The Consequences of Visibility and Opaqueness for Platform Workers
Copyright (c) 2024 Laura Seppanen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Abstract
Digital technologies can considerably increase the visibility of people’s behaviours and activities, and therefore researchers should pay more attention to visibility and opaqueness in organisations. This paper focuses on visibility in terms of the information given or mediated to workers. The aim of this paper is to examine consequences of visibility for workers who carry out work tasks through digital labour platforms. The research will focus on how visibility or opaqueness in practice promotes or hinders workers’ capacity to act and to make informed choices in their work. The visibility paradoxes of connectivity, performance and transparency are used as methodical lenses.
The same platform operations can have both empowering and marginalising consequences for workers. While labour platforms continuously improve visibility to workers, they may also hide, inadvertently or intentionally, key information.
Keywords:
References
ANANNY, Mike – CRAWFORD, Kate (2018): Seeing without Knowing: Limitations of Transparency Ideal and Its Application to Algorithmic Accountability. New Media & Society, 20(3), 973–989. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816676645
Delivery platform’s Induction Material (2022). Unpublished.
ANDERSON, L. – WESTBERG, C. eds. (2016): Voices of Workable Futures. People Transforming Work in the Platform Economy: The Institute for the Future.
BALL, Carolyn (2009): What is Transparency? Public Integrity, 11(4), 293–307. Online: https://doi.org/10.2753/PIN1099-9922110400
BOBILLIER CHAUMON, M.-E. (2021): Technologies emergentes et transformations digitales de l’activité: enjeux pour l’activité et la santé au travail. Psychologie de travail et des organisations, 27, 17–32. Online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pto.2021.01.002
BRIGHENTI, Andrea (2007): Visibility. A Category for the Social Sciences. Current Sociology, 55(3), 323–342. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392107076079
Cedefop (2020): Developing and Matching Skills in the Online Platform Economy: Findings on New Forms of Digital Work and Learning from Cedefop's CrowdLearn Study. Luxembourg: Publications Office. Cedefop reference series; No 116. Online: https://doi.org/10.2801/588297
CHRISTENSEN, Lars T. – CHENEY, George (2015): Peering into Transparency: Challenging Ideas, Proxies and Organizational Practices. Communication Theory, 25(1), 70–90. Online: https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12052
DEJOURS, C. (1993): Intelligence pratique et sagesse pratique: deux dimensions méconnues du travail réel. Éducation Permanente, 116, 47–60.
DENG, Xuefei – JOSHI, K. D. – GALLIERS, Robert D. (2016): The Duality of Empowerment and Marginalization in Microtask Crowdsourcing: Giving Voice to the Less Powerful through Value Sensitive Design. MIS Quarterly, 40(2), 279–302. Online: https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2016/40.2.01
FLYVERBOM, Mikkel (2022): Overlit: Digital Architectures of Visibility. Organization Theory, 3(3). Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877221090314
HARDGRAVE, Timothy J. – VAN DE VEN, Andrew (2017): Integrating Dialectical and Paradox Perspectives on Managing Contradictions in Organizations. Organization Studies, 38(3–4), 319–339. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616640843
HARNESS, Delaney – GANESH, Shiv – STOHL, Cynthia (2022): Visibility Agents: Organizing Transparency in the Digital Era. New Media & Society, online first, November 26, 2022. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221137816
KEMPER, Jakko – KOLKMAN, Daan (2018): Transparent to Whom? No Algorithmic Accountability Without a Critical Audience. Information, Communication & Society, 22(14), 2081–2096. Online: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1477967
KORNBERGER, Martin – PFLUEGER, Dane – MOURITSEN, Jan (2017): Evaluative Infrastructures: Accounting for Platform Organization. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 60, 79–95. Online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2017.05.002
LEONARDI, Paul – TREEM, Jeffrey (2020): Behavioral Visibility: A New Paradigm for Organization Studies in the Age of Digitization, Digitalization and Datafication. Organization Studies, 41(12), 1601–1625. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840620970728
LEWIS, M. W., – SMITH, W. K. (2014): Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the Focus and Widening the Scope. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(2), 127–149. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886314522322
MAZMANIAN, Melissa (2013): Avoiding the Trap of Constant Connectivity: When Congruent Frames Allow for Heterogeneous Practices. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1225–1250. Online: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0787
MAZMANIAN, Melissa – ORLIKOWSKI, Wanda – YATES, JoAnne (2013): The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals. Organization Science, 24(5), 1337–1357. Online: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0806
PICHAULT, François – MCKEOWN, Tui (2019): Autonomy at Work in the Gig Economy: Analysing Work Status, Work Content and Working Conditions of Independent Professionals. New Technology, Work and Employment, 34(1), 59–72. Online: https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12132
PESOLE, A. – URZI BRANCATI, M. C. – FERNÁNDEZ-MACIAS, E. – BIAGI, F. – GONZALEZ VAZQUEZ, I. (2018): Platform Workers in Europe Evidence from the COLLEEM Survey. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Online: https://doi.org/10.2760/742789
POWER, Michael (2022): Theorizing the Economy of Traces: From Audit Society to Surveillance Capitalism. Organization Theory, 3(3). Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877211052296
RAHMAN, Hatim A. (2021): The Invisible Cage: Workers' Reactivity to Opaque Algorithmic Evaluations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(4), 945–988. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392211010118
SEPPÄNEN, L. – HASU, M. – KÄPYKANGAS, S. – POUTANEN, Seppo (2018): On-demand Work in Platform Economy: Implications for Sustainable Development. In BAGNARA, S. – TARTAGLIA, ALBOLINO, R. S. – ALEXANDER, T. – FUJITA, Y. (eds.): Proceedings of the 20th Congress of International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018). Cham: Springer, 803–811. Online: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96068-5_86
SEPPÄNEN, Laura – POUTANEN, Seppo – ROUVINEN, P. (2019): Millaista yrittäjyyttä alustatyö edistää? Esimerkkinä Upwork Suomessa [What kind of entrepreneurship does platform work enhance?]. Työpoliittinen aikakauskirja, (1), 20–28.
