Faced with a surge in labour costs, companies are strongly incentivised by local governments’ aggressive promotion to embrace robotic technology, triggering intense media debates. This, in turn, inevitably shapes workers’ attitudes towards their current jobs and brings uncertainty about their future workplace. This study investigates the connection between robotisation, routinisation and job satisfaction in China’s labour market. The results show that there is an observed positive relationship between an individual’s job satisfaction and exposure to robots in the local labour market, which may be related to the overwhelming benefits of these new technologies about certain work dimensions. However, fear of automation is not groundless. Our findings show that job satisfaction decreased with an increase in the routinisation of task content, particularly in areas that are increasingly exposed to robot adoption. This supports the routine-biased technological change hypothesis, which connects technology-induced unemployment with job routinisation.
AbelianskyABeulmannM (2019) Are They Coming for Us? Industrial Robots and the Mental Health of Workers (No. 379). Göttingen: Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research (CEGE).
2.
AcemogluDAutorDH (2011) Skills, tasks and technologies: Implications for employment and earnings. In: CardDAshenfelterO (eds) Handbook of Labor Economics. New York: Elsevier, pp. 1043–1171.
3.
AcemogluDRestrepoP (2020) Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets. Journal of Political Economy128: 2188–2244.
4.
Aguiar do MonteP (2012) Job dissatisfaction and labour turnover: Evidence from Brazil. International Journal of Human Resource Management23: 1717–1735.
5.
AllenJDe GripA (2012) Does skill obsolescence increase the risk of employment loss?Applied Economics44: 3237–3245.
AutorDHDornD (2013) The growth of low-skill service jobs and the polarization of the US labor market. American Economic Review103: 1553–1597.
8.
AutorDHLevyFMurnaneRJ (2003) The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics118: 1279–1333.
9.
BaronRMKennyDA (1986) The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51: 1173.
10.
BroughamDHaarJ (2018) Smart technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, and algorithms (stara): Employees’ perceptions of our future workplace. Journal of Management Organization24: 239–257.
11.
CaselliMFracassoAMarcolinA, et al. (2021) The Reassuring Effect of Firms’ Technological Innovations on Workers’ Job Insecurity (No. 938). Essen: Global Labor Organization (GLO).
12.
ChengHJiaRXLiDD, et al. (2019) The rise of robots in China. Journal of Economic Perspectives33: 71–88.
13.
ChengZGuoFHugoG, et al. (2013) Employment and wage discrimination in the Chinese cities: A comparative study of migrants and locals. Habitat International39: 246–255.
14.
CoupeT (2019) Automation, job characteristics and job insecurity. International Journal of Manpower40: 1288–1304.
15.
CronbachJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika16: 297–334.
16.
DauthWFindeisenSSüdekumJ, et al. (2017) German Robots: The Impact of Industrial Robots on Workers (No. 30/2017). Nürnberg: Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB).
17.
DuYHWeiXH (2020) Task content routinisation, technological change and labour turnover: Evidence from China. The Economic and Labour Relations Review31: 324–346.
18.
DuYHHazrulSWeiXH (2023) ‘I’m stressed!’: The work effect of process innovation on mental health. SSM-Population Health21: 101347.
19.
ErdoganBBauerTNTruxilloDM, et al. (2012) Whistle while you work: A review of the life satisfaction literature. Journal of Management38: 1038–1083.
20.
FonsecaTLimaFPereiraSC (2018) Job polarization, technological change and routinization: Evidence for Portugal. Labor Economics51: 317–339.
21.
FreyCBOsborneMA (2017) The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?Technological Forecasting and Social Change114: 254–280.
22.
GihlebRGiuntellaOStellaL, et al. (2020) Industrial Robots, Workers’ Safety, and Health (No. 13672). Bonn: Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
23.
GiuntellaOWangT (2019) Is an Army of Robots Marching on Chinese Jobs? (No. 12281). Bonn: Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
24.
GoosMManningASalomonsA (2014) Explaining job polarization: Routine-biased technological change and offshoring. American Economic Review104: 2509–2526.
25.
GunadiCHanbyulR (2021) Does the rise of robotic technology make people healthier?Health Economics30: 2047–2062.
26.
HeymanF (2016) Job polarization, job tasks and the role of firms. Economics Letter145: 246–251.
27.
JacksonDYoungVSanderA (2020) Information and Communication Technologies and Work-Life Balance: Practical Recommendations for Employers and Individuals, vol. 32. London: IntechOpen, pp. 137–144. Available at: https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/74135
28.
LingmontDNAlexiouA (2020) The contingent effect of job automating technology awareness on perceived job insecurity: Exploring the moderating role of organizational culture. Technological Forecasting and Social Change161: 120302.
29.
McGuinnessSPouliakasKRedmondP (2019) Skills-Displacing Technological Change and Its Impact on Jobs: Challenging Technological Alarmism? (No. 12541). Bonn: Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
30.
ManyikaJChuiMMiremadiM, et al. (2017) A Future That Works: AI, Automation, Employment, and Productivity. San Francisco, CA: McKinsey Global Institute.
31.
MarcolinLMiroudotSSquicciariniM (2019) To be (routine) or not to be (routine), that is the question: A cross-country task-based answer. Industrial and Corporate Change28: 477–501.
32.
MauroCAndreaFAriannaM, et al. (2021) The Reassuring Effect of Firms’ Technological Innovations on Workers’ Job Insecurity (No. 938). Essen: Global Labor Organization (GLO).
33.
MontresorG (2019) Job polarization and labour supply changes in the UK. Labor Economics58: 187–203.
34.
NamT (2019) Technology usage, expected job sustainability, and perceived job insecurity. Technological Forecasting and Social Change138: 155–165.
35.
PivaMVivarelliM (2018) Technological change and employment: Is Europe ready for the challenge?Eurasian Business Review8: 13–32.
SmidsJNyholmSBerkersH (2020) Robots in the workplace: A threat to – Or opportunity for – Meaningful work?Philosophy & Technology33: 503–522.
38.
Souza-PozaASouza-PozaA (2007) The effect of job satisfaction on labour turnover by gender: An analysis for Switzerland. The Journal of Socio-Economics36: 895–913.
39.
SpencerDA (2018) Fear and hope in an age of mass automation: Debating the future of work. New Technology, Work and Employment33: 1–12.
40.
TopcicMBaumMKabstR (2016) Are high-performance work practices related to individually perceived stress? A job demands-resources perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource Management27: 45–66.
41.
Van RoyVVértesyDVivarelliM (2018) Technology and employment: Mass unemployment or job creation? Empirical evidence from European patenting firms. Research Policy47: 1762–1776.
42.
VivarelliM (2013) Technology, employment and skills: An interpretative framework. Eurasian Business Review3: 66–89.
43.
WangWWFanCC (2012) Migrant workers’ integration in urban China: Experiences in employment, social adaptation, and self-identity. Eurasian Geography and Economics53: 731–749.
44.
World Bank (2016) World Development Report 2016: Digital Dividends. Washington, DC: World Bank.
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.
