IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v71y2022ics0160791x22002275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Employment 5.0: The work of the future and the future of work

Author

Listed:
  • Kolade, Oluwaseun
  • Owoseni, Adebowale

Abstract

This systematic review brings together the collection of recent scholarly outputs on the disruptive impact of digital transformation on the work. This paper draws from a sample of 68 outputs from 2011 to 2022. We identify three key theoretical perspectives: socio-technical systems theory, skill-biased technological change, and political economy of digital transformation. The articles provide complementary insights on cross-cutting themes of technological unemployment, wage inequality and job polarization. They also highlight often conflicting views about technology ownership, work-less utopia, education reforms and the imperative of human-centricity in appropriation of technology. Drawing on the findings across the whole spectrum of theoretical and analytical perspectives, we offer critical reflections about the factors that will define the work of the future, in terms of skills, creativity and opportunities for autonomous workers. We also discuss the political and institutional processes that will shape the future of work. Finally, we offer recommendations for future research and policy interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kolade, Oluwaseun & Owoseni, Adebowale, 2022. "Employment 5.0: The work of the future and the future of work," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:71:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x22002275
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102086
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X22002275
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102086?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Culot, Giovanna & Nassimbeni, Guido & Orzes, Guido & Sartor, Marco, 2020. "Behind the definition of Industry 4.0: Analysis and open questions," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    2. Tsan‐Ming Choi & Subodha Kumar & Xiaohang Yue & Hau‐Ling Chan, 2022. "Disruptive Technologies and Operations Management in the Industry 4.0 Era and Beyond," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(1), pages 9-31, January.
    3. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2014. "Explaining Job Polarization: Routine-Biased Technological Change and Offshoring," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(8), pages 2509-2526, August.
    4. David H. Autor & Frank Levy & Richard J. Murnane, 2003. "The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change: An Empirical Exploration," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(4), pages 1279-1333.
    5. David H. Autor & David Dorn, 2013. "The Growth of Low-Skill Service Jobs and the Polarization of the US Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1553-1597, August.
    6. Dengler, Katharina & Matthes, Britta, 2018. "The impacts of digital transformation on the labour market: Substitution potentials of occupations in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 304-316.
    7. Colin Caines & Florian Hoffmann & Gueorgui Kambourov, 2017. "Complex-Task Biased Technological Change and the Labor Market," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 25, pages 298-319, April.
    8. Grybauskas, Andrius & Stefanini, Alessandro & Ghobakhloo, Morteza, 2022. "Social sustainability in the age of digitalization: A systematic literature Review on the social implications of industry 4.0," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    9. Andrew Stewart & Jim Stanford, 2017. "Regulating work in the gig economy: What are the options?," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 28(3), pages 420-437, September.
    10. Dalenogare, Lucas Santos & Benitez, Guilherme Brittes & Ayala, Néstor Fabián & Frank, Alejandro Germán, 2018. "The expected contribution of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 383-394.
    11. Peter M. Bednar & Christine Welch, 2020. "Socio-Technical Perspectives on Smart Working: Creating Meaningful and Sustainable Systems," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 281-298, April.
    12. Novakova, Lucia, 2020. "The impact of technology development on the future of the labour market in the Slovak Republic," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    13. Morgan-Thomas, Anna & Dessart, Laurence & Veloutsou, Cleopatra, 2020. "Digital ecosystem and consumer engagement: A socio-technical perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 713-723.
    14. Sony, Michael & Naik, Subhash, 2020. "Industry 4.0 integration with socio-technical systems theory: A systematic review and proposed theoretical model," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    15. Cyrille Schwellnus & Assaf Geva & Mathilde Pak & Rafael Veiel, 2019. "Gig economy platforms: Boon or Bane?," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1550, OECD Publishing.
    16. Frey, Carl Benedikt & Osborne, Michael A., 2017. "The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 254-280.
    17. Cirillo, Valeria & Evangelista, Rinaldo & Guarascio, Dario & Sostero, Matteo, 2021. "Digitalization, routineness and employment: An exploration on Italian task-based data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    18. Sindhwani, Rahul & Afridi, Shayan & Kumar, Anil & Banaitis, Audrius & Luthra, Sunil & Singh, Punj Lata, 2022. "Can industry 5.0 revolutionize the wave of resilience and social value creation? A multi-criteria framework to analyze enablers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    19. Ferreira, João J. & Fernandes, Cristina I. & Guo, Ying & Rammal, Hussain G., 2022. "Knowledge worker mobility and knowledge management in MNEs: A bibliometric analysis and research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 464-475.
    20. Lene Pettersen, 2019. "Why Artificial Intelligence Will Not Outsmart Complex Knowledge Work," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 33(6), pages 1058-1067, December.
    21. Ekaterina V. Orlova, 2021. "Design of Personal Trajectories for Employees’ Professional Development in the Knowledge Society under Industry 5.0," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-29, November.
