research paper about technological advancement pdf

• Previous Article
• Next Article

Promises and Pitfalls of Technology

Politics and privacy, private-sector influence and big tech, state competition and conflict, author biography, how is technology changing the world, and how should the world change technology.

[email protected]

• Split-Screen
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Guest Access
• Get Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Josephine Wolff; How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?. Global Perspectives 1 February 2021; 2 (1): 27353. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/gp.2021.27353

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Technologies are becoming increasingly complicated and increasingly interconnected. Cars, airplanes, medical devices, financial transactions, and electricity systems all rely on more computer software than they ever have before, making them seem both harder to understand and, in some cases, harder to control. Government and corporate surveillance of individuals and information processing relies largely on digital technologies and artificial intelligence, and therefore involves less human-to-human contact than ever before and more opportunities for biases to be embedded and codified in our technological systems in ways we may not even be able to identify or recognize. Bioengineering advances are opening up new terrain for challenging philosophical, political, and economic questions regarding human-natural relations. Additionally, the management of these large and small devices and systems is increasingly done through the cloud, so that control over them is both very remote and removed from direct human or social control. The study of how to make technologies like artificial intelligence or the Internet of Things “explainable” has become its own area of research because it is so difficult to understand how they work or what is at fault when something goes wrong (Gunning and Aha 2019) .

This growing complexity makes it more difficult than ever—and more imperative than ever—for scholars to probe how technological advancements are altering life around the world in both positive and negative ways and what social, political, and legal tools are needed to help shape the development and design of technology in beneficial directions. This can seem like an impossible task in light of the rapid pace of technological change and the sense that its continued advancement is inevitable, but many countries around the world are only just beginning to take significant steps toward regulating computer technologies and are still in the process of radically rethinking the rules governing global data flows and exchange of technology across borders.

These are exciting times not just for technological development but also for technology policy—our technologies may be more advanced and complicated than ever but so, too, are our understandings of how they can best be leveraged, protected, and even constrained. The structures of technological systems as determined largely by government and institutional policies and those structures have tremendous implications for social organization and agency, ranging from open source, open systems that are highly distributed and decentralized, to those that are tightly controlled and closed, structured according to stricter and more hierarchical models. And just as our understanding of the governance of technology is developing in new and interesting ways, so, too, is our understanding of the social, cultural, environmental, and political dimensions of emerging technologies. We are realizing both the challenges and the importance of mapping out the full range of ways that technology is changing our society, what we want those changes to look like, and what tools we have to try to influence and guide those shifts.

Technology can be a source of tremendous optimism. It can help overcome some of the greatest challenges our society faces, including climate change, famine, and disease. For those who believe in the power of innovation and the promise of creative destruction to advance economic development and lead to better quality of life, technology is a vital economic driver (Schumpeter 1942) . But it can also be a tool of tremendous fear and oppression, embedding biases in automated decision-making processes and information-processing algorithms, exacerbating economic and social inequalities within and between countries to a staggering degree, or creating new weapons and avenues for attack unlike any we have had to face in the past. Scholars have even contended that the emergence of the term technology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries marked a shift from viewing individual pieces of machinery as a means to achieving political and social progress to the more dangerous, or hazardous, view that larger-scale, more complex technological systems were a semiautonomous form of progress in and of themselves (Marx 2010) . More recently, technologists have sharply criticized what they view as a wave of new Luddites, people intent on slowing the development of technology and turning back the clock on innovation as a means of mitigating the societal impacts of technological change (Marlowe 1970) .

At the heart of fights over new technologies and their resulting global changes are often two conflicting visions of technology: a fundamentally optimistic one that believes humans use it as a tool to achieve greater goals, and a fundamentally pessimistic one that holds that technological systems have reached a point beyond our control. Technology philosophers have argued that neither of these views is wholly accurate and that a purely optimistic or pessimistic view of technology is insufficient to capture the nuances and complexity of our relationship to technology (Oberdiek and Tiles 1995) . Understanding technology and how we can make better decisions about designing, deploying, and refining it requires capturing that nuance and complexity through in-depth analysis of the impacts of different technological advancements and the ways they have played out in all their complicated and controversial messiness across the world.

These impacts are often unpredictable as technologies are adopted in new contexts and come to be used in ways that sometimes diverge significantly from the use cases envisioned by their designers. The internet, designed to help transmit information between computer networks, became a crucial vehicle for commerce, introducing unexpected avenues for crime and financial fraud. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter, designed to connect friends and families through sharing photographs and life updates, became focal points of election controversies and political influence. Cryptocurrencies, originally intended as a means of decentralized digital cash, have become a significant environmental hazard as more and more computing resources are devoted to mining these forms of virtual money. One of the crucial challenges in this area is therefore recognizing, documenting, and even anticipating some of these unexpected consequences and providing mechanisms to technologists for how to think through the impacts of their work, as well as possible other paths to different outcomes (Verbeek 2006) . And just as technological innovations can cause unexpected harm, they can also bring about extraordinary benefits—new vaccines and medicines to address global pandemics and save thousands of lives, new sources of energy that can drastically reduce emissions and help combat climate change, new modes of education that can reach people who would otherwise have no access to schooling. Regulating technology therefore requires a careful balance of mitigating risks without overly restricting potentially beneficial innovations.

Nations around the world have taken very different approaches to governing emerging technologies and have adopted a range of different technologies themselves in pursuit of more modern governance structures and processes (Braman 2009) . In Europe, the precautionary principle has guided much more anticipatory regulation aimed at addressing the risks presented by technologies even before they are fully realized. For instance, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation focuses on the responsibilities of data controllers and processors to provide individuals with access to their data and information about how that data is being used not just as a means of addressing existing security and privacy threats, such as data breaches, but also to protect against future developments and uses of that data for artificial intelligence and automated decision-making purposes. In Germany, Technische Überwachungsvereine, or TÜVs, perform regular tests and inspections of technological systems to assess and minimize risks over time, as the tech landscape evolves. In the United States, by contrast, there is much greater reliance on litigation and liability regimes to address safety and security failings after-the-fact. These different approaches reflect not just the different legal and regulatory mechanisms and philosophies of different nations but also the different ways those nations prioritize rapid development of the technology industry versus safety, security, and individual control. Typically, governance innovations move much more slowly than technological innovations, and regulations can lag years, or even decades, behind the technologies they aim to govern.

In addition to this varied set of national regulatory approaches, a variety of international and nongovernmental organizations also contribute to the process of developing standards, rules, and norms for new technologies, including the International Organization for Standardization­ and the International Telecommunication Union. These multilateral and NGO actors play an especially important role in trying to define appropriate boundaries for the use of new technologies by governments as instruments of control for the state.

At the same time that policymakers are under scrutiny both for their decisions about how to regulate technology as well as their decisions about how and when to adopt technologies like facial recognition themselves, technology firms and designers have also come under increasing criticism. Growing recognition that the design of technologies can have far-reaching social and political implications means that there is more pressure on technologists to take into consideration the consequences of their decisions early on in the design process (Vincenti 1993; Winner 1980) . The question of how technologists should incorporate these social dimensions into their design and development processes is an old one, and debate on these issues dates back to the 1970s, but it remains an urgent and often overlooked part of the puzzle because so many of the supposedly systematic mechanisms for assessing the impacts of new technologies in both the private and public sectors are primarily bureaucratic, symbolic processes rather than carrying any real weight or influence.

Technologists are often ill-equipped or unwilling to respond to the sorts of social problems that their creations have—often unwittingly—exacerbated, and instead point to governments and lawmakers to address those problems (Zuckerberg 2019) . But governments often have few incentives to engage in this area. This is because setting clear standards and rules for an ever-evolving technological landscape can be extremely challenging, because enforcement of those rules can be a significant undertaking requiring considerable expertise, and because the tech sector is a major source of jobs and revenue for many countries that may fear losing those benefits if they constrain companies too much. This indicates not just a need for clearer incentives and better policies for both private- and public-sector entities but also a need for new mechanisms whereby the technology development and design process can be influenced and assessed by people with a wider range of experiences and expertise. If we want technologies to be designed with an eye to their impacts, who is responsible for predicting, measuring, and mitigating those impacts throughout the design process? Involving policymakers in that process in a more meaningful way will also require training them to have the analytic and technical capacity to more fully engage with technologists and understand more fully the implications of their decisions.

