IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v52y2023i1s0048733322001305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The digitalisation paradox of everyday scientific labour: How mundane knowledge work is amplified and diversified in the biosciences

Author

Listed:
  • Ribeiro, Barbara
  • Meckin, Robert
  • Balmer, Andrew
  • Shapira, Philip

Abstract

This paper examines how automation and digitalisation influence the way everyday scientific work practices are organised and conducted. Drawing on a practice-based study of the field of synthetic biology, the paper uses ethnographic, interview and survey data to offer a sociomaterial and relational perspective of technological change. As automation and digitalisation are deployed in research settings, our results show the emergence and persistence of what we call ‘mundane knowledge work’, including practices of checking, sharing and standardising data; and preparing, repairing and supervising laboratory robots. While these are subsidiary practices that are often invisible in comparison to scientific outputs used to measure performance, we find that mundane knowledge work constitutes a fundamental part of automated and digitalised biosciences, shaping scientists' working time and responsibilities. Contrary to expectations of the removal of such work by automation and digitalisation, we show that mundane work around data and robots persists through ‘amplification’ and ‘diversification’ processes. We argue that the persistence of mundane knowledge work suggests a digitalisation paradox in the context of everyday labour: while robotics and advanced data analytics aim at simplifying work processes, they also contribute to increasing their complexity in terms of number and diversity of tasks in creative, knowledge-intensive professions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ribeiro, Barbara & Meckin, Robert & Balmer, Andrew & Shapira, Philip, 2023. "The digitalisation paradox of everyday scientific labour: How mundane knowledge work is amplified and diversified in the biosciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:52:y:2023:i:1:s0048733322001305
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2022.104607
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733322001305
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104607?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. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2019. "Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(2), pages 3-30, Spring.
    2. Liu, Christopher C. & Stuart, Toby, 2014. "Positions and rewards: The allocation of resources within a science-based entrepreneurial firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1134-1143.
    3. Mark Doms & Timothy Dunne & Kenneth R. Troske, 1997. "Workers, Wages, and Technology," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(1), pages 253-290.
    4. Paula E. Stephan, 2010. "The Economics of Science - Funding for Research," ICER Working Papers 12-2010, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    5. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    6. Matt Beane & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2015. "What Difference Does a Robot Make? The Material Enactment of Distributed Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1553-1573, December.
    7. Nambisan, Satish & Wright, Mike & Feldman, Maryann, 2019. "The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    8. Shove, Elizabeth & Walker, Gordon, 2010. "Governing transitions in the sustainability of everyday life," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 471-476, May.
    9. Jeffrey L. Furman & Florenta Teodoridis, 2020. "Automation, Research Technology, and Researchers’ Trajectories: Evidence from Computer Science and Electrical Engineering," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 330-354, March.
    10. Diane Bailey & Samer Faraj & Pamela Hinds & Georg von Krogh & Paul Leonardi, 2019. "Special Issue of Organization Science: Emerging Technologies and Organizing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 642-646, May.
    11. Balconi, Margherita, 2002. "Tacitness, codification of technological knowledge and the organisation of industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 357-379, March.
    12. David H. Autor & Frank Levy & Richard J. Murnane, 2002. "Upstairs, Downstairs: Computers and Skills on Two Floors of a Large Bank," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 55(3), pages 432-447, April.
    13. Daniel Robey & Sundeep Sahay, 1996. "Transforming Work Through Information Technology: A Comparative Case Study of Geographic Information Systems in County Government," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 93-110, March.
    14. Marie-Claude Boudreau & Daniel Robey, 2005. "Enacting Integrated Information Technology: A Human Agency Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 3-18, February.
    15. 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.
    16. Brian T. Pentland & Martha S. Feldman, 2007. "Narrative Networks: Patterns of Technology and Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5), pages 781-795, October.
    17. Bijan Azad & Nelson King, 2008. "Enacting computer workaround practices within a medication dispensing system," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 264-278, June.
    18. Waverly W. Ding & Sharon G. Levin & Paula E. Stephan & Anne E. Winkler, 2010. "The Impact of Information Technology on Academic Scientists' Productivity and Collaboration Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(9), pages 1439-1461, September.
