Neo-Taylorism in the Digital Age: Workplace Transformations in French and German Retail Warehouses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper analyzes how digitalization in conjunction with changes to the economic environment are affecting the nature of low-skilled jobs in the logistics sector; in particular, job content and the working and employment conditions attached to those jobs. On the basis of expert interviews and company case studies in French and German retail warehouses, the authors investigate whether the adaptation of these jobs corresponds to the more general ‘neo-Taylorist’ transformation of workplaces discussed in the literature and seek to identify those factors that are helping to stabilize or modify this trend. Drawing on the comparative labour relations literature, which distinguishes between different types of workers’ power resources (institutional, associational and structural), the study examines how and to what extent employees and their representatives renegotiate or influence techno-organizational choices. By focusing on firms headquartered in France and Germany, we can shed some light on whether the institutional power of organized labour may enable them to foster trajectories other than the kind of ‘digital Taylorism’ we see in liberal market economies. The findings point, however, to a general convergence on digitally enhanced ‘Neo-Taylorism,’ which is characterized by deskilling and intensification of performance control. The limited cross-country variation can largely be explained by the very similar effects across countries of ‘lean’ supply-chain transformation and the trend toward outsourcing and offshoring, which negatively affect workers’ structural power. Moreover, associational resources are negatively affected by the deskilling trend. Meanwhile, the findings provide some evidence of a beneficial impact from the institutional power of worker representatives in both countries: in particular, the rights to veto and co-determine performance management systems. These rights have not altogether helped prevent the shift toward neo-Taylorism but have contributed to somewhat less intense forms of neo-Taylorism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".