Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/267778 
Year of Publication: 
2022
Citation: 
[Journal:] Weizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society [ISSN:] 1932-6203 [Volume:] 2 [Issue:] 1 [Article No.:] w2.1.5 [Publisher:] Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society - the German Internet Institute [Place:] Berlin [Year:] 2022 [Pages:] --
Publisher: 
Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society - the German Internet Institute, Berlin
Abstract: 
The current understanding of automation is dominated by “routine-biased technological change” (RBTC). This theory predicts a strong automation dynamic in jobs with high routine-task share and a polarization of employment structures. While RBTC theory has many merits, this paper develops a systematic critique of the theory and a counter-proposal of a socioeconomically grounded company-level theory of the automation of work. It distinguishes between feasibility conditions of automation, technology choices, and social outcomes. With regard to feasibility conditions, the relevant factor is not routine-task intensity but the interaction between product architecture (product complexity) and process complexity. Which technology choices are made in this feasibility space is in turn influenced by companies’ profit strategies and power relations between management and labor. The social outcomes of automation depend on these technology choices, but also on managerial strategies pursued in the restructuring of organizational roles and skills. These managerial strategies are shaped by national institutional systems.
Subjects: 
automation
technological change
labor and industrial relations
manufacturing
employment
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.