IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/arbeit/v26y2017i3-4p315-342n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subjektive Aneignungspraktiken digitaler Technologien und die zugrunde liegenden Gerechtigkeitsansprüche der Beschäftigten

Author

Listed:
  • Walker Eva-Maria

    (Alanus Hochschule für Kunst und Gesellschaft, Villestr. 3, 53347 Alfter bei, Bonn, Deutschland)

Abstract

Mit der Digitalisierung der Arbeitswelt wird die Frage nach einer humanen Gestaltung von Arbeit neu diskutiert. Der Beitrag zeigt anhand einer empirischen Fallstudie zur Implementierung eines digitalen Warenwirtschaftssystems („Shelvesfit“) in einem Handelskonzern, wie sich hierdurch Arbeitsinhalte verändern und ob – und wenn ja, wie – damit subjektive Ansprüche an „gute Arbeit“ verletzt werden. Als „gute Arbeit“ werden dabei jene Arbeitsbedingungen verstanden, die den Filialbeschäftigten in ihrer Selbsteinschätzung ein angemessenes Maß an Handlungsautonomie gewährleisten (das kann also auch heißen: keine Handlungsautonomie), um ihre Selbstansprüche an erfolgreiches Beraten und Verkaufen zu erfüllen. Die empirischen Befunde zeigen, dass die subjektiven Ansprüche der Beschäftigten an die Einführung der digitalen Technologie durchaus in Widerspruch geraten können mit den organisational intendierten Funktionen der Technologie, die Filialbeschäftigten sich die Technologie aber auf eine Art und Weise aneignen, dass sie das subjektiv als notwendig wahrgenommene Maß an professionellem Handlungsspielraum bewahren oder zurückgewinnen können, um in ihrer Wahrnehmung erfolgreich beraten und verkaufen zu können. Der Beitrag zeigt damit auch auf, wie eine kritische Arbeitsforschung in ihrer Analyse „guter Arbeit“ auch die subjektiven Ansprüche der Beschäftigten einbeziehen kann.

Suggested Citation

  • Walker Eva-Maria, 2017. "Subjektive Aneignungspraktiken digitaler Technologien und die zugrunde liegenden Gerechtigkeitsansprüche der Beschäftigten," Arbeit, De Gruyter, vol. 26(3-4), pages 315-342, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:arbeit:v:26:y:2017:i:3-4:p:315-342:n:3
    DOI: 10.1515/arbeit-2017-0021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/arbeit-2017-0021
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/arbeit-2017-0021?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. Eve Chiapello & Luc Boltanski, 2003. "Der neue Geist des Kapitalismus," Post-Print hal-00680087, HAL.
    2. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2000. "Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 404-428, August.
    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. Kertcher, Zack & Venkatraman, Rohan & Coslor, Erica, 2020. "Pleasingly parallel: Early cross-disciplinary work for innovation diffusion across boundaries in grid computing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 581-594.
    2. Pandza, Krsto & Ellwood, Paul, 2013. "Strategic and ethical foundations for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1112-1125.
    3. Aaltonen, Aleksi Ville & Alaimo, Cristina & Kallinikos, Jannis, 2021. "The making of data commodities: data analytics as an embedded process," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110296, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert & Andrew B. Whinston, 2001. "Research Commentary: Introducing a Third Dimension in Information Systems Design—The Case for Incentive Alignment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 225-239, September.
    5. Tammar B. Zilber, 2011. "Institutional Multiplicity in Practice: A Tale of Two High-Tech Conferences in Israel," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1539-1559, December.
    6. Lise Arena & Anthony Hussenot, 2021. "From Innovations at Work to Innovative Ways of Conceptualizing Organization: A Brief History of Organization Studies," Post-Print hal-03290300, HAL.
    7. François-Xavier de Vaujany & Sabine Carton & Carine Dominguez-Perry & Emmanuelle Vaast, 2012. "Performativity and Information Technologies: An inter-organizational perspective," Post-Print halshs-00851315, HAL.
    8. Högström, Claes & Tronvoll, Bård, 2012. "The enactment of socially embedded service systems: Fear and resourcing in the London Borough of Sutton," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 427-437.
    9. Pamela J. Hinds & Diane E. Bailey, 2003. "Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 615-632, December.
    10. Pascale Amans & Agnes Mazars & Fabienne Villesèque-Dubus, 2013. "Techniques de gestion et organisations du spectacle vivant : quels dispositifs de soutien et quelles interactions pour l'innovation artistique ?," Post-Print hal-01002362, HAL.
    11. Luciana Cingolani & Tim Hildebrandt, 2022. "Incentive Structures for the Adoption of Crowdsourcing in Public Policy: A Bureaucratic Politics Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-16, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Carine Dominguez-Péry & Lakshmi Narasimha Raju Vuddaraju & Isabelle Corbett-Etchevers & Rana Tassabehji, 2021. "Reducing maritime accidents in ships by tackling human error: a bibliometric review and research agenda," Journal of Shipping and Trade, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-32, December.
    14. Wanda J. Orlikowski & C. Suzanne Iacono, 2001. "Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 121-134, June.
    15. Armanda Cetrulo & Dario Guarascio & Maria Enrica Virgillito, 2020. "Anatomy of the Italian occupational structure: concentrated power and distributed knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(6), pages 1345-1379.
    16. Carlos A. Osorio & Dov Dori & Joseph Sussman, 2011. "COIM: An object‐process based method for analyzing architectures of complex, interconnected, large‐scale socio‐technical systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 364-382, December.
    17. F. Ackermann & M. Yearworth & L. White, 2018. "Micro-processes in Group Decision and Negotiation: Practices and Routines for Supporting Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 709-713, October.
    18. Michael Lounsbury & Christine M. Beckman, 2015. "Celebrating Organization Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 288-308, March.
    19. Xu, Jia & Wei, Jiuchang & Zhao, Dingtao, 2016. "Influence of social media on operational efficiency of national scenic spots in china based on three-stage DEA model," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 374-388.
    20. D'Adderio, Luciana, 2008. "The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routines dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 769-789, June.

    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:bpj:arbeit:v:26:y:2017:i:3-4:p:315-342:n:3. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.