Turn Digitalization and Automation to a Job Resource

My aim with this commentary is to discuss my vision on what will determine its impact, building on Parker and Grote (2020). To my view, digitalization and automation can contribute to stimulating and “healthy” jobs, if (a) they are designed to support people’s work, (b) people are in control and can craft their use, (c) job resources are maximized and job demands are affordable, (d) the economic growth is shared among stakeholders, including employees, and (e) authorities protect employees and employment (conditions)


INTRODUCTION
Predicting the impact of digitalization and automation (called technology for brevity) on organizations, employees, and the society at large may seem like predicting the future with a magic ball. Parker and Grote (2020) discussed the possible impact of technology on core job characteristics and job demands. In line with their analysis, Wegman, Hoffman, Carter, Twenge and Guenole's (2016) cross-temporal meta-analysis of the changes in work characteristics between 1975 and 2010 showed that skill variety increased most, followed by task identity, task significance, and autonomy. However, feedback failed to show significant gains. The increases remained significant-even when controlling for job complexity, organization type, and industry-indicating that jobs are generally becoming more enriched, possibly due to technology-related changes. Indeed, technology has already visible effects as it seems to allow new production systems, with decentralized and coordinated production, adapted to the market and that reduce costs, increase the individualization of work, and modify terms of working conditions (Colàs Neila, 2011). According to Bréchemier et al. (2016), the transition towards robotization in the automotive industry shows that the © 2020 The Authors. Applied Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Association of Applied Psychology. productivity of major manufacturers doubled between 1975 and 1990, during which period workforces were downsized by nearly 45 percent although the number of executives increased by 45 percent and production nevertheless increased by almost 40 percent. Safety has also improved, with work accidents falling by 20 percent. The Millennium Project (Daheim, Wintermann, Glenn, Korn, & Schoon, 2019) specified three scenarios or alternative visions of the impact of technology: (1) mixed scenario, which contains both advantageous (e.g., less concentration of wealth) and disadvantageous (e.g., life-long working) decisions; (2) negative scenario of political and economic turmoil characterized by high alienation, increased social division, and political polarization; and (3) positive scenario, where human and technology symbiosis is achieved and work is meaningful and leads to self-actualization. These scenarios show that technology has the potential to have a positive impact on work and on people's well-being. My aim with this commentary is to discuss my vision on what will determine its impact, building on Parker and Grote (2020).

Impact of Digitalization and Automation from a Job Demands-Resources Perspective
Critical is whether technology will be designed as a demand or a resource for the employees. Job demands are those aspects of the job that require sustained effort, and are therefore associated with certain costs (e.g., high work pressure, cognitive demands, and irregular working hours), whereas job resources refer to those aspects of the job that are functional in achieving work goals, reduce job demands and the associated costs, or stimulate personal learning and development (e.g., autonomy, social support, and opportunities for growth) (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner & Schaufeli, 2001). Technology can be designed such that it supports local decision making (high job resource), decides for the operator who only has a vigilant role (low job demands), or synthesizes information allowing the operator to make high complexity decisions (high job demands).
Although technology can take over a lot of repetitive, complicated, or heavy tasks, the current evidence seems to suggest that job demands will change or increase at least in the short term. Because technology takes over treatment, manipulation, or assembly of smaller objects, parts, or information, the human operator has to work with more cognitively or mentally demanding parts of work that require a high amount of information processing. The nature of job demands also changes as employees take over vigilance (i.e., tasks requiring sustained attention and timely reactions to a visual stimulus) and maintenance tasks (i.e., tasks required to ensure optimal supportability of operational systems). Furthermore, new tasks and routines require new knowledge (Lundh & Rydstedt, 2016). As these changes do not occur automatically, employees are confronted with higher demands due to technology-induced implementation of changes, which is related to higher workload and insecurity. Both may be reduced as the time passes and employees become acquainted with technology use. Supporting employees during the introduction (through the right training) and the use of technology (through a help-desk construction) may reduce these change-related demands. Nevertheless, changing one's work routine and being required to follow training or to ask for technical support is a demanding situation (van Emmerik, Bakker & Euwema, 2009). Finally, increased demands may be byproducts of technology introduction, as is the case when new tasks and old work design mismatch (Lundh & Rydstedt, 2016) or because technology facilitates intrusions into private life, increasing the experience of work-family conflict (Ollier-Malaterre, Jacobs, & Rothbard, 2019).
In terms of job resources, Parker and Grote (2020) provide an excellent discussion on the impact of new technology on the core job characteristics. Adding to this discussion, if there are two resources that will increase most due to technology, these are opportunities for development and learning, and flexibility in working time and location. Although higher opportunities for development represent an important job resource (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017), the complexity of technology and the less transparent technical solutions require different skills and knowledge. A downside of this may be the lack of appropriate education and the necessity of intensive training or reschooling to support these opportunities. Moreover, we know from the working times literature that flexibility in working times can be employer-led (time restrictions, overtime) or employee-led (decision of start and end time). Kattenbach, Demerouti and Nachreiner (2010) found that the former is actually a job demand, whereas only the latter is a job resource.
In support of this, Lundh and Rydstedt (2016) investigated the changes of job demands and resources due to automation among engine room staff in ships. Specifically, the role of the marine engineers changed from engineering to system operating. As the physical design initiatives incorporated in the ship did not support the tasks to be performed, crew members found alternative and suboptimal ways to perform their tasks, which may trigger unsafe behaviors. Further, it was found that staffing had been reduced (more resignations due to the altered jobs), new tasks were added but the organization of the crew and the design of the workplace remained unaltered. Unfortunately, increased job demands were not compensated with increased job resources, as the engine crew reported that participation in planning of work was reduced, contact with colleagues was reduced because they worked alone, and communication occurred though internet/emails. Taken together, job demands seem to increase with the introduction of technology, whereas job resources seem