    22. Krzywdzinski, Martin, 2017. "Automation, skill requirements and labour-use strategies: high-wage and low-wage approaches to high-tech manufacturing in the automotive industry," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 32(3), pages 247-267.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kalpokiene, Julija & Kalpokas, Ignas, 2023. "Creative encounters of a posthuman kind – anthropocentric law, artificial intelligence, and art," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    2. Didier, Nicolas, 2024. "Turning fragments into a lens: Technological change, industrial revolutions, and labor," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Undheim, Trond Arne, 2024. "In search of better methods for the longitudinal assessment of tech-derived X-risks: How five leading scenario planning efforts can help," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Mina, Giorgio & Peira, Giovanni & Bonadonna, Alessandro, 2023. "Public perception and social sustainability of indoor farming technologies: A systematic review," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    5. Mukherjee, Abheek Anjan & Raj, Alok & Aggarwal, Shikha, 2023. "Identification of barriers and their mitigation strategies for industry 5.0 implementation in emerging economies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 257(C).
    6. Nadeem, Kashif & Wong, Sut I. & Za, Stefano & Venditti, Michelina, 2024. "Digital transformation and industry 4.0 employees: Empirical evidence from top digital nations," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    7. Långstedt, Johnny & Spohr, Jonas & Hellström, Magnus, 2023. "Are our values becoming more fit for artificial intelligence society? A longitudinal study of occupational values and occupational susceptibility to technological substitution," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    8. David, Sofia & Zinica, Daniel & Bărbuță-Mișu, Nicoleta & Savga, Larisa & Virlanuta, Florina-Oana, 2024. "Public administration managers' and employees' perceptions of adaptability to change under “the future of work” paradigm," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    9. Gillani, Fatima & Chatha, Kamran Ali & Jajja, Shakeel Sadiq & Cao, Dongmei & Ma, Xiao, 2024. "Unpacking Digital Transformation: Identifying key enablers, transition stages and digital archetypes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    10. Barata, João & Kayser, Ina, 2024. "How will the digital twin shape the future of industry 5.0?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    11. Sanchis, Raúl G., 2023. "Towards a general equilibrium theory of allocation of time for the digital revolution era," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Roberto Antonietti & Luca Cattani & Francesca Gambarotto & Giulio Pedrini, 2021. "Education, routine, and complexity-biased Knowledge Enabling Technologies: Evidence from Emilia-Romagna, Italy," Discussion Paper series in Regional Science & Economic Geography 2021-07, Gran Sasso Science Institute, Social Sciences, revised May 2021.
    2. Silvia Vannutelli & Sergio Scicchitano & Marco Biagetti, 2022. "Routine-biased technological change and wage inequality: do workers’ perceptions matter?," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(3), pages 409-450, September.
    3. Consoli, Davide & Marin, Giovanni & Rentocchini, Francesco & Vona, Francesco, 2023. "Routinization, within-occupation task changes and long-run employment dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    4. Barbieri, Laura & Mussida, Chiara & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2019. "Testing the employment and skill impact of new technologies: A survey and some methodological issues," MERIT Working Papers 2019-032, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Du, Longzheng & Lin, Weifen, 2022. "Does the application of industrial robots overcome the Solow paradox? Evidence from China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    6. Caselli, Mauro & Fracasso, Andrea & Scicchitano, Sergio & Traverso, Silvio & Tundis, Enrico, 2021. "Stop worrying and love the robot: An activity-based approach to assess the impact of robotization on employment dynamics," GLO Discussion Paper Series 802, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    7. Zilian, Laura S. & Zilian, Stella S. & Jäger, Georg, 2021. "Labour market polarisation revisited: evidence from Austrian vacancy data," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 55, pages 1-7.
    8. Florent Bordot & Andre Lorentz, 2021. "Automation and labor market polarization in an evolutionary model with heterogeneous workers," LEM Papers Series 2021/32, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    9. Carbonero, Francesco & Scicchitano, Sergio, 2021. "Labour and technology at the time of Covid-19. Can artificial intelligence mitigate the need for proximity?," GLO Discussion Paper Series 765, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    10. David J. Deming, 2017. "The Growing Importance of Social Skills in the Labor Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(4), pages 1593-1640.
    11. Beier, Grischa & Matthess, Marcel & Shuttleworth, Luke & Guan, Ting & de Oliveira Pereira Grudzien, David Iubel & Xue, Bing & Pinheiro de Lima, Edson & Chen, Ling, 2022. "Implications of Industry 4.0 on industrial employment: A comparative survey from Brazilian, Chinese, and German practitioners," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    12. Usabiaga, Carlos & Núñez, Fernando & Arendt, Lukasz & Gałecka-Burdziak, Ewa & Pater, Robert, 2022. "Skill requirements and labour polarisation: An association analysis based on Polish online job offers," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    13. Oussama Chemlal & Wafaa Benomar, 2024. "The Technological Impact on Employment in Spain between 2023 and 2035," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-30, April.
    14. Dauth, Wolfgang, 2014. "Job polarization on local labor markets," IAB-Discussion Paper 201418, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    15. Krenz, Astrid & Prettner, Klaus & Strulik, Holger, 2021. "Robots, reshoring, and the lot of low-skilled workers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    16. Hensvik, Lena & Skans, Oskar Nordström, 2023. "The skill-specific impact of past and projected occupational decline," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    17. Arntz, Melanie & Gregory, Terry & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2019. "Digitalization and the Future of Work: Macroeconomic Consequences," IZA Discussion Papers 12428, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2018. "Robots at Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 753-768, December.
    19. Maximilian Longmuir & Carsten Schröde & Matteo Targa, 2020. "De-Routinization of Jobs and Polarization of Earnings: Evidence from 35 Countries," Working Papers 1397, Economic Research Forum, revised 20 Jun 2020.
    20. Fierro, Luca Eduardo & Caiani, Alessandro & Russo, Alberto, 2022. "Automation, Job Polarisation, and Structural Change," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 499-535.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:71:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x22002275. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.