    19. Ribeiro, Barbara & Shapira, Philip, 2020. "Private and public values of innovation: A patent analysis of synthetic biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    20. Melissa Mazmanian & Wanda J. Orlikowski & JoAnne Yates, 2013. "The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1337-1357, October.
    21. Stella Pachidi & Hans Berends & Samer Faraj & Marleen Huysman, 2021. "Make Way for the Algorithms: Symbolic Actions and Change in a Regime of Knowing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 18-41, January.
    22. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1996. "Improvising Organizational Transformation Over Time: A Situated Change Perspective," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 63-92, March.
    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. Almeida, Derick & Naudé, Wim & Sequeira, Tiago Neves, 2024. "Artificial Intelligence and the Discovery of New Ideas: Is an Economic Growth Explosion Imminent?," IZA Discussion Papers 16766, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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. Paula Jarzabkowski & Sarah Kaplan, 2015. "Strategy tools-in-use: A framework for understanding “technologies of rationality” in practice," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 537-558, April.
    2. Nicholas Berente & Kalle Lyytinen & Youngjin Yoo & John Leslie King, 2016. "Routines as Shock Absorbers During Organizational Transformation: Integration, Control, and NASA’s Enterprise Information System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 551-572, June.
    3. Scellato, Giuseppe & Franzoni, Chiara & Stephan, Paula, 2015. "Migrant scientists and international networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 108-120.
    4. Susan Scott & Wanda Orlikowski, 2022. "The Digital Undertow: How the Corollary Effects of Digital Transformation Affect Industry Standards," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 311-336, March.
    5. Margunn Aanestad & Bob Jolliffe & Arunima Mukherjee & Sundeep Sahay, 2014. "Infrastructuring Work: Building a State-Wide Hospital Information Infrastructure in India," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 834-845, December.
    6. Scott, Susan V. & Orlikowski, Wanda J., 2022. "The digital undertow: how the corollary effects of digital transformation affect industry standards," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112426, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Fauchart, Emmanuelle & Bacache-Beauvallet, Maya & Bourreau, Marc & Moreau, François, 2022. "Do-It-Yourself or Do-It-Together: How digital technologies affect creating alone or with others?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    8. Kerstin Hotte & Melline Somers & Angelos Theodorakopoulos, 2022. "Technology and jobs: A systematic literature review," Papers 2204.01296, arXiv.org.
    9. Avom, Désiré & Dadegnon, Aimé Kocou & Igue, Charlemagne Babatoundé, 2021. "Does digitalization promote net job creation? Empirical evidence from WAEMU countries," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8).
    10. Murayama, Kota & Nirei, Makoto & Shimizu, Hiroshi, 2015. "Management of science, serendipity, and research performance: Evidence from a survey of scientists in Japan and the U.S," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 862-873.
    11. Martha S. Feldman & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2011. "Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1240-1253, October.
    12. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    13. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fernández, Gastón P. & Rammer, Christian, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and firm-level productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 188-205.
    14. Emmanuelle Vaast & Geoff Walsham, 2009. "Trans-Situated Learning: Supporting a Network of Practice with an Information Infrastructure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 547-564, December.
    15. Weiling Ke & Lele Kang & Chuan-Hoo Tan & Chih-Hung Peng, 2021. "User Competence with Enterprise Systems: The Effects of Work Environment Factors," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 860-875, September.
    16. Juan F. Jimeno, 2019. "Fewer babies and more robots: economic growth in a new era of demographic and technological changes," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 93-114, June.
    17. Fabio Montobbio & Jacopo Staccioli & Maria Enrica Virgillito & Marco Vivarelli, 2022. "The empirics of technology, employment and occupations: lessons learned and challenges ahead," DISCE - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Politica Economica dipe0028, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    18. 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.
    19. Aboal, Diego & Tacsir, Ezequiel, 2016. "The impact of ex-ante subsidies to researchers on researcher's productivity: Evidence from a developing country," MERIT Working Papers 2016-019, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    20. Dragos Vieru & Pierre-Emmanuel Arduin, 2016. "Sharing Knowledge in a Shared Services Center Context: An Explanatory Case Study of the Dialectics of Formal and Informal Practices," Post-Print hal-01458031, HAL.

    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:respol:v:52:y:2023:i:1:s0048733322001305. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.