At the same time that tech companies seem unwilling or unable to rein in their creations, many also fear they wield too much power, in some cases all but replacing governments and international organizations in their ability to make decisions that affect millions of people worldwide and control access to information, platforms, and audiences (Kilovaty 2020) . Regulators around the world have begun considering whether some of these companies have become so powerful that they violate the tenets of antitrust laws, but it can be difficult for governments to identify exactly what those violations are, especially in the context of an industry where the largest players often provide their customers with free services. And the platforms and services developed by tech companies are often wielded most powerfully and dangerously not directly by their private-sector creators and operators but instead by states themselves for widespread misinformation campaigns that serve political purposes (Nye 2018) .

Since the largest private entities in the tech sector operate in many countries, they are often better poised to implement global changes to the technological ecosystem than individual states or regulatory bodies, creating new challenges to existing governance structures and hierarchies. Just as it can be challenging to provide oversight for government use of technologies, so, too, oversight of the biggest tech companies, which have more resources, reach, and power than many nations, can prove to be a daunting task. The rise of network forms of organization and the growing gig economy have added to these challenges, making it even harder for regulators to fully address the breadth of these companies’ operations (Powell 1990) . The private-public partnerships that have emerged around energy, transportation, medical, and cyber technologies further complicate this picture, blurring the line between the public and private sectors and raising critical questions about the role of each in providing critical infrastructure, health care, and security. How can and should private tech companies operating in these different sectors be governed, and what types of influence do they exert over regulators? How feasible are different policy proposals aimed at technological innovation, and what potential unintended consequences might they have?

Conflict between countries has also spilled over significantly into the private sector in recent years, most notably in the case of tensions between the United States and China over which technologies developed in each country will be permitted by the other and which will be purchased by other customers, outside those two countries. Countries competing to develop the best technology is not a new phenomenon, but the current conflicts have major international ramifications and will influence the infrastructure that is installed and used around the world for years to come. Untangling the different factors that feed into these tussles as well as whom they benefit and whom they leave at a disadvantage is crucial for understanding how governments can most effectively foster technological innovation and invention domestically as well as the global consequences of those efforts. As much of the world is forced to choose between buying technology from the United States or from China, how should we understand the long-term impacts of those choices and the options available to people in countries without robust domestic tech industries? Does the global spread of technologies help fuel further innovation in countries with smaller tech markets, or does it reinforce the dominance of the states that are already most prominent in this sector? How can research universities maintain global collaborations and research communities in light of these national competitions, and what role does government research and development spending play in fostering innovation within its own borders and worldwide? How should intellectual property protections evolve to meet the demands of the technology industry, and how can those protections be enforced globally?

These conflicts between countries sometimes appear to challenge the feasibility of truly global technologies and networks that operate across all countries through standardized protocols and design features. Organizations like the International Organization for Standardization, the World Intellectual Property Organization, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, and many others have tried to harmonize these policies and protocols across different countries for years, but have met with limited success when it comes to resolving the issues of greatest tension and disagreement among nations. For technology to operate in a global environment, there is a need for a much greater degree of coordination among countries and the development of common standards and norms, but governments continue to struggle to agree not just on those norms themselves but even the appropriate venue and processes for developing them. Without greater global cooperation, is it possible to maintain a global network like the internet or to promote the spread of new technologies around the world to address challenges of sustainability? What might help incentivize that cooperation moving forward, and what could new structures and process for governance of global technologies look like? Why has the tech industry’s self-regulation culture persisted? Do the same traditional drivers for public policy, such as politics of harmonization and path dependency in policy-making, still sufficiently explain policy outcomes in this space? As new technologies and their applications spread across the globe in uneven ways, how and when do they create forces of change from unexpected places?

These are some of the questions that we hope to address in the Technology and Global Change section through articles that tackle new dimensions of the global landscape of designing, developing, deploying, and assessing new technologies to address major challenges the world faces. Understanding these processes requires synthesizing knowledge from a range of different fields, including sociology, political science, economics, and history, as well as technical fields such as engineering, climate science, and computer science. A crucial part of understanding how technology has created global change and, in turn, how global changes have influenced the development of new technologies is understanding the technologies themselves in all their richness and complexity—how they work, the limits of what they can do, what they were designed to do, how they are actually used. Just as technologies themselves are becoming more complicated, so are their embeddings and relationships to the larger social, political, and legal contexts in which they exist. Scholars across all disciplines are encouraged to join us in untangling those complexities.

Josephine Wolff is an associate professor of cybersecurity policy at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. Her book You’ll See This Message When It Is Too Late: The Legal and Economic Aftermath of Cybersecurity Breaches was published by MIT Press in 2018.

Recipient(s) will receive an email with a link to 'How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?' and will not need an account to access the content.

Subject: How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?

(Optional message may have a maximum of 1000 characters.)

Citing articles via

Email alerts, affiliations.

• Special Collections
• Review Symposia
• Info for Authors
• Info for Librarians
• Editorial Team
• Emerging Scholars Forum
• Open Access
• Online ISSN 2575-7350
• Copyright © 2024 The Regents of the University of California. All Rights Reserved.

Stay Informed

Disciplines.

• Ancient World
• Anthropology
• Communication
• Criminology & Criminal Justice
• Film & Media Studies
• Food & Wine
• Browse All Disciplines
• Browse All Courses
• Book Authors
• Booksellers
• Instructions
• Journal Authors
• Journal Editors
• Media & Journalists
• Planned Giving

About UC Press

• Press Releases
• Seasonal Catalog
• Acquisitions Editors
• Customer Service
• Exam/Desk Requests
• Media Inquiries
• Print-Disability
• Rights & Permissions
• UC Press Foundation
• © Copyright 2024 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Privacy policy    Accessibility

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

The Palgrave Handbook of Global Social Change pp 1–17 Cite as

Technological Advancement, Globalization, and Developing Countries

A Case Study of Travel Behavior and Familial Settings in Sub-Saharan West Africa

• Sunday Olutayo Fakunle   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0053-0082 7 ,
• John Lola Okunola   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9870-3462 7 &
• Bukunmi Kehinde Ajani   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3358-890X 8  
• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 03 August 2023

62 Accesses

The twenty-first century has witnessed an unprecedented advancement in technology as one of the major components of globalization. This advancement has led to the invention of the Internet and Android mobile phones. The use of these invented devices has resulted in significant changes in how people conduct their social activities and construct their daily lives. Moreover, globalization has influenced social institutions such as the economy, politics, education, technology, health, and family life through several adjustments that have occurred in each of these social institutions. This section is mainly concerned with the interplay among various concepts such as globalization, the advancement of technology, neoliberalism, and social change. Therefore, this section shows the extent to which people in sub-Saharan West Africa have been incorporated into globalization through the Internet and mobile phone use and the significant alterations or modifications that globalization has brought to travel behavior and the traditional familial settings in the region. The section begins with a succinct discussion of the contextual meaning of each of these concepts, while the significant impacts of globalization in relation to neoliberalism and change are succinctly highlighted, in particular, travel behavior and familial settings in the sub-Saharan African region.

• Globalization
• Information and communication technology (ICT)
• Neoliberalism
• Social change

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Adenuga, K. I., Iahad, N. A., & Miskon, S. (2017). Towards reinforcing telemedicine adoption amongst clinicians in Nigeria. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 104 , 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.05.008

Article   Google Scholar  

Adenuga, K. I., Iahad, N. A., & Miskon, S. (2020). Telemedicine system: Service adoption and implementation issues in Nigeria. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 13 , 1321–1327.

Ajani, O. A., & Fakunle, S. O. (2018). Mobile phone use and travel behaviour of adult residents Ile-Ife, South-western Nigeria. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 8 (14), 71–77.

