Technopolitics from Below: A Framework for the Analysis of Digital Politics of Production

Abstract

This article develops a multi-level framework for the analysis of a bottom-up politics of technology at the workplace. It draws on a multi-case study on algorithmic management of manual labor in manufacturing and delivery platforms in Germany. In researching how workers influenced the use of algorithmic management systems, the concept of technopolitics is developed to refer to three different arenas of negotiation: (1) the arena of regulation, where institutional framings of technologies in production are negotiated, typically between state actors, employers’ associations, and unions. (2) The arena of implementation, where strategies of technology deployment are negotiated—in the German production model typically between management and works council. (3) The arena of appropriation, in which different organizational technocultures offer contesting schemes for the actual use of technology at work. Whereas most recent research on digitalization of work conceptualizes workers as mere objects of digitalization processes, this paper focuses on worker agency as a “technopolitics from below.” It thus demonstrates how workers influence the concrete outcome of digitalization projects.

Political Theory of the Digital Constellation

“…Digitalisation also refers, for example, to the challenge of democratic and state rule-making (Pistor 2020), to changing forms of political governance-starting with Lawrence Lessig's (2006) canonical formulation "Code is Law", to Mireille Hildebrandt's (2015) work on the transformation of law through preemption and automation, to the complex transformation of norms such as trans- 2 The concept of technopolitics aims to reflect the hybridity of politics and digital infrastructures. Approaches inspired by the sociology of technology in movement research or the sociology of work conceptualise the relationship as a contested field in which the concrete design of the technical structuring of social and political orders is fought over (Kurban et al 2017;Milan and Gutierrez 2018;Schaupp 2021). It is precisely this politicisation of the design of digital infrastructures that is increasingly echoed in political theory (see, for example, Berg and Staemmler 2020;Forestal 2021).…”

Cybernetic proletarianization: Spirals of devaluation and conflict in digitalized production

“…This is a myth. Instead, in the cases researched here, workers developed various individual and collective strategies to influence digitalization, which can be termed 'technopolitics from below' (Schaupp 2021a). This consists of three different elements.…”

“…Thus, part of the job of these workers consists in making themselves superfluous. At the same time, however, this cybernetic proletarianization is accompanied by a new wave of labour conflicts, which is described here as 'technopolitics from below' (Schaupp 2021a). They take the form of individual and collective technological disobedience, but also of collective self-organization, in many cases outside the traditional institutions of industrial relations.…”

Algorithmic Integration and Precarious (Dis)Obedience: On the Co-Constitution of Migration Regime and Workplace Regime in Digitalised Manufacturing and Logistics

“…This article builds on a multi-case study (Yin, 2003) of digitalised manufacturing and logistics in Germany that was conducted through 2017–19 (see also Schaupp, 2021b). The study consists of 53 qualitative interviews (I#1–53) and participant observations in four different companies (PO#1–9) which function as focus cases.…”

“…Workers interviewed here reported that they 'give the finger' to the control systems (I#45) or try to 'outwit' them (I#11). Informal resistant practices included various forms of micro-level 'technopolitics', like manipulating the algorithms or sabotaging the infrastructure, which in one case led to the abortion of the implementation of additional control technologies (Schaupp, 2021b).…”