(Negative) Consequences and How to Avoid Them
As was clear in Parker and Grote (2020) and the Millennium Project (Daheim et al., 2019), technology can impact each job characteristic in a positive or negative way. My main proposition is that the only way to collectively profit from digitalization and automation is to turn it into a resource for all involved parties, including or even starting from the employees. Providing sufficient resources for the new demands posed to employees is essential for the well-being of employees. As the Job Demands-Resources theory (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017;Demerouti et al., 2001) suggests, high demands can drain employee energy and lead to health impairment due to the costs of increased effort expended, whereas lack of resources diminish motivation due to inhibiting goal accomplishment and fulfilment of demands. Technology can therefore influence the well-being of employees and make them more exhausted and less engaged in their work. This has consequences for the employee (impaired health), their family (reduced involvement in family life), organizations (higher absenteeism and turnover and lower performance) and insurances, as well as governments (costs for benefits). As adaptation is an extra-role behavior that is generally predicted by increased motivation (cf. Griffin, Neal & Parker, 2007), it is of particular importance to design jobs with affordable demands and sufficiently high resources in order to stimulate high task, and also adaptive performance of employees. Failing to do this may lead to employees who sabotage new technology or who do not use its full potential. Examples are decision support systems that are ignored by the operators who make their own, often suboptimal, decisions (Fildes, Goodwin, Lawrence, & Nikolopoulos, 2009).
Providing sufficient resources for the demands posed by technology will be the key to enable good performances. However, this is not sufficient. Having meaningful work is an innate drive for employees (Hulshof, Demerouti, & Le Blanc, 2020), which may be threatened by technology as the "left over" design principle may result in "Digital Taylorism" (Degryse, 2016). One way to increase meaningful work is through job crafting. Job crafting represents bottom-up adjustment of the work tasks and characteristics to make them fit one's preferences and to find meaning in work. According to the JD-R theory, employees craft their job by expanding (seek resources and challenges) or reducing (diminish or optimize demands) its scope. Our research shows that employees who have the autonomy (by the organization or supervisor) or who are stimulated (through training) to craft their job, are more open and adaptive to changes because they can create the environment that they can operate optimally and arrange the conditions that they need to integrate the change (technology) into their daily work (Gordon et al., 2018). Proactive involvement of employees in the design and implementation of technology may also be one way to keep employees technologically fit and constantly on the move, as this is the new context of technology.
Instead of placing all responsibility for the successful technology implementation on employees (expecting them to be flexible, able to fulfill constantly changing roles, take care of their own education/training, negotiate own employment conditions and job function, being available around the clock and endorse instead of resist change), and in line with the suggestions of Parker and Grote (2020), organizations, authorities, and policymakers need to take their own responsibility. Organizations need to turn technology into a resource by redesigning the whole system (task, knowledge, organizational structure, decision-making processes), taking experiences and requirements of users into consideration in the design process, providing appropriate resources for the new demands, and facilitate employee job crafting. Authorities and policymakers should protect employees by introducing norms to maintain a safe work environment, safe working hours (against overload and exploitation), sufficient income, and to ensure privacy and training and education of employees. Moreover, they should protect flexible employment and self-employment as well as employee-led flexibility next to employer-led flexibility in order to avoid deterioration of the living and working conditions. The state also has to change institutions and processes and become more closely aligned to long-term perspectives and more proactive in anticipating and shaping the future (and not just the future of work and technology) (Daheim et al., 2019). In this way, the wealth created by technology can be distributed not only to those who develop or implement it, but also to those who have to work with it. Finally, educational institutions (e.g., schools, colleges, and universities) should teach individuals skills and not (just) knowledge, and promote meta-skills (such as the capability for cooperation, creativity, and problem-solving) to prepare the way for (more) multi-track employment biographies.
Taken together, digitalization and automation can contribute to stimulating and "healthy" jobs, if (a) they are designed to support people's work, (b) people are in control and can craft their use, (c) job resources are maximized and job demands are affordable, (d) the economic growth is shared among stakeholders, including employees, and (e) authorities protect employees and employment (conditions).