Google Scholar  

Ajani, O. A., & Fakunle, S. O. (2021a). Gender differential in mobile phone use and travel behaviour. Discovery, 57 (306), 519–529.

Ajani, O. A., & Fakunle, S. O. (2021b). Globalisation and trends of changes in family institution in Nigerian society. American International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 2 (1), 37–45.

Aremu, A. D. (2006). Culture and some basic theories in anthropology. In O. A. Ogunbameru & R. A. Rotimi (Eds.), Man and his social environment: A textbook of sociology . Spectrum Books Limited.

Asongu, S. A., & Le, S. (2017). Technological forecasting and social change enhancing ICT for inclusive human development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 118 (5), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.01.026

Babalola, D., Anayo, M., & Itoya, D. A. (2021). Telehealth during COVID-19: Why sub-Saharan Africa is yet to log-in to virtual healthcare? AIMS Medical Science, 8 (1), 46–55. https://doi.org/10.3934/medsci.2021006

Bond, E. (2010). Managing mobile relationships: Children’s perception of the impact of the mobile phone on relationships in their everyday lives. Childhood, 17 , 514–529.

Busari, D. A. M., Owojuyigbe, R. A., & Okunola, I. (2017). Cultural concepts employed in child discipline within rural Yoruba households: The Ayetoro-Oke African community. Rural Society, 26 (2), 161–177.

Fakunle, S. O., & Ajani, B. K. (2021). Peculiarities of ICT adoption in Nigeria. Insights into Regional Development, 3 (4), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.9770/IRD.2021.3.4(4)

Familusi, O. O., & Ajayi, D. S. (2019). Effects of globalization on Yoruba family values. Nigerian Journal of Applied Psychology, 21 (1), 207–227.

Harry, O. N., Okoye, C. A. F., & Ugwu-Oju, A. C. (2013). Positive family dynamics: The anti thesis of domestic violence. Global Journal of Arts Humanities and Social Sciences, 1 (4), 6–14.

Igyuve, A. I., Akilla, O. M., Oriola, O. M., & Agbele, J. D. (2018). Smartphone adoption in Nigeria: Issues and discourse. Saudi Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (SJHSS), 3 (1A), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.21276/sjhss.2018.3.1.3

Imam-Tamim, M. K., Zin, N. M., & Ibrahim, N. (2016). Impact of globalisation on domestic family law: Multi-tiered marriage in Nigeria as a case study. The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 48 (2), 256–272.

Ime, N. G., & David, E. U. (2013). Combating the 21st century family challenges in Nigeria for social stability through family counselling services. Developing Country Studies, 3 (4), 52–58.

Keengwe, J., Schnellert, G., & Jonas, D. (2012). Mobile phones in education: Challenges and opportunities for learning. Education, Information and Technology, 11 (12), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639012-9235-7

Kyalo, P. (2012). A reflection on the African traditional values of marriage and sexuality. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive education and Development, 1 (2), 211–219.

Manyati, T. K., & Mutsau, M. (2020). Exploring the effectiveness of telehealth interventions for diagnosis, contact tracing and care of Corona virus disease of 2019 (COVID19) patients in sub Saharan Africa: A rapid review. Health and Technology, 11 , 341–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-020-00485-8

Mars, M. (2012). Building the capacity to build capacity in e-health in sub-Saharan Africa: The KwaZulu natal experience. Telemedicine Journal of e-Health, 18 (1), 32–37.

Mawere, M., & Mawere, A. (2010). The changing philosophy of African marriage: The relevance of Shona customary marriage practice of Kukumbira. Journal of African Studies and Development, 2 (9), 224–233.

Montgomery, N. D., Liomba, N. G., Kampani, C., Krysiak, R., Stanley, C. C., Tomoka, T., Kamiza, S., Dhungel, B. M., Gopal, S., & Fedoriw, Y. (2016). Accurate real-time diagnosis of lymphoproliferative disorders in Malawi through clinicopathologic teleconferences: A model for pathology services in sub-Saharan Africa. American Journal of Clinical Pathology, 146 (16), 423–430. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqw118

Muoghalu, C. O., & Fakunle, S. O. (2021). Socio-cultural binoculars view of telemedicine in sub Saharan Africa: Potency, prospect, defect and danger. American International Journal of Biology and Life Sciences, 3 (1), 18–27.

Obaro, O. A., & Agbontaen-Eghafona, K. A. (2003). Changes in the family institution in Nigeria. Ibom Journal of Social Issues, 7 (1), 27–44.

Obasola, O. I., Mabawonku, I., & Lagunju, I. (2015). A review of e-health interventions for maternal and child health in sub-Sahara Africa. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 19 , 1813–1824.

Ojua, T. A. (2013). Child rights protection and sustainable social development programme in contemporary Nigeria: A sociological overview. Modern Social Science Journal, 2 (2).

Ojua, T. A., & Omono, C. K. (2012). African sacrificial ceremonies and issues in socio-cultural development. British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 4 (1).

Ojua, T. A., Lukpata, F. E., & Atama, C. (2014). Exploring the neglect of African family value systems and its effects on sustainable development. American Journal of Human Ecology, 3 (3), 43–50.

Olorunfemi, D. Y. (2009). Family-work conflict, information use, and social competence: A case study of married postgraduate students in the faculty of education, University of Ibadan, Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice, 9 , 1–7.

Oloya, B. O. (2013). A social change and the family institution in Africa. In V. T. Jike (Ed.), Nigeria for tertiary institutions (p. 180). Progress Printing Associates.

Omobowale, A. O., Omobowale, M. O., & Falase, O. S. (2018). The context of children in Yoruba popular culture. Global Studies of Childhood, 9 (1), 18–28.

Omotayo, F. O. (2016). Adoption and use of information and communication technologies by Pentecostal churches in Ibadan, Nigeria. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 49 (2), 22–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000616662517

Otsen, B., & Agyei-baffour, P. (2016). Cost-effectiveness analysis of telemedicine for primary healthcare delivery in the Amansie-west District, Ghana. African Journal of Health Economics, 5 , 1–11.

Oyefara, J. L. (2017). Social dynamics of marital dissolution among ethno-endogamous marriages in contemporary Nigerian society: The Yoruba example. African Journal for the Psychological Studies of Social, 20 (3), 27–56.

Rahman, K. M. A., & Zhang, D. (2017). Globalization and family values: Eroding trends. International Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, Asian Economic and Social Society, 2 (2), 63–74.

Ritzer, G. (2011). Sociological theory (8th ed.). Mc Graw-Hill Higher Education.

Sam, A. M., & Ibekwe, P. (2017). Contemporary family choice: Areas of Nigerian families’ change lag. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational Sciences, 5 (1), 66–70.

Sarfo, F. S., Adamu, S., Awuah, D., & Ovbiagele, B. (2017). Tele-neurology in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Neurological Science, 380 (17), 196–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2017.07.037

Steve, B., & Steven, Y. (2006). The sage dictionary of sociology . Sage.

Wahab, E., Odunsi, S., & Ajiboye, O. (2012). Causes and consequences of rapid erosion of cultural values in traditional society. Journal of Anthropology, 10 (1), 10–17.

World Health Organization. (2019). Contraception. www.who.int/reproductivehealth

Wusu, O., & Isiugo-Abanihe, U. C. (2003). Family structure and reproductive health decision making among the Ogu of southwestern Nigeria: A qualitative study. African Population Studies, 18 (2), 27–45.

Wusu, O., & Isiugo-Abanihe, U. C. (2006). Interconnections among changing family structure, childrearing and fertility behaviour among the Ogu, Southwestern Nigeria: A qualitative study. Demographic Research, 14 (8), 139–156.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Behavioural Studies, Redeemer’s University, Ede, Nigeria

Sunday Olutayo Fakunle & John Lola Okunola

Department of Anthropology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America

Bukunmi Kehinde Ajani

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sunday Olutayo Fakunle .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Fakunle, S.O., Okunola, J.L., Ajani, B.K. (2023). Technological Advancement, Globalization, and Developing Countries. In: The Palgrave Handbook of Global Social Change. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87624-1_160-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87624-1_160-1

Received : 02 November 2022

Accepted : 19 June 2023

Published : 03 August 2023

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-87624-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-87624-1

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Social Sciences Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

The effects of technological developments on work and their implications for continuous vocational education and training: a systematic review.

• Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany

Technology is changing the way organizations and their employees need to accomplish their work. Empirical evidence on this topic is scarce. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the effects of technological developments on work characteristics and to derive the implications for work demands and continuous vocational education and training (CVET). The following research questions are answered: What are the effects of new technologies on work characteristics? What are the implications thereof for continuous vocational education and training? Technologies, defined as digital, electrical or mechanical tools that affect the accomplishment of work tasks, are considered in various disciplines, such as sociology or psychology. A theoretical framework based on theories from these disciplines (e.g., upskilling, task-based approach) was developed and statements on the relationships between technology and work characteristics, such as complexity, autonomy, or meaningfulness, were derived. A systematic literature review was conducted by searching databases from the fields of psychology, sociology, economics and educational science. Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Empirical evidence was extracted and its implications for work demands and CVET were derived by using a model that illustrates the components of learning environments. Evidence indicates an increase in complexity and mental work, especially while working with automated systems and robots. Manual work is reported to decrease on many occasions. Workload and workflow interruptions increase simultaneously with autonomy, especially with regard to digital communication devices. Role expectations and opportunities for development depend on how the profession and the technology relate to each other, especially when working with automated systems. The implications for the work demands necessary to deal with changes in work characteristics include knowledge about technology, openness toward change and technology, skills for self- and time management and for further professional and career development. Implications for the design of formal learning environments (i.e., the content, method, assessment, and guidance) include that the work demands mentioned must be part of the content of the trainings, the teachers/trainers must be equipped to promote those work demands, and that instruction models used for the learning environments must be flexible in their application.

Introduction

In the face of technology-driven disruptive changes in societal and organizational practices, continuous vocational education and training (CVET) lacks information on how the impact of technologies on work must be considered from an educational perspective ( Cascio and Montealegre, 2016 ). Research on workplace technologies, i.e., tools or systems that have the potential to replace or supplement work tasks, typically are concerned with one out of two areas of interest: First, economic and sociological research repeatedly raises the question on technological mass-unemployment and societal inequality as a result of technological advances ( Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2014 ; Ford, 2015 ; Frey and Osborne, 2017 ). And second, management literature questions the suitability of prevailing organizational structures in the face of the so-called “fourth industrial revolution” ( Schwab, 2017 ), taking visionary leaps into a fully automated future of digital value creation ( Roblek et al., 2016 ).

Many of the contributions of scholars discuss the enormous potential of new technologies for work and society at a hypothetical level, which led to a large number of position papers. Moreover, the question on what consequences recent developments, such as working with robots, automated systems or artificial intelligence will have for different professions remain largely unclear. By examining what workplace technologies actually “do” in the work environment, it was suggested that work tasks change because of technological developments ( Autor et al., 2003 ; Autor, 2015 ). This is due to technologies substituting different operations or entire tasks and thus leave room for other activities. Jobs are defined by the work tasks and the conditions under which the tasks have to be performed. This in turn defines the necessary competences, that is the potential capacity to carry out a job (e.g., Ellström, 1997 ). Therefore, CVET needs to be informed on the changes that technology causes in work tasks and the consequential characteristics of work. Only then CVET is able to derive the required competences of employees and organize learning environments that foster the acquirement of these competences. These insights can be used to determine the implications thereof for the components of formal learning environments: content, didactics, trainer behavior, assessment, and resources (e.g., Mulder et al., 2015 ).

The aim of this systematic literature review is to get insight into the effects of new technological developments on work characteristics in order to derive the necessary work demands and their implications for the design of formal learning environments in CVET.

Therefore, the following research questions will be answered:

RQ 1 : What are the effects of new technologies on work characteristics?

RQ 2 : What are the implications thereof for continuous vocational education and training?

Theoretical considerations on the relationships between technology and work characteristics are presented before the methods for searching, selecting and analyzing suitable studies are described. Regarding the results section, the structure is based on the three main steps of analyzing the included studies: First, the variables identified within the selected studies are clustered and defined in terms of work characteristics. Second, a comprehensive overview of evidence on the relationships between technologies and work characteristics is displayed. Third, the evidence is evaluated regarding the work demands that result from technologies changing work characteristics. Finally, the implications for CVET and future research as well as the limitations of this study will be discussed.

Theoretical Framework

In this section, a conceptualization of technology and theoretical assumptions on relationships between technology and work characteristics will be outlined. Research within various disciplines, such as sociology, management, economics, educational science, and psychology was considered to inform us on the role of technology within work. Completing this section, an overview of the various components of learning environments is provided to be used as a basis for the analyses of the empirical evidence.

Outlining Technology and Recent Technological Developments

A clear definition of technology often lacks in studies, what may be due to the fact that the word itself is an “equivoque” ( Weick, 1990 , p. 1) and a “repository of overlapping inconsistent meanings” ( McOmber, 1999 , p. 149). A suitable definition can be provided by analyzing what technologies actually “do” ( Autor et al., 2003 , p. 1,280). The primary goal of technology at work is to save or enhance labor in the form of work tasks, defined as “a unit of work activity that produces output” ( Autor, 2013 , p. 186). Technology can therefore be defined as mechanical or digital devices, tools or systems. These are used to replace work tasks or complement the execution of work tasks (e.g., McOmber, 1999 ; Autor et al., 2003 ). According to this view, technology is conceptualized according to “its status as a tool” (“instrumentality”; McOmber, 1999 , p. 141). Alternatively, technology is understood as “the product of a specific historical time and place,” reflecting a stage of development within a predefined historical process (“industrialization”; McOmber, 1999 , p. 143) or as the “newest or latest instrumental products of human imagination” (“novelty”; McOmber, 1999 , p. 143), reflecting its nature that is rapidly replacing and “outdating” its predecessors. The definition according to “instrumentality” is particularly suitable for this research, as the interest focuses on individual-level effects of technologies and its use for accomplishing work. Therefore, the technology needs to be mentioned explicitly (e.g., “robot” instead of “digital transformation”) and described specifically in the form with which the employee is confronted at the workplace. Different definitions may reflect different perspectives on the role of technology for society and work. These perspectives in the form of paradigmatic views ( Liker et al., 1999 ) include philosophical and cultural beliefs as well as ideas on organizational design and labor relations. They differ with regard to the complexity in which the social context is believed to determine the impact of technology on society. Listed in accordance to increasing social complexity, the impact may be determined by technology itself (i.e., “technological determinism”), established power relations (i.e., “political interest”), managerial decisions (i.e., “management of technology”), or the interaction between technology and its social context (i.e., “interpretivist”) ( Liker et al., 1999 ). Later research added an even more complex perspective, according to which the effects of technology on society and organizations are determined by the relations between the actors themselves (i.e., “sociomateriality”; Orlikowski and Scott, 2008 ). Paradigmatic views may guide research in terms of content, purpose and goals, which in turn is likely to affect the methods and approach to research and may be specific to disciplines. For instance, Marxist sociological research following the view of “political interest” or research in information systems following the view of “management of technology.”

New technological developments are widely discussed in various disciplines. For instance, Ghobakhloo (2018) summarizes the expected areas of application of various technological concepts within the “smart factory” in the manufacturing industry: The internet of things as an umbrella term for independent communication of physical objects, big data as procedure to analyse enormous amounts of data to predict the consequences of operative, administrative, and strategic actions, blockchain as the basis for independent, transparent, secure, and trustworthy transaction executed by humans or machines, and cloud computing as an internet-based flexible infrastructure to manage all these processes simultaneously ( Cascio and Montealegre, 2016 ; Ghobakhloo, 2018 ). The central question to guide the next section is to what extent these new technologies, and also well-established technologies such as information and communication technologies (ICT), which are constantly being expanded with new functions, could influence work characteristics on a theoretical basis.