SEPPÄNEN, Laura – POUTANEN, Seppo (2020): Cultural Transition in the Sharing Economy? Introducing Platform Work with Activity Concepts. In POUTANEN, S. – KOVALAINEN, A. – ROUVINEN, P. (eds.): Digital Work and the Platform Economy. Understanding Tasks, Skills and Capabilities in the New Era. New York and London: Routledge, 183–202. Online: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429467929-10
SEPPÄNEN, Laura – KÄNSÄLÄ, M. – IMMONEN, J. – ALASOINI, T. (2022): Näkökulmia alustatyön reiluuteen. Reiluuden mallit alustatyössä -hankkeen loppuraportti. Tietoa työstä. [Perspectives into fairness of platform work. Final report of the Models of fairness in platform work–project].
SEPPÄNEN, Laura – TOIVIAINEN, Hanna – HASU, Mervi (2023): Workplace Learning for Fair Work on Digital Labour Platforms. In BOUND, Helen – EDWARDS, Anne – EVANS, Karen – CHIA, Arthur (eds.): Workplace Learning for Changing Social and Economic Circumstances. Routledge, 171–184. Online: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003227946-14
STOHL, Cynthia – STOHL, Michael – LEONARDI, Paul (2016): Managing Opacity: Information Visibility and the Paradox of Transparency in the Digital Age. International Journal of Communication, 10(2016), 123–137.
SUNDARARAJAN, Arun (2016): The Sharing Economy: The End of Employment and the Rise of Crowd-Based Capitalism. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
TADELIS, Steven (2016): Reputation and Feedback Systems in Online Platform Markets. Annual Review of Economics, 8(3), 21–40. Online: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080315-015325
VAIRIMAA, Reetta (2023): Digitalisaatiosta toivottiin tuottavuusloikkaa – miksi asiantuntijoiden aika menee tietojärjestelmien kanssa tappelemiseen? [An efficiency leap was expected from digitalization – why experts’ time is wasted to fight with information systems?] Helsingin Yliopisto, 4/2023. Online: https://www.helsinki.fi/fi/uutiset/digitalisaatio/digitalisaatiosta-toivottiin-tuottavuusloikkaa-miksi-asiantuntijoiden-aika-menee-tietojarjestelmien-kanssa-tappelemiseen
VALLAS, Steven – SCHOR, Juliet B. (2020): What Do Platforms Do? Understanding the Gig Economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 273–294. Online: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857
VAN DOORN, N. – BADGER, A. (2021): Dual Value Production as Key to the Gig Economy Puzzle. In MEIJERINK, J. – JANSEN, G. – V. DASKALOVA (eds.): Platform Economy Puzzles. A Multidisciplinary Perspective on Gig Work. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 123–139. Online: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839100284.00015
WOOD, Alex J. (2021): Algorithmic Management. Consequences for Work Organisation and Working Conditions. Seville: European Commission.
WOOD, Alex J. – GRAHAM, Mark – LEHDONVIRTA, Vili – HJORTH, Isis (2019): Good Gig, Bad Gig: Autonomy and Algorithmic Control in the Global Gig Economy. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 56–75. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018785616
WURHOFER, Daniela – MENEWEGER, Thomas – FUCHSBERGER, Verena – TSCHELIGI, Manfred (2018): Reflections on Operators’ and Maintenance Engineers’ Experiences of Smart Factories. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on Supporting Groupwork, Sanibel Island, USA. Online: https://doi.org/10.1145/3148330.3148349
