The management of workers using algorithms is rapidly becoming ubiquitous across many industries. Our review of the nascent research on algorithmic management uncovers many negative effects on worker motivation. We offer recommendations to better design and implement algorithmic management in organizations.

No abstract

As it is the case for many business processes and activities disciplines, artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated in human resources management (HRM). While AI has great potential to augment the HRM activities in organizations, automating the management of humans is not without risks and limitations. The identification of these risks is fundamental to promote responsible use of AI in HRM. We thus conducted a review of the empirical academic literature across disciplines on the affordances and responsible principles of AI in HRM. This is the first review of responsible AI in HRM that focuses solely on studies containing observations, measurements, and tests about this phenomenon. The multi-domain and multidisciplinary approach and empirical focus provides a better understanding of the reality of the development, study, and deployment of AI in HRM and sheds light on how these are conducted responsibly. We conclude with a call for research based on what we identified as the most needed and promising avenues.

There is an increasing body of research on algorithmic management (AM), but the field lacks measurement tools to capture workers' experiences of this phenomenon. Based on existing literature, we developed and validated the algorithmic management questionnaire (AMQ) to measure the perceptions of workers regarding their level of exposure to AM. Across three samples (overall n = 1332 gig workers), we show the content, factorial, discriminant, convergent, and predictive validity of the scale. The final 20‐item scale assesses workers' perceived level of exposure to algorithmic: monitoring, goal setting, scheduling, performance rating, and compensation. These dimensions formed a higher order construct assessing overall exposure to algorithmic management, which was found to be, as expected, negatively related to the work characteristics of job autonomy and job complexity and, indirectly, to work engagement. Supplementary analyses revealed that perceptions of exposure to AM reflect the objective presence of AM dimensions beyond individual variations in exposure. Overall, the results suggest the suitability of the AMQ to assess workers' perceived exposure to algorithmic management, which paves the way for further research on the impacts of these rapidly accelerating systems.