Theories on the Relationships Between Technology and Work Characteristics

A central discussion on technology can be found in the sociological literature on deskilling vs. upgrading ( Heisig, 2009 ). The definition of “skill” in empirical studies on this subject varies regarding its content by describing either the level of complexity that an employee is faced with at work, or the level of autonomy that employees are able to make use of Spenner (1990) . Theories advocating the deskilling of work (e.g., labor process theory; Braverman, 1998 ) propose that technology is used to undermine workers' skill, sense of control, and freedom. Employees need to support a mechanized workflow under constant surveillance in order to maximize production efficiency ( Braverman, 1998 ). Other authors, advocating “upskilling” ( Blauner, 1967 ; Bell, 1976 ; Zuboff, 1988 ), propose the opposite by claiming that technology frees employee's from strenuous tasks, leaving them with more challenging and fulfilling tasks ( Francis, 1986 ). In addition, issues of identity at work were raised by Blauner (1967) who acknowledged that employees may feel “alienated” as soon as technologies change or substitute work that is meaningful to them, leaving them with a feeling of powerlessness, meaninglessness, or self-estrangement ( Shepard, 1977 ). In sum, sociological theories suggest that technology has an impact on the level of freedom, power and privacy of employees, determining their identity at work and the level of alienation they experience.

According to contingency theories ( Burns and Stalker, 1994 ; Liker et al., 1999 ) technology is a means to reduce uncertainty and increase competitiveness for organizations ( Parker et al., 2017 ). Therefore, the effects of technology on the employee depend on strategic decisions that fit the organizational environment best. When operational uncertainty is high, organizations get more competitive by using technology to enhance the flexibility of employees in order to enable a self-organized adaption to the changing environment ( Cherns, 1976 ). This increases employee's flexibility by allowing them to identify and decide on new ways to add value to the organization (“organic organization”; Burns and Stalker, 1994 ). When operational uncertainty is low, organizations formalize and standardize procedures in order to optimize the workflow and make outputs more calculable (“mechanistic organization”; Burns and Stalker, 1994 ). This leads to less opportunities for individual decision-making and less flexibility for the employees. In sum, contingency theories suggest, that the effects of technology depend on the uncertainty and competitiveness in the external environment and may increase or decrease employee's flexibility and opportunities for decision-making and self-organization.

Economic research following the task-based approach from Autor et al. (2003) suggests, that technology substitutes routine tasks and complements complex (or “non-routine”) ones. Routine manual and cognitive tasks usually follow a defined set of explicit rules, which makes them susceptible to automation. By analyzing qualification requirements in relation to employment rates and wage development, it was argued that workplace automation substitutes routine and low-skill tasks and thus favors individuals who can carry out high-skilled complex work due to their education and cognitive abilities ( Card and DiNardo, 2002 ; Autor et al., 2003 ). This means, that the accomplishment of tasks “demanding flexibility, creativity, generalized problem-solving, and complex communications” ( Autor et al., 2003 , p. 1,284) becomes more important. Complex tasks, so far, posed a challenge for automation, because they required procedural and often implicit knowledge ( Polanyi, 1966 ; Autor, 2015 ). However, recent technological developments such as machine learning, are capable of delivering heuristic responses to complex cognitive tasks by applying inductive thinking or big data analysis ( Autor, 2015 ). Regarding complex manual tasks, mobile robots are increasingly equipped with advanced sensors which enable them to navigate through dynamic environments and interactively collaborate with human employees ( Cascio and Montealegre, 2016 ). In sum, economic research following the task-based approach argues that technology affects the routineness and complexity of work by substituting routine tasks. However, new technologies may be able to increasingly substitute and complement not only routine tasks, but complex tasks as well. According to the theories, this will again increase the complexity of work by creating new demands for problem-solving and reviewing the technology's activity.

Useful insights can be gained from psychological theories that explicitly take the role of work characteristics into account. Work characteristics are often mentioned by for instance sociological theories (e.g., autonomy and meaningfulness) without clearly defining the concepts. Particularly the job characteristics model of Hackman and Oldham (1975) and the job-demand-control model of Karasek (1979) and Karasek et al. (1998) are consulted to further clarify the meaning of autonomy and meaningfulness at work. With regard to autonomy, Hackman and Oldham's model 1975 conceptualizes autonomy as a work characteristic, defined as “the degree to which the job provides substantial freedom, independence, and discretion to the employee in scheduling the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out” ( Hackman and Oldham, 1975 , p. 162). According to the authors, autonomy facilitates various work outcomes, such as motivation and performance. In a similar vein, Karasek et al. (1998) stress the role of autonomy in the form of “decision authority” that interacts with more demanding work characteristics, such as workload or frequent interruptions and therefore enables a prediction of job strain and stress ( Karasek et al., 1998 ). With regard to meaningfulness, Hackman and Oldham (1975) clarify that different core job dimensions, such as the significance of one's own work results for the work and lives of other people, the direct contribution to a common goal with visible outcomes, and the employment of various skills, talents and activities all enhance the perception of meaningfulness at work. In sum, psychological theories on employee motivation and stress clarify the concepts of autonomy and meaningfulness by illustrating the factors that contribute to their experience in relation to challenging and rewarding aspects of work.

Components of CVET

In order to formulate the implications for CVET of the studied effects of technology on work characteristics, a framework with the different components of CVET is needed. The objective of the VET system and continuous education is to qualify people by supporting the acquirement of required competences, for instance by providing training. Competences refer to the potential capacity of an individual in order to successfully carry out work tasks ( Ellström, 1997 ). They contain various components such as work-related knowledge and social skills (e.g., Sonntag, 1992 ). Competences are considered here as “the combination of knowledge, skills and attitude, in relation to one another and in relation to (future) jobs” ( Mulder and Baumann, 2005 , p. 106; e.g., Baartman and de Bruijn, 2011 ).

Participants in CVET enter the system with competences, such as prior knowledge, motivation, and expectations. It is argued that these have to be considered when designing learning environments for CVET. Next to making the distinction between the different components of learning environments content, guidance, method, and assessment, it is considered important that these components are coherent and consistent ( Mulder et al., 2015 ). For instance, the content of the training needs to fit to the objectives and the background of the participants. The same goes for the method or didactics used (e.g., co-operative learning, frontal instruction) and the guidance of teachers, mentors or trainers. In addition, assessment needs to be consistent with all these components. For instance, problem based learning or competence based training requires other forms of assessment than more classical teacher centered forms of didactics, which makes a classic multiple choice test not fitting ( Gulikers et al., 2004 ). Figure 1 contains an overview of the components of learning environments for CVET.

Figure 1 . Components of CVET learning environments (adapted from Mulder et al., 2015 , p. 501).

Three steps are necessary to answer the research questions. Firstly, a systematic search and review of empirical studies reporting evidence on the direct relationships between new technologies and work characteristics. Secondly, an analysis of the evidence with regard to its implications for work demands. Thirdly, deriving the work demands and their implications for CVET.

Systematic Search Strategy

Due to the interdisciplinary nature of our research, specific databases were selected for each of the disciplines involved: Business Source Premier (business and management research) and PsycArticles (psychology) were searched via EBSCOhost, and ERIC (educational science), and Sociological Abstracts (sociology) were searched via ProQuest.

Identifying suitable keywords for technological concepts is challenging due to the rapidly changing and inconsistent terminology and the nested nature of technological concepts ( Huang et al., 2015 ). Therefore, technological terms were systematically mapped by using the different thesauri provided by each of the chosen databases. After exploding a basic term within a thesaurus, the resulting narrower terms and related terms were documented and examined within the following procedure: (a) Checking the compatibility with our definition of technology reflecting its instrumentality, (b) Adjustment of keywords that are too broad or too narrow, (c) Disassembling nested concepts. The procedure was repeated stepwise for each of the databases. Finally, 45 terms that reflect new technologies were documented and used for the database search.

Keywords reflecting work characteristics are derived from the theoretical conceptualizations previously outlined. Synonyms for different concepts within the relevant theories were identified and included. In order to narrow our search results, additionally operators for empirical studies conducted in a workplace setting were added.

