Drawing on interviews with 77 high-performing eBay business sellers in France and Belgium, this article investigates the power asymmetries generated by customers’ evaluations in online work settings. Sellers revealed a high degree of sensitivity to negative reviews, which, while infrequent, triggered feelings of anxiety and vulnerability. Their accounts exposed power asymmetries at two levels: the transactional level between sellers and customers and the governance level between sellers and eBay. Our findings highlight three main mechanisms underlying power asymmetries in this context. First, online customer evaluations have created a new form of employee monitoring in which power is exercised through the construction of visibility gaps between buyers and sellers and through an implicit coalition between buyers and the platform owner, who join together in the evaluation procedures. Second, by mediating and objectifying relations, algorithms reproduce power asymmetries among the different categories of actors, thereby constraining human agency. Third, online customer evaluations prompt sellers to exploit their practical knowledge of the algorithm to increase their agency. Through the lived experience of working for an algorithm, our findings contribute new understandings of power and agency in online work settings.
AdlerP. S.BorysB.1996 “Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 61–89.
2.
AntebyM.ChanC. K.2018 “A self-fulfilling cycle of coercive surveillance: Workers’ invisibility practices and managerial justification.” Organization Science, 29: 247–263.
3.
BarleyS. R.1990 “The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 61–103.
4.
BarnesB.2001 “Practice as collective action.” In SchatzkiT. R.Knorr-CetinaK.Von SavignyE. (eds.), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory: 26–50. London: Routledge.
BeaneM.OrlikowskiW. J.2015 “What difference does a robot make? The material enactment of distributed coordination.” Organization Science, 26: 1553–1573.
7.
BeerD.2009 “Power through the algorithm? Participatory web cultures and the technological unconscious.” New Media and Society, 11: 985–1002.
8.
BeerD.2017 “The social power of algorithms.” Information, Communication and Society, 20: 1–13.
9.
BeuscartJ.-S.MelletK.TrespeuchM.2016 “Reactivity without legitimacy? Online consumer reviews in the restaurant industry.” Journal of Cultural Economy, 9: 458–475.
10.
BlauP. M.1964Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.
11.
BrassD. J.BurkhardtM. E.1993 “Potential power and power use: An investigation of structure and behavior.” Academy of Management Journal, 36: 441–470.
12.
BrownJ. S.DuguidP.1991 “Organizational learning and communities-of-practice.” Organization Science, 2: 40–57.
13.
BrownJ. S.DuguidP.2001 “Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective.” Organization Science, 12: 198–213.
CoyneI. T.1997 “Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries?” Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26: 623–630.
17.
CrozierM.FriedbergE.1980Actors and Systems: The Politics of Collective Action. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
DahlR. A.1957 “The concept of power.” Behavioral Science, 2: 201–215.
19.
DanzgerM. H.1964 “Community power structure: Problems and continuties.” American Sociological Review, 29: 707–717.
20.
DellarocasC.2003 “The digitization of word of mouth: Promise and challenges of online feedback mechanisms.” Management Science, 49: 1407–1424.
21.
ElmerG.2012 “Panopticon-discipline-control.” In BallK.HaggertyK.LyonD. (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies: 21–29. London: Routledge.
22.
EspelandW. N.SauderM.2007 “Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds.” American Journal of Sociology, 113: 1–40.
23.
FlemingP.SpicerA.2003 “Working at a cynical distance: Implications for power, subjectivity and resistance.” Organization, 10: 157–179.
24.
FoucaultM.1977Discipline and Punish. London: Penguin Books.
25.
FoucaultM.2002 “Truth and juridical forms.” In FaubionJ. D. (ed.), Power: The Essential Works of Michel Foucault 1954–1984, vol. 3: 1–89. London: Allen Lane.
26.
GeertzC.1978 “The bazaar economy: Information and search in peasant marketing.” American Economic Review, 68: 28–32.
27.
GioiaD. A.CorleyK. G.HamiltonA. L.2013 “Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology.” Organizational Research Methods, 16: 15–31.
28.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L.2008The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.
29.
HodsonR.2001Dignity at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
HodsonR.RoscignoV. J.MartinA.LopezS. H.2013 “The ascension of Kafkaesque bureaucracy in private sector organizations.” Human Relations, 66: 1249–1273.
31.
KemmisS.1993 “Foucault, Habermas and evaluation.” Curriculum Studies, 1: 35–54.
32.
KomakiJ. L.1986 “Toward effective supervision: An operant analysis and comparison of managers at work.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 270–279.
33.
KorczynskiM.2014Songs of the Factory: Pop Music, Culture, and Resistance. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
34.
LanzaraG. F.PatriottaG.2007 “The institutionalization of knowledge in an automotive factory: Templates, inscriptions, and the problem of durability.” Organization Studies, 28: 635–660.
35.
LashS.2007 “Power after hegemony: Cultural studies in mutation?” Theory, Culture and Society, 24: 55–78.
36.
LatourB.1990 “Technology is society made durable.” Sociological Review, 38: 103–131.
37.
LaveJ.WengerE.1991Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38.
