IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/267778.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Toward a Socioeconomic Company-Level Theory of Automation at Work

Author

Listed:
  • Krzywdzinski, Martin

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Krzywdzinski, Martin, 2022. "Toward a Socioeconomic Company-Level Theory of Automation at Work," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-1.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:267778
    DOI: 10.34669/WI.WJDS/2.1.5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/267778/1/Full-text-article-Krzywdzinski-Toward-a-socioeconomic.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.34669/WI.WJDS/2.1.5?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Helbing, Dirk, 2009. "Managing Complexity in Socio-Economic Systems," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 423-438, May.
    2. C. Jeffrey Waddoups, 2016. "Did Employers in the United States Back Away from Skills Training during the Early 2000s?," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 69(2), pages 405-434, March.
    3. Krzywdzinski, Martin & Jo, Hyung Je, 2022. "Skill formation, automation and governance: comparing German and Korean automotive manufacturers in Central-Eastern Europe," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 18(1), pages 115-136.
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2018. "The Race between Man and Machine: Implications of Technology for Growth, Factor Shares, and Employment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(6), pages 1488-1542, June.
    5. Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2006. "Technical Change, Job Tasks, and Rising Educational Demands: Looking outside the Wage Structure," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 235-270, April.
    6. Erik Brynjolfsson & Daniel Rock & Chad Syverson, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence and the Modern Productivity Paradox: A Clash of Expectations and Statistics," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 23-57, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Jacques Bélanger & Paul Edwards, 2007. "The Conditions Promoting Compromise in the Workplace," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 45(4), pages 713-734, December.
    8. Susan Helper & Rebecca Henderson, 2014. "Management Practices, Relational Contracts, and the Decline of General Motors," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(1), pages 49-72, Winter.
    9. Robert J. Gordon, 2016. "Perspectives on The Rise and Fall of American Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 72-76, May.
    10. Zachary Parolin, 2019. "Automation and occupational wage trends," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 228, OECD Publishing.
    11. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Goos, Maarten & Rademakers, Emilie & Röttger, Ronja, 2021. "Routine-Biased technical change: Individual-Level evidence from a plant closure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    2. Deng, Liuchun & Müller, Steffen & Plümpe, Verena & Stegmaier, Jens, 2024. "Robots, occupations, and worker age: A production-unit analysis of employment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    3. Yining Zhang & Zhong Wu, 2021. "Intelligence and Green Total Factor Productivity Based on China’s Province-Level Manufacturing Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, April.
    4. Gallipoli, Giovanni & Makridis, Christos A., 2018. "Structural transformation and the rise of information technology," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 91-110.
    5. Mokyr, Joel, 2018. "The past and the future of innovation: Some lessons from economic history," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 13-26.
    6. Maarek, Paul & Moiteaux, Elliot, 2021. "Polarization, employment and the minimum wage: Evidence from European local labor markets," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    7. Parteka, Aleksandra & Kordalska, Aleksandra, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and productivity: global evidence from AI patent and bibliometric data," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    8. Arntz, Melanie & Gregory, Terry & Zierahn-Weilage, Ulrich, 2019. "Digitalization and the Future of Work: Macroeconomic Consequences," IZA Discussion Papers 12428, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Guarascio, Dario & Gualtieri, Valentina & Quaranta, Roberto, 2018. "Does routinization affect occupation dynamics? Evidence from the ‘Italian O*Net’ data," MPRA Paper 89585, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Falck, Oliver & Heimisch-Roecker, Alexandra & Wiederhold, Simon, 2021. "Returns to ICT skills," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    11. Gregory, Terry & Salomons, Anna & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2016. "Racing With or Against the Machine? Evidence from Europe," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145843, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Azio Barani, 2021. "Innovazione tecnologica e lavoro: automazione, occupazione e impatti socio-economici," QUADERNI DI ECONOMIA DEL LAVORO, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(114), pages 51-79.
    13. Findeisen, Sebastian & Dauth, Wolfgang & Schlenker, Oliver, 2024. "Organized labor versus robots? Evidence from micro data," Working Papers 25, University of Konstanz, Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality. Perceptions, Participation and Policies".
    14. Penglong Li & Xuan Ye, 2024. "Research on the promotion effect and mechanisms of digital empowerment of food enterprises," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 70(2), pages 60-72.
    15. Yingying Lu & Yixiao Zhou, 2021. "A review on the economics of artificial intelligence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1045-1072, September.
    16. Ciaffi, Giovanna & Deleidi, Matteo & Di Bucchianico, Stefano, 2024. "Stagnation despite ongoing innovation: Is R&D expenditure composition a missing link? An empirical analysis for the US (1948–2019)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    17. Robert C. Allen, 2021. "The Interplay among Wages, Technology, and Globalization: The Labour Market and Inequality, 1620-2020," Working Papers 20210065, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Jun 2021.
    18. Lipowski, Cäcilia & Salomons, Anna & Zierahn-Weilage, Ulrich, 2024. "Expertise at work: New technologies, new skills, and worker impacts," ZEW Discussion Papers 24-044, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Tan, Youchao & Liu, Xiumei & Sun, Hanwen & Zeng, Cheng(Colin), 2022. "Population ageing, labour market rigidity and corporate innovation: Evidence from China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    20. Wanying Rao & Pingfeng Liu, 2024. "Can Digital Innovation Improve Green Total Factor Productivity: Evidence from Digital Patents of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-21, May.

    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:zbw:espost:267778. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.