In order to avoid unnecessary redundancy, the use of asterisks was carefully considered, provided that the search results did not lose significantly in precision or the number of hits did not grow to an unmanageable number of studies. The final search string is shown in Table 1 .

Table 1 . Final search string.

Eligibility Criteria and Study Selection

Technical criteria included methodological adequacy. This was ensured by only including studies published in peer-reviewed journals. In addition, the studies had to provide quantitative or qualitative data on relationships between technology and work characteristics. Only English-language studies were considered, because most of the studies are published in English and therefore the most complete overview of the existing knowledge on this topic can be obtained. This also enables as many readers as possible to have access to the original studies and analyse the findings of the empirical studies themselves.

Concerning technology, variables had to express the direct consequence or interaction with a certain technology (e.g., the amount of computer-use or experience with robots in the workplace) and indirect psychological states that conceptually resulted from the presence of the technology (e.g., a feeling of increased expectations concerning availability). Regarding work characteristics, variables had to describe work-related aspects associated with our conceptualization of work characteristics (e.g., a change in flexibility or the perception of complexity).

Regarding the direction of effects, only studies that focused on the implementation or use of technologies for work-related purposes were included. Studies were excluded, if they (a) tested particular designs or features of technologies and evaluated them without considering effects on work characteristics, (b) regarded technology not as a specific tool but an abstract process (e.g., “digital transformation”), (c) were published before 1990 due to the fact that the extent of usability and usefulness of technologies before that time should be substantially limited compared to today (e.g., Gattiker et al., 1988 ), and (d) investigated the impact of technologies on society in general without a specific relation to professional contexts (e.g., McClure, 2018 ).

Studies that were found but that did not report empirical findings on the relationships between technology and work characteristics, but rather on the relationships between technology and work demands (e.g., specific knowledge or skills) or work outcomes (e.g., performance, job satisfaction) were documented. Since the aim for this study was to derive the work demands from the work characteristics in any case, the studies that reported a direct empirical relationship between technology and work demands were analyzed separately ( N = 7).

Data Extraction

The variables expressing technology and work characteristics were listed in a table, including the quantitative or qualitative data on the relationships. Pearson's r correlations were preferred over regression results to ensure comparability. For qualitative data, the relevant passages documenting data were included. Finally, methodological information as well as sample characteristics and size are listed.

Analysis of the Results

Firstly, the variables containing work-related aspects are clustered thematically into a comprehensive final set of work characteristics. This is necessary to reduce complexity due to variations in naming, operationalization and measurement and to make any patterns in the data more visible. Deviations from the theoretically expected clusters are noted and discussed before synthesizing the evidence narratively in accordance to the research questions ( Rodgers et al., 2009 ). As proposed, the evidence on changing work characteristics is analyzed with respect to the resulting work demands in the sense of knowledge, skills, attitude and behavior, which in turn are used to determine the implications for the different components of CVET.

Figure 2 depicts a flowchart documenting the literature search. In sum, 21 studies providing evidence on relationships between technology and work characteristics were included. In addition, seven supplementary studies containing empirical evidence on relationships between technology and specific work demands were identified. These studies are taken into account when deriving the work requirements. Next, the descriptive characteristics of the included studies will be reported. After that, the evidence on relationships between technologies and work characteristics of the 21 included studies will be summarized, before finally deriving the work demands based on the evidence found.

Figure 2 . Flowchart of literature search process.

Characteristics of Studies

Table 2 contains an overview of the characteristics of selected studies. Most of the studies were published between 2015 and 2019 (52%). Nearly half of the studies were conducted in Europe (48%), followed by North America (33%). Most of the studies reported qualitative data collected with methods such as interviews (62%).

Table 2 . Characteristics of the studies.

The studies investigated a variety of technologies, such as computers (1, 7), various forms of Information and Communication technologies (ICTs; 2, 3, 17, 18, 21) in a broad sense, including specific examples of work-extending technologies and other tools for digital communication, information technology (IT) systems supporting information dissemination and retrieval within organizations (4, 9), automated systems supporting predominantly physical work procedures (5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 20), robots (15, 19), social media enabling professional networking and participation in organizational and societal practices (8, 16), and more domain-specific technologies such as clinical technology supporting professional decisions (9) and field technology for labor management (10).

Relationships Between Technology and Work Characteristics

In sum, nine work characteristics were identified and defined distinctively. Table 3 contains the operational definitions of the final work characteristics and the work-related aspects they consist of. The final work characteristics are: Workflow interruptions, workload, manual work, mental work, privacy, autonomy, complexity, role expectations, and opportunities for development.

Table 3 . Overview for final work characteristics and the exemplary work-related aspects assigned to them.

The complete overview of the selected studies and results for the relationships between technology and work characteristics is provided in Table 4 (for quantitative data) and Table 5 (for qualitative data). To further increase comprehensibility, the variables within the tables were labeled according to their function in the respective study (e.g., independent variable, mediating variable, dependent variable; see notes).

Table 4 . Studies providing quantitative evidence for the relationship between technology and work-related aspects.

Table 5 . Studies providing qualitative evidence for the relationship between technology and work-related aspects.

There is quantitative evidence on positive relationships between IT system use and complexity reported by two studies (4, 9). On a similar note, qualitative evidence suggests lower situational awareness within automated systems indicating an increase in complexity (12), and clinical technology being associated with an increase in complexity for nurses (9).

There is mixed quantitative evidence on the relationships between computer work and autonomy (1). The amount of computer work is positively related to autonomy, while technological pacing is negatively related to autonomy. Working within automated systems is negatively (5, 6) or not related (6) to different measures of autonomy. ICT use shows mixed relationships with job decision latitude (3) depending on ICT features that describe negative or positive effects of use. Evidence indicates a positive relationship between social media use and autonomy. Qualitative evidence suggests that ICT use increases autonomy (21) and flexibility (17, 18, 21).

Quantitative studies indicate strong positive relationships between computer work (1) and ICT use (2) and workload. The relationships are not consistent due to the fact that certain ICT features differ in their effects on workload. ICT characteristics such as presenteeism and pace of change are positively related to feelings of increasing workload, while a feeling of anonymity is negatively associated with workload. Evidence indicates positive relationships between time or workload pressure in the context of computer work (7), working in an automated system (5), as well as social media use (8) and provide evidence for positive relationships between various technologies and workload. Qualitative studies report similar outcomes. ICT use (18), automated systems (12, 13) as well as clinical technology (9) are reported to increase the workload.

Workflow Interruptions

Quantitative evidence indicates positive relationships between computer work and increasing levels of interruptions as well as an increasing demand for multitasking (7). Qualitative evidence suggests that ICT use is positively associated with an increased level of interruptions on the one hand and workflow support on the other hand (21). Further qualitative evidence suggests that robots at the workplace have positive effects on workflow support (19), and automated systems seem to increase the level of multitasking required in general (12).

Manual Work

Qualitative evidence suggests a decrease in the amount of physically demanding tasks when working with automated systems (11) and robots (15). In one study, qualitative evidence suggests an increase in manual work for technical jobs where automated systems are used (14).

Mental Work

Quantitative evidence indicates no relationships between monitoring tasks or problem-solving demands for technical jobs within automated systems (6). Qualitative evidence however suggests positive relationships between work within automated systems and various cognitive tasks and demands, such as problem-solving and monitoring (11, 13), while working with robots increases the amount of new and challenging mental tasks (15).

Quantitative evidence indicates that different ICT characteristics show different relationships with invasion of privacy (2). Some features are negatively related to invasion of privacy (anonymity) and others are positively related to it (presenteeism, pace of change). Qualitative evidence suggests that IT systems are not related to the perception of managerial surveillance (9), while social media is positively related to peer-monitoring (16), and field technology is negatively related to employee data control (10).

