, arguing that sustained commitment, accountability, and intentionality are essential to dismantle structural barriers and foster more inclusive and equitable technological ecosystems.

Linkedin

E-mail