ABSTRACT
The nature of work began to change due to the pervasiveness of computational systems and shifts toward managerial, professional, and technical occupational structure. These changes impact where, when, and how work is done, spurring tensions between workers, managers, and institutions, altering spatiotemporal dynamics, and demanding new rules for workplace interactions. The research within the axis explores the micro-interactions among workers, questioning whether contemporary work environments foster democratic organizing. We aim to understand how digital tools influence work organization and whether democratic values can thrive in modern workplaces.
1. DESCRIPTION
'Future of work (FoW)' and 'new ways of working (NWW)' are labels used to describe the more complex changes undergoing the nature of work. The first often entails emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and blockchain (Bailey et al., 2019; Eurofound, 2024; Rotolo et al., 2015). The latter tends to focus on mobility and the digitalization of workplaces (Aroles et al., 2021; Van Meel, 2011). Indeed, the nature of work began to change due to the pervasiveness of computational systems and shifts toward managerial, professional, and technical occupational structure (Barley, 2020).
In that sense, three critical tensions are our discussions' foundation.
First, it is undeniable that technological sophistication results in changes in what we do, but especially how we do it (Bailey et al., 2019; Barley, 2020). If we consider hybrid working as an example, we see the faster dissemination and incremental development of mobile devices and applications underlying organizational decisions on what type of governance to adopt. Compared to the industrial work performed in the past decades, after the Covid-19 pandemic, most work activities turn to remote performances and are not tied to a determined location, and employees create alternatives to explore the 'work anywhere, anytime' (Bloom et al., 2024). Managerial and real estate pressures (Johns et al., 2024) strive to enforce a return to the office, arguing that collaboration and teamwork are only developed in shared spaces (Christian, 2023). Nevertheless, digital (and smarter) technologies may lure workers and managers into prioritizing video chatting, centralizing messages, and using several devices and applications, all connected through cloud solutions (e.g., OneDrive, Dropbox, and many others).
Second, due to these different pressures involving people, technology, and places, shifts in spatiotemporal dynamics are at the core of the changing nature of work. This is because interactions are often mediated by additional layers of software and hardware (Haubrich et al., 2024). Our dependence on these several mediating layers (applications to monitor the progress of our tasks and our availability, for instance) highlights the prevalence of a platform mindset in the contemporary workplace (e.g., datafication, flexibility see ILO, 2021), which mobilizes us to question its contributions to changes in how work is organized and what are the unfolding consequences. As a result of these shifts in the space and time of work, the digital application becomes the primary location (where) of work, and the office, home, or café is an extension of it. The when is nuanced and accelerated. Additionally, it is unclear how the extensive data emerging in contemporary work may be used to define schedules, reshape tasks, and further develop algorithmic management.
Third, changes in the nature of work require new rules and agreements among workers, either peers or managers. For example, while it is known that organizations aim to impose the use of tools to concentrate all message exchanges (e.g., Teams, Slack), parallel applications are in place (e.g., WhatsApp). Similarly, companies tend to regulate the use of AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) in the workplace, while trends such as BYOD (bring your own device) allow workers more control over the tools they use to work. Moreover, companies often rely on commercial agreements with vendors that use AI to develop their solutions. Norms tend to become less documented, and informal, fast-changing (agile) agreements are at the core of organizing.
Research within the axis strives to connect both lines of inquiry, FoW and NWW, aiming to develop a deeper understanding of a) the nature of work in contemporary life and b) how it changes. This is relevant because emerging technologies increase the challenges in the highly digitalized workplace. Most workers nowadays depend on technological devices, which increases the datafication of performances, tasks, and organizing dynamics. We can think of delivery workers depending on platforms connected to their GPS-tracked phones (Woodcock, 2020), but also, consider the work of nurses in digital medicine (Hafermalz & Riemer, 2020) or our message exchanges on MS Teams/Slack. Most of the research in this context has focused on macro interactional dynamics, while we propose turning the lens to micro-interactions among workers. Broadly, we aim to understand if a more democratic perspective to organizing can be fostered in contemporary workplaces.
A few questions guide the debate:
- Is democratic organizing possible?
- Does it already exist? How can we learn from these experiences?
- How can we shape such conversations?
- What can we learn from alternative working arrangements?
- How do new ways of working produce?
- Is work a fruitful path to reclaim the importance of democratic values?
2. POSSIBLE COLLABORATIONS
OPA 2025 – core theme is democracy in the workplace
ICMS 2025 – proposition of a Paper Stream
3. CHAIR(S) OF THIS STANDING GROUP
Gislene Feiten Haubrich (House of Innovation - Stockholm School of Economics)
Michel Ajzen (Université de Namur)
Bernhard Resch (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)
4. REFERENCES
Aroles, J., Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Dale, K., Kingma, S. F., & Mitev, N. (2021). New ways of working (NWW): Workplace transformation in the digital age. Information and Organization, 31(4), 100378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2021.100378
Bailey, D., Faraj, S., Hinds, P., Von Krogh, G., & Leonardi, P. (2019). Special Issue of Organization Science: Emerging Technologies and Organizing. Organization Science, 30(3), 642–646. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2019.1299
Barley, S. R. (2020). Work and Technological Change (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198795209.001.0001
Bloom, N., Han, R., & Liang, J. (2024). Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07500-2
Christian, A. (2023, June 13). Why hybrid return-to-office mandates aren’t as flexible as they seem. BBC Worklife. https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20230613-why-hybrid-return-to-office-mandates-arent-as-flexible-as-they-seem
Eurofound. (2024). Human–robot interaction: What changes in the workplace? Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2806/601796
Hafermalz, E., & Riemer, K. (2020). Interpersonal Connectivity Work: Being there with and for geographically distant others. Organization Studies, 41(12), 1627–1648. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840620973664
Haubrich, G. F., Soekijad, M., & Hafermalz, E. (2024, July). Neither flex nor remote: Organising for synthetic situations in hybrid working. 40th EGOS Colloquium, Milan.
ILO (Ed.). (2021). World employment and social outlook 2021: The role of digital labour platforms in transforming the world of work. International labour organisation.
Johns, J., Yates, E., Charnock, G., Pitts, F. H., Bozkurt, Ö., & Ozdemir Kaya, D. D. (2024). Coworking spaces and workplaces of the future: Critical perspectives on community, context and change. European Management Review, emre.12654. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12654
Rotolo, D., Hicks, D., & Martin, B. R. (2015). What is an emerging technology? Research Policy, 44(10), 1827–1843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.06.006
Van Meel, J. (2011). The origins of new ways of working: Office concepts in the 1970s. Facilities, 29(9/10), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632771111146297
Woodcock, J. (2020). The algorithmic panopticon at Deliveroo: Measurement, precarity, and the illusion of control. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 20(3), 67–95. https://ephemerajournal.org/sites/default/files/2022-01/20-3Woodcock.pdf