AI is not for luxury: balancing Chronos efficiency and Kairos experience

Purpose This study aims to theorise how AI-driven acceleration reconfigures firms’ temporal assets, creating efficiency gains while destroying relational time (trust, loyalty, premium value), a hidden cost invisible to managerial accounting but acutely felt by customers. Design/methodology/approach A mixed-method dual-coding design combining qualitative coding of 2,000 reviews (from a 1.2 M Google Maps corpus across 10 luxury chains) with an automated Gemini natural language processing extraction. The comparative design developed temporal categories and validated brand-level friction patterns while proving human interpretation essential to detect Kairos deficits and distinguish intentional deceleration from service failure. Findings Systematic temporal fractures where AI acceleration destroys relational value. Five Strategic Temporal Archetypes (Decelerator, Bifurcator, Autonomy Provider, Fragmentor, Automator) represent distinct competitive positions on the efficiency-experience frontier. Research limitations/implications This study extends AI, service and organisational temporality research by conceptualising AI as a temporal agent and introducing Kairos deficit, temporal extraction and temporal co-destruction. It also demonstrates the value of dual-coding methodologies combining computational scale with qualitative interpretation. Future research should test Strategic Temporal Governance and its archetypes across sectors, cultures and longitudinally. Practical implications Organisations should move beyond efficiency metrics towards strategic temporal governance. AI deployment should distinguish contexts where Chronos optimisation creates value from those requiring Kairos, intentional pacing and relational attention. AI systems should incorporate temporal transparency and human override, while managers should recognise frontline resistance to acceleration as potentially valuable temporal mediation. Social implications AI-driven acceleration can reduce opportunities for reflection, relational engagement and meaningful participation. When organisational speed dominates, technological progress may privilege efficiency over human temporal needs. Recognising Kairos alongside Chronos therefore matters socially, helping preserve spaces for deliberation, care, relational attention and human override rather than assuming that faster interaction always represents social progress. Originality/value Introduces temporal reconfiguration and Kairos deficit as strategic constructs; develops qualitative coding and constant comparison for lived experience at scale; validates the qualitative–computational distinction through comparative dual-coding against automated LLM extraction; reframes AI implementation as competitive positioning, not operational optimisation.