LengletM.2011 “Conflicting codes and codings: How algorithmic trading is reshaping financial regulation.” Theory, Culture and Society, 28: 44–66.
39.
LeonardiP. M.BarleyS. R.2010 “What’s under construction here? Social action, materiality, and power in constructivist studies of technology and organizing.” Academy of Management Annals, 4: 1–51.
40.
LevyP. E.WilliamsJ. R.2004 “The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework for the future.” Journal of Management, 30: 881–905.
41.
LongC. P.BenderskyC.MorrillC.2011 “Fairness monitoring: Linking managerial controls and fairness judgments in organizations.” Academy of Management Journal, 54: 1045–1068.
42.
LukesS.1974Power: A Radical View. London: Macmillan.
43.
MacKenzieD.2019 “How algorithms interact: Goffman’s ‘interaction order’ in automated trading.” Theory, Culture and Society, 36: 39–59.
44.
MahajanV.MullerE.KerinR. A.1984 “Introduction strategy for new products with positive and negative word-of-mouth.” Management Science, 30: 1389–1404.
45.
MechanicD.1962 “Sources of power of lower participants in complex organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 7: 349–364.
46.
MelucciA.1995 “The process of collective identity.” In JohnstonH.KlandermansB. (eds.), Social Movements and Culture: 41–63. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
47.
MolmL. D.1990 “Structure, action, and outcomes: The dynamics of power in social exchange.” American Sociological Review, 55: 427–447.
48.
MolmL. D.1997 “Risk and power use: Constraints on the use of coercion in exchange.” American Sociological Review, 62: 113–133.
49.
MudambiS. M.SchuffD.2010 “What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon.com.” MIS Quarterly, 34: 185–200.
NiehoffB. P.MoormanR. H.1993 “Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior.” Academy of Management Journal, 36: 527–556.
52.
OrlikowskiW. J.2000 “Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations.” Organization Science, 11: 404–428.
53.
OrlikowskiW. J.ScottS. V.2008 “Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization.” Academy of Management Annals, 2: 433–474.
54.
OrlikowskiW. J.ScottS. V.2014 “What happens when evaluation goes online? Exploring apparatuses of valuation in the travel sector.” Organization Science, 25: 868–891.
55.
OrlikowskiW. J.ScottS. V.2015 “The algorithm and the crowd: Considering the materiality of service innovation.” MIS Quarterly, 39: 201–216.
56.
OuchiW. G.1977 “The relationship between organizational structure and organizational control.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 22: 95–113.
PatriottaG.BrownA. D.2011 “Sensemaking, metaphors and performance evaluation.” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 27: 34–43.
59.
PavlouP. A.DimokaA.2006 “The nature and role of feedback text comments in online marketplaces: Implications for trust building, price premiums, and seller differentiation.” Information Systems Research, 17: 392–414.
60.
PfefferJ.1981Power in Organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.
61.
PickeringA.1993 “The mangle of practice: Agency and emergence in the sociology of science.” American Journal of Sociology, 99: 559–589.
62.
PowerM.1999The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63.
PrasadP.PrasadA.2000 “Stretching the iron cage: The constitution and implications of routine workplace resistance.” Organization Science, 11: 387–403.
64.
RoscignoV. J.HodsonR.2004 “The organizational and social foundations of worker resistance.” American Sociological Review, 69: 14–39.
65.
RubinB. A.1986 “Class struggle American style: Unions, strikes and wages.” American Sociological Review, 51: 618–633.
66.
SchatzkiT. R.Knorr-CetinaK.von SavignyE.2001The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London: Routledge.
67.
ScottS. V.OrlikowskiW. J.2012 “Reconfiguring relations of accountability: Materialization of social media in the travel sector.” Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37: 26–40.
68.
SewellG.BarkerJ. R.2006 “Coercion versus care: Using irony to make sense of organizational surveillance.” Academy of Management Review, 31: 934–961.
69.
SewellW. H.Jr.1992 “A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation.” American Journal of Sociology, 98: 1–29.
70.
SherryJ. F.1990 “A sociocultural analysis of a midwestern American flea market.” Journal of Consumer Research, 17: 13–30.
71.
StakeR. E.1995The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
72.
StraussA.CorbinJ.1998Basics of Qualitative Research, 2d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
73.
ThompsonM.2005 “Structural and epistemic parameters in communities of practice.” Organization Science, 16: 151–164.
74.
TownleyB.1993 “Performance appraisal and the emergence of management.” Journal of Management Studies, 30: 221–238.
75.
VallasS. P.2006 “Empowerment redux: Structure, agency, and the remaking of managerial authority.” American Journal of Sociology, 111: 1677–1717.
76.
WeberM.1978Economy and Society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
77.
WiltermuthS. S.FlynnF. J.2013 “Power, moral clarity, and punishment in the workplace.” Academy of Management Journal, 56: 1002–1023.
78.
YinR. K.2018Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods, 6th ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
79.
ZammutoR. F.GriffithT. L.MajchrzakA.DoughertyD. J.FarajS.2007 “Information technology and the changing fabric of organization.” Organization Science, 18: 749–762.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
