You’d think this headline was straight out of the future. And yet, here we are. Robots are becoming more and more important in the workplace. In factories, on the assembly line; in restaurants, in customer service. But a recent study by the National University of Singapore reveals a mixed picture.
The robots are still brand new, barely out of the box. Now a team of researchers in Singapore has decided to measure their impact on the morale and psychology of workers. In an article published last October in the journal American Psychological Association, a team led by researcher Kai Chi Yam showed – through four separate studies – that the introduction of robots into the workplace is not without its challenges.
The results of our multi-method, multi-cultural research demonstrate more specifically that the adoption of robots can also contribute to job insecurity among workers in both low-skilled and intellectually demanding jobs,” the authors state in their conclusion.
To make this demonstration, the researchers first cross-referenced data (Study 1) from 50 states in the United States to see if there was a correlation between robot density per worker and workers’ interest in job search sites such as LinkedIn, Glassdoor, ZipRecruiter, Indeed and Monster. This last criterion would reflect, according to the researchers, the fear of losing one’s job. And the correlation was confirmed: the more robots in a metropolitan area, the more active people are on job search sites.
In another “field” experiment (Study 3), the researchers directly surveyed a group of 118 engineers in Singapore three times a day over a two-week period to take the pulse of their interaction with factory robots. Feelings of “job insecurity” again emerged, this time correlated with workplace incivility and burnout.
Despite the demonstrated positive impact of robots on reducing operating costs, it can also come with unexpected psychological costs,” the researchers conclude.
Debunking the “job loss” myth
By the researchers’ admission, the Singapore study looked at the presence of robots in the workplace from the very specific angle of “job insecurity.” Fear stemming from the famous headline: “Robots will kill your job”. But the researchers found two interesting elements in this regard.
On the one hand, data analyzed in the United States show that there is no correlation between high robot density and unemployment in those markets. In the discussion of the aforementioned Study 1, the researchers find that the increase in robot density from 2010 to 2015 had no effect on the employment rate in either direction. Thus, the fear of job loss is not rooted in reality.
This seems to imply that robot capabilities are increasing at an increased rate, as are the opportunities they generate. On balance, while exposure to robots leads to feelings of anxiety related to job insecurity, these feelings may be due to subjective appraisal rather than actual job loss.”
On the other hand, the researchers argue that this fear can be “treated.” In the fourth study, the research team successfully reduced job insecurity in a group of workers by offering them an assertiveness exercise.
To do this, the researchers recruited 400 employees from a company, who were divided into a control group and a test group. Before interacting with robots, employees in the test group were asked to fill out a form where they had to rank and describe their most cherished values.
Employees want to have a positive self-image; and we encourage managers and leaders to use assertiveness interventions as often as possible. The positive effects of an assertiveness intervention can be felt for up to a year after the intervention, because “a moment of validation during a threatening transition can change a trajectory,” the researchers explain.
According to the technophiles, robots were supposed to make our lives “easier” by relieving us of “unpleasant” tasks, thus allowing us to concentrate on “added” value tasks. We now realize that, beyond this rhetoric, workers have a sensitivity… that must also be taken into account.
