From Taylorism to Algorithmic Management: How Technological Evolution Reshapes Foundational Management Principles
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract: This study traces management’s evolution from Frederick W. Taylor’s early 20th‑century scientific management to the contemporary phenomenon of algorithmic management, probing how technological advancements have fundamentally transformed managerial logic and dynamics. Taylorism emphasized optimizing labor through meticulous time‑and‑motion studies, task standardization, top-down control, and managerial oversight, aimed at maximizing economic efficiency and reducing reliance on worker discretion.
In contrast, algorithmic management entrusts managerial functions such as monitoring, performance assessment, scheduling, goal‑setting, compensation, and even dismissal to algorithms and automated systems. Enabled by real‑time data collection, predictive analytics, and digital platforms, algorithmic management enables organizations to manage dispersed labor at scale with unprecedented precision.
While both approaches share enduring principles like efficiency, standardization, and control, the shift from human supervision to software‑mediated governance introduces distinctive dynamics. Algorithmic systems create triangular visibility regimes rather than traditional hierarchical oversight, often obscuring decision logic and engendering information asymmetries, where employers and increasingly algorithm designers hold more knowledge than workers do.
Moreover, the impacts of algorithmic management are complex and dual in nature. Empirical and theoretical literature suggests such systems can simultaneously restrict and enable worker autonomy and value creation shaping workstation design, job demands, well-being, and motivation. This duality underscores that algorithmic management’s consequences are not predetermined by technology but are contingent on sociotechnical design and implementation choices.
The paper explores how these shifts play out in contemporary labor contexts - from gig platforms to fulfillment centers where workers are subject to algorithmic surveillance and quantified performance regimes, compelling new forms of worker resistance, adaptation, and negotiation of agency.
Integrating Labor Process Theory, the analysis reveals how algorithmic systems reenact power asymmetries and labor control while posing fresh challenges and opportunities for worker autonomy and organizational justice. It argues that as management becomes digitized, practitioners, policymakers, and scholars must critically assess algorithmic design, prioritize ethical implementation, and craft frameworks to preserve worker dignity, transparency, and fairness.
Downloads
References
Bajwa, U., Knorr, L., & Doucet, M. (2021). The algorithmic workplace: Resistance, control, and politics in the platform economy. Canadian Journal of Communication, 46(2), 211–232. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2021v46n2a3955
Barley, S. R. (1990). The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 61–103. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393551
Benanav, A. (2020). Automation and the future of work. Verso Books.
Bérastégui, P. (2021). AI and platform work: How artificial intelligence is transforming platform work. European Trade Union Institute.
Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century. Monthly Review Press.
Burawoy, M. (1979). Manufacturing consent: Changes in the labor process under monopoly capitalism. University of Chicago Press.
Cant, C. (2021). Riding for Deliveroo: Resistance in the new economy. Polity Press.
Cherry, M. A. (2016). Beyond misclassification: The digital transformation of work. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 577–602.
De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the "just-in-time workforce": On-demand work, crowdwork, and labor protection in the "gig economy". Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 471–504.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Duggan, J., Sherman, U., Carbery, R., & McDonnell, A. (2020). Algorithmic management and app‐work in the gig economy: A research agenda for employment relations and HRM. Human Resource Management Journal, 30(1), 114–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12258
Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin's Press.
Gandini, A. (2019). Labour process theory and the gig economy. Human Relations, 72(6), 1039–1056. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718790002
Gray, M. L., & Suri, S. (2019). Ghost work: How to stop Silicon Valley from building a new global underclass. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Head, S. (2014). Mindless: Why smarter machines are making dumber humans. Basic Books.
Heeks, R., Graham, M., & Ahmed, S. (2021). Digital labour platforms and the future of work: A development perspective. Routledge.
Hoffmann, J., Reuter, M., & Bormann, R. (2021). Algorithmic management and collective bargaining in Germany. European Trade Union Institute. https://www.etui.org/publications/algorithmic-management-and-collective-bargaining-germany
Howcroft, D., & Bergvall-Kåreborn, B. (2019). A typology of crowdwork platforms. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018760136
Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 366–410. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0174
Kalleberg, A. L., & Dunn, M. (2016). Good jobs, bad jobs in the gig economy. Perspectives on Work, 20, 10–14.
Kashyap, R., & Belli, L. (2021). Digital discomfort: Experiences of Indian gig workers under algorithmic management. Centre for Internet and Society. https://cis-india.org/raw/digital-discomfort
Moore, P. V. (2021). The quantified worker: Technology and the future of work. Bristol University Press.
Rosenblat, A., & Stark, L. (2016). Algorithmic labor and information asymmetries: A case study of Uber’s drivers. International Journal of Communication, 10, 3758–3784.
Schor, J. B., & Attwood-Charles, W. (2017). The sharing economy: Labor, inequality, and social connection on for-profit platforms. Sociology Compass, 11(8), e12493. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12493
Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform capitalism. Polity Press.
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. Harper & Brothers.
Thompson, P., & van den Broek, D. (2010). Managerial control and workplace regimes: An introduction. Work, Employment and Society, 24(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017010376243
Vallas, S., & Schor, J. B. (2020). What do platforms do? Understanding the gig economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 273–294. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857
van Doorn, N. (2017). Platform labor: On the gendered and racialized exploitation of low-income service work in the ‘on-demand’ economy. Information, Communication & Society, 20(6), 898–914. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1294194
Veen, A., Barratt, T., & Goods, C. (2020). Platform-capital’s “app-etite” for control: A labour process analysis of food-delivery work in Australia. Work, Employment and Society, 34(3), 388–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017019836911
Wood, A. J., Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V., & Hjorth, I. (2019). Good gig, bad gig: Autonomy and algorithmic control in the global gig economy. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 56–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018785616
Zhang, C., Lu, L., & Li, N. (2022). Algorithmic management, job burnout, and turnover intentions in the gig economy: A person–job fit perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(5), 755–770. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000911

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published in our journal are licensed under CC-BY 4.0, which permits authors to retain copyright of their work. This license allows for unrestricted use, sharing, and reproduction of the articles, provided that proper credit is given to the original authors and the source.