Advertisement

The Quantified Workplace: A Study in Self-Tracking, Agility and Change Management

  • Phoebe Moore
  • Lukasz Piwek
  • Ian Roper
Chapter

Abstract

While self-and other tracking devices are increasingly common in workplaces, they are normally implemented either for explicit productivity and efficiency monitoring (warehouses) or as part of wellness initiatives (white collar and office work) rather than as part of change management. This chapter looks at one company’s project work design experiment where management provided several devices to employees to record productivity and movement and asked for daily self-reports on subjective well-being and stress. The quantified workplace study (QWS) was designed by the company to identify how productivity and resilience can be self-managed in times of transition through self-awareness and healthy lifestyles and well-being in what authors call the new era of agility.

Keywords

Self-tracking Workplace Labour Agility Management Subjectivity 

References

  1. Ajana, Btihaj. 2017. Digital Health and the Biopolitics of the Quantified Self. Digital Health 3: 1–18.Google Scholar
  2. Barley, Stephen R., and Gideon Kunda. 1992. Design and devotion: Surges of rational and normative ideologies of control in managerial discourse. Administrative science quarterly 363–399.Google Scholar
  3. Barnes, Ralph., M. 1937/1980. Motion and Time Study: Design and Measurement of Work. USA and Canada: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  4. Cederstrom, Carl, and Andre Spicer. 2015. The Wellness Syndrome. Cambridge, UK and Malden, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  5. Daws, Ryan. 2016. Adopting Fitness Trackers in Businesses Saves $1000 per employee. http://www.wearabletechnology-newscom/news/2016/oct/19/adopting-fitness-trackers-businesses-saves-1000-employee/.
  6. Drucker, Peter. 1970. Technology, Management and Society. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Fernie, Sue, and David Metcalf. 1998. (Not) Hanging on the Telephone: Payments Systems in the New Sweatshops. No. 390 Paper Produced as Part of the Centre’s Industrial Relations Programme, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
  8. Gilbreth, Lillian. 1914. Psychology of Management: The Function of Mind in Determining, Teaching, and Installing Methods of Least Waste. New York: Sturgis and Walton Company.Google Scholar
  9. Hughes, Michael. 2015. How to Adapt Your Recruitment and HR Strategy to Wearable Technology. ITProPortal, August 3, 2015. http://www.itproportal.com/2015/08/03/how-to-adapt-your-recruitment-and-hr-strategy-to-wearable-technology/.
  10. Jiff. 2016. Jiff Data Challenges Myths on Workplace Wearables. http://www.castlighthealth.com/press-releases/jiff-data-challenges-myths-workplace-wearables/.
  11. Joroff, Michael L., William L. Porter, Barbara Feinberg, and Chuckl Kukla. 2003. The Agile Workplace. Journal of Corporate Real Estate 5 (4): 293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Manifesto for Agile Software Development. 2001. Agility Manifesto. http://agilemanifesto.org.
  13. Moore, Phoebe, and Andrew Robinson. 2016. The Quantified Self: What Counts in the Neoliberal Workplace. New Media and Society 18 (1): 2774–2792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moore, Phoebe. 2016. As jobs are replaced by machines, workers are treated as fungible data sets. Blog post (13/10/16). https://phoebevmoore.wordpress.com/2016/10/13/as-jobs-are-replaced-by-machines-workers-are-treated-as-fungible-data-sets/.
  15. Moore, P. 2017. The Quantified Self in Precarity: Work, Technology and What Counts, Advances in Sociology series. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Nadworny, Milton J. 1955. Scientific Management and the Unions 1900–1932: A Historical Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Price, Brian. 1989. Frank and Lillian Gilbreth and the Manufacture and Marketing of Motion Study, 1908–1924. Business and Economic History Second Series Vol. 18 http://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/TheGilbreths.pdf.
  18. Ramsay, H. 1977. Cycles of Control: Worker Participation in Sociological and Historical Perspective. Sociology 11 (3): 481–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ruckenstein, Minna. 2014. Visualised and Interacted Life: Personal Analytics and Engagements with Data Doubles. Societies 4 (1): 68–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schwab, Klaus. 2016. The Fourth Industrial Revolution: What it Means, How to Respond. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-to-respond/.
  21. Sewell, G., and B. Wilkinson. 1992. Someone to Watch Over Me: Surveillance, Discipline and the Just-in-Time Labour Process. Sociology 26 (2): 271–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Spencer, David. 2016. Work in and Beyond the Second Machine Age: The Politics of Production and Digital Technologies. Work, Employment and Society First Published Online June 7, 2016. doi: 10.1177/0950017016645716.
  23. Strauss, Anselm, and Juliet Corbin. 1994. Grounded Theory Methodology. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, ed. N.K. Denzin, and Y.S. Lincoln, 217–285. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  24. Taylor, Frederick W. 1911/1998. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Taylor, Phil, and Peter Bain. 1999. “An Assembly Line in the Head”: Work and Employee Relations in the Call Centre. Industrial Relations Journal 30 (2): 101–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thompson, P., and S. Ackroyd. 1995. All Quiet on the Workplace Front? Critique of Recent Trends in British Industrial Sociology. Sociology 29: 615–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1. School of LawMiddlesex UniversityLondonUK
  2. 2.School of ManagementUniversity of BathBathUK

Personalised recommendations