Role Expectations

Quantitative evidence indicates that ICT use is inconsistently related to role ambiguity depending on specific characteristics of the technology (2). Regarding automated systems, quantitative evidence indicates no relationship between working in an automated system and opportunities for role expansion in the form of an increased perceived responsibility (6). Qualitative evidence suggests that ICT use increases the expectations for availability and connectivity (21), and social media positively affects networking pressure (16). Qualitative evidence suggests that IT systems (9) decrease meaningful job content and role expansion. Qualitative evidence suggests that automated systems vary with regard to enhancing meaningfulness at work, dependent on whether the work tasks are complemented by the system or revolve around maintaining the system (20).

Opportunities for Development

Qualitative evidence suggests that ICT use (12) as well as working with an automated system (17) increase the demands for continuing qualification. Qualitative evidence suggests that opportunities for learning and development are prevalent with clinical technology (9) and absent when working with robots (19). Mixed qualitative evidence regarding automated systems and learning opportunities suggests that the effects depend on the differences in work roles in relation to being supported by the system or supporting the system (20).

A comprehensive summary of the outcomes can be found in Table 6 . The information in this table gives a summary of the evidence found for the different technologies and their relationships to work characteristics, more specifically to work related aspects. Important distinctive characteristics such as sample characteristics are listed in Tables 4 , 5 .

Table 6 . Overview over identified relationships between technology and work characteristics.

Subsequently, the results shown are now used as a basis for the identification of work demands that lead to the need for adapting to changes in work characteristics.

Relationships Between Technologies and Work Demands

Three sources are considered for the identification of work demands: Work demands mentioned in the studies on technology and work characteristics, work demands mentioned by the supplementary studies found during the database search ( N = 7), and work demands analytically derived from the results.

Some studies that examined the effects of technology on work characteristics also reported concrete work demands. Regarding the increasing complexity and the associated mental work, qualitative evidence suggests an increasing demand for cognitive as well as digital skills (11) in automated systems. With regard to IT systems, quantitative evidence indicates positive relationships with computer literacy (9), and analytical skills (4). With regard to the increase in workflow interruptions and the role expectations for constant availability and connectivity, time and attention management strategies are proposed in order to cope with the intrusive features of technology (2). Other strategies mentioned in the studies include self-discipline for disengaging from the ubiquitous availability resulting from mobile communication devices (18, 8) as well as the need for reflecting on individual responsiveness when working overtime due to self-imposed pressure to be available at all times (18, 21). Concerning opportunities for development, the willingness and ability to learn and adapt to technological changes and the associated changes in work (15, 4, 12) is emphasized. Moreover, employability is facilitated by using technological tools for professional networking (16).

The supplementary studies provide evidence on the direct relationships between technologies and work demands without the mediating consideration of work characteristics. This evidence is listed in Table 7 .

Table 7 . Supplementary studies on the relationship between technology and work-related demands.

There is quantitative evidence for positive relationships between the perception of controllability and exploratory use of computers (22), first-hand experience with robots and readiness for robotization (23, 24), and perceived usefulness and positive attitudes toward telemedicine technology (25), blockchain technology (26), and IT systems in general (27). Further quantitative evidence indicates mixed effects of perceived ease of use. Evidence indicates a positive relationship between perceived ease of use and perceived technological control with regard to telemedicine (25), no relationship between ease of use and attitude regarding blockchain technology (26), and a positive relationship between ease of use and attitude toward using IT systems (27). Quantitative evidence indicates that information processing enabled by technology is positively related to an increasing demand of cognitive skills (e.g., synthesizing and interpreting data) and interpersonal skills (e.g., coordinating and monitoring other people), but not related to an increasing demand in psychomotor skills (e.g., manual producing and precise assembling) (28). The level of standardization of work is positively related to interpersonal skills, but not related to cognitive and psychomotor skills (28). A high variety of tasks is positively related to the demand for cognitive skills and interpersonal skills and not related to psychomotor skills (28).

By analyzing the evidence on relationships between technology and work characteristics, further work demands can be derived. Knowledge about the specific technology at hand may be useful to decrease the perception of complexity as new technologies are introduced. This seems evident when comparing the effects of a simple computer with the effects of work within an automated system. For instance, while evidence indicates no relationship between computer work and complexity (6), work within an automated system is suggested to be associated with increasing complexity (12). Moreover, problem-solving skills (13) and cognitive skills such as diagnosing and monitoring (11, 15) increase when employees work within automated systems. Increasing autonomy suggests the need for personal skills regarding self-organizing and self-management due to greater flexibility and the associated possibilities for structuring work in many ways, particularly when working with ICTs (18, 21). Workflow interruptions and an increasing workload also increases the importance of communication skills for explicating the boundaries of one's own engagement to colleagues and leaders (17, 18, 21). Furthermore, reflecting the professional role at work may be critical due to changes in role expectations. The example of self-imposed need for availability underlines this argument (21). All this has implications for self-regulatory activities, such as reflection, and could benefit from experimenting and monitoring one's own strategies for time and attention management.

Implications for CVET: Objectives and Characteristics

The aforementioned studies describe several required behavioral aspects that are considered important due to technology at work. Emphasized is the need for components related to the organization of one's own work, namely self-discipline and time and attention management.

The identified need for reflection on one's own professional actions, for experimentation, and also for professional networking (for instance by using tools) can be seen as parts of further professional development by oneself or in interaction with others. In addition, the need for demonstrating employability is mentioned. From all these professional and career development aspects can be derived that problem-solving skills, self-regulation skills, and communication skills are required as well as proactive work behavior and coping and reflection strategies.

Various relevant skills, such as psychomotor skills, analytical skills, management skills, and interpersonal skills are mentioned. In addition, the need for diagnostic and monitoring skills as well as digital skills is emphasized. All these components can be used in relation to two explicitly mentioned needs: ability to learn and computer literacy. The demand for generic and transferable skills is emphasized. As a basis for the skills, knowledge is required, for instance on the technology itself, although not explicitly discussed in the studies. In contrast, several components of attitude are explicitly mentioned and considered to be a requirement for the ability to deal with challenges caused by new technologies at work. Firstly, the more generic willingness to learn, adaptability, and perceived behavioral control. Secondly, attitudes that are directly linked to technology, namely a positive attitude and trust, especially toward technology (e.g., robots), and technological readiness and acceptance.

Next to the opportunity of acquiring the mentioned components of competences at work, CVET can organize training interventions in the form of adequate learning environments to foster these. The ability of employees to carry out, develop and use the mentioned behavioral aspects, skills, knowledge, and attitudes, can be considered as required objectives of CVET and have concrete consequences for the characteristics of the learning environments.

As for the content of the learning environments, derived from the aforementioned requirements, it can be argued that attention should be paid to different categories of learning objectives: acquiring knowledge about and learning how to use technology, how to manage work and oneself, and how to continue one's own professional development. In addition, the relevance of attitude tells us that these components need to be fostered in the training and therefore need to be part of the content of the learning environments as well.

In relation to the methods or the didactics, only one study explicitly mentioned a suggestion, namely experience based learning for fostering adaptability (12). In relation to the guidance of trainers or teachers no suggestions are provided. The same goes for assessment, diagnoses or monitoring, and the coherence of components of the learning environments.

This systematic literature review aimed at identifying effects of new technological developments on work characteristics, identifying associated work demands, and determining their implications for the design of formal CVET learning environments.

Effects of New Technologies on Work Characteristics and Word Demands

Based on a systematic review focusing on empirical evidence, several effects of technology on work characteristics were found, thus answering RQ 1. Evidence suggests that complexity and mental work increases with ongoing automation and robotization of work, for instance due to the automatization of procedures which “hides” certain processes from employees. The automatization of tasks introduces new mental tasks, such as monitoring the machine's activities and solving problems. A decrease in manual work depends on the relation between the job and the technology in use (supporting vs. being supported).

Workload and workflow interruptions increase as a general consequence of the ubiquity of technology, mainly due to a higher level of job speed and the associated time and workload pressure. A higher level of autonomy seems to be associated with a higher workload and more workflow interruptions. This applies in particular to work with ICTs and domain-specific technologies, such as field technology.

Role expectations and opportunities for development depend on the relation between the job and the technology in use (supporting vs. being supported). With regard to role expectations, the need for being available or connected via digital devices and a new division of responsibilities between employees and technology are repeatedly mentioned in the studies. This applies particularly to work with automated systems, robots, and domain-specific technologies such as clinical technology.

With regard to work demands, employees need strategies to deal with higher levels of workload, autonomy, and complexity. Required skill demands contain mental, analytical, cognitive, and self-regulatory demands. In addition, opportunities for role expansion and learning, which do not seem to automatically result from the implementation and use of new technologies, need to be created (pro)actively by the employees. Employees need to take more responsibility with regard to their own development and professional work identity (for instance considering the pressure for constant availability). They need to be able to effectively deal with a high workload and number of interruptions, increasing flexibility, complexity, and autonomy, a demand for constant availability, changes in meaningfulness of tasks, changes in work roles, and the need to create and use learning opportunities. In the light of ongoing changes and challenges, skills to further develop and adapt one's own skills gain in importance. Regarding attitudes, the willingness to learn, adapt and experiment may be a central work demand.

Implications for the Practice of CVET

Various required objectives of CVET can be concluded from the reported results. For instance, developing the ability of employees to carry out the mentioned behaviors, as well as the skills, knowledge and attitudes that are necessary for those behaviors. These objectives have consequences for the content of CVET learning environments. From the empirical studies on the relationships between technology and work, we derived the need for employees to organize their own work, for instance through time management. Furthermore, many issues relating to own professional development and career development are important, to acquire individually and independently as well as by interacting with others. Ultimately, this refers to the skills of self-initiated learning and development. With regard to fostering helpful attitudes, raising awareness of the relevance of trust or training the social skills to promote trust in the workplace can be included in the content of CVET learning environments. In research on creating trust within organizations, regularly giving and receiving relevant information was shown to be important for creating trust toward co-workers, supervisors and top-management, which in turn fostered the perception of organizational openness and employee involvement as a result ( Thomas et al., 2009 ). In the research on creating trust in virtual teams, the importance of frequent interaction was important to develop trust on a cognitive as well as an affective level (e.g., Germain, 2011 ). These research results however need to be adapted to the context of technology at work.

Although there is no information provided on the guidance of employees, informal guidance through leadership ( Bass and Avolio, 1994 ) as well as formal guidance by trainers and teachers during interventions contain possibilities for fostering the required competences. Attention should be paid not only to acquiring relevant knowledge (digital literacy), but also to skills in applying the knowledge and therefore dealing with technology. Even more challenging might be the task of supporting attitude development (e.g., technological acceptance and openness to changes), fostering transfer of skills, and preparation for future development. Especially future professional development, which includes the ability to learn in relation to current and future changes, needs to be focused on. Teachers, trainers and mentors need to be equipped to be able to foster these competences.

In relation to the use of didactical methods, methods that do not merely focus on knowledge acquisition but also provide opportunities for skill acquisition and changes in attitude need to be applied. For example, one study explicitly suggested experience based learning for fostering the adaptability of employees when faced with ongoing technological developments. Other solutions for instruction models as a profound basis for learning environments may be found in more flexible approaches, for instance according to the cognitive flexibility theory ( Spiro et al., 2003 ), where learners are meant to find their own learning paths in ill-structured domains. By applying such models, that are often based on constructivist learning theories, in a coherent way, the development of strategies for self-organizing and self-regulation may be facilitated.

Furthermore, the use of technology within learning environments may have the potential to increase participants interactions, which are focused in for instance collaborative and co-operative learning ( Dillenbourg et al., 2009 ). Next to increasing interactions in learning and being able to co-operate, technology in learning environments can used to foster the other required competences, if adequately designed ( Vosniadou et al., 1996 ; Littlejohn and Margaryan, 2014 ).

When keeping in mind, that the coherence of components is an important requirement for the design of learning environments ( Mulder et al., 2015 ), the component that describes assessment needs further attention. There is evidence supporting the idea, that the type of assessment has an impact on how learning takes place ( Gulikers et al., 2004 ; Dolmans et al., 2005 ). Therefore, it can be used to deliberatively support and direct learning processes.

Only when all these aspects are considered can CVET interventions effectively and sustainably foster the mentioned objectives, such as promoting a willingness to change in relation to technologies, the effective use of technology, and personal development in the context of technological developments.

Limitations and Implications for Future Research

Regarding the search methods, the use of databases is challenging when investigating technologies ( Huang et al., 2015 ). Technological and technical terms are widespread outside the research in which they are regarded as the object of investigation. Therefore, it produces a large amount of studies that concern technology with diverse research objectives that can be difficult to sort. An interesting focus for future research would be the systematic mapping of journals dealing specifically with technology in order to identify research that could complement the results of the present study as well as consider specificities regarding the domains in which the data is collected and disciplines by which the research is conducted. For instance, domain-specific databases from healthcare or manufacturing might provide additional insights into the effects of technology on work. Another limitation is the absence of innovative new technologies, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, or the internet of things as object of investigation. Broad technological categories, such as ICTs and social media have received some attention in research, especially in relation to questions beyond the scope of this review. Newer technological developments as discussed by Ghobakhloo (2018) are virtually not present in current research. This gap in empirical research needs to be filled. In addition, future research should ensure that it does not miss opportunities for research where effects of these innovative technologies can be examined in detail, for instance by conducting an accompanying case study of the implementation process. Research investigating changes over time regarding the use of technology and its effects is needed. In doing so, research could capture the actual dynamics of change and development of processes as they happen in order to inform truly effective interventions in practice. Moreover, a classification of technological characteristics according to their effects may be valuable by enabling a more in-depth analysis of new technologies and their effects on specific groups of employees and different types of organizations. These analyses will also allow a breakdown of effects in relation to differences in jobs, hierarchy levels and levels of qualification, which could be very important for organizations and employers in order to adapt the CVET strategy to the specific demands of specific groups of employees. The present review takes a first step in this direction by identifying work characteristics that are affected by different technologies. In addition, future research could also take into account non-English language research, which might increase insight in for instance cultural differences in the use and the effects of technology at work.

Regarding theory, some of the relevant theories considering technology stem from sociology (e.g., Braverman, 1998 ) or economics ( Autor et al., 2003 ). For instance, the task-based approach ( Autor et al., 2003 ) showed some explanatory value by suggesting that complexity may increase as a consequence of technology. Furthermore, it suggested that this effect may depend on job specifics. Those propositions are reflected in the aforementioned empirical evidence. Psychological theories on work characteristics do not conceptualize technology explicitly (e.g., Hackman and Oldham, 1975 ; Karasek, 1979 ). As of the present study, the large variation regarding the concepts and variables derived from theory might limit the comparability of results. To foster systematic research, further theory development needs to more explicitly consider the role of technology at multiple levels (i.e., individual level, team level, organizational level) and with regard to the characteristics and demands of work. In the context of theory, the paradigmatic views also deserve attention (e.g., Liker et al., 1999 ; Orlikowski and Scott, 2008 ). These views could be reflected in the subject of research, as exemplified for instance in the study of field technologies and its effects on privacy from a managerial control and power perspective, potentially reflecting the view of political interest ( Tranvik and Bråten, 2017 ). Most of the studies, however, do not take a clear stand on what exactly they mean when they investigate technology. This complicates interdisciplinary inquiry and integration, as it is not always clear which understanding of technology is prevalent. We therefore encourage future research to explicitly define technology, for instance as in the present paper using the proposed framework of McOmber (1999) . In doing so, characteristics of technology may be defined more clearly and distinctive which in turn would enable the formation of the strongly needed categorization of technologies, as was proposed earlier.

And, although there are theories and models on the use of technology in education (e.g., E-Learning, Technology enhanced learning), they are not focussing on fostering the competences required to deal with new technologies in a sustainable manner. In general, the same gap needs to be filled for instruction models and instructional design models, for instance to promote changes in attitude and professional development. In addition, there is hardly any attention for the consequences of new technologies at work for CVET yet ( Harteis, 2017 ). All this requires more systematic evaluation studies. The research gaps identified need to be filled in order to provide evidence-based support to employees in dealing with new technologies at work in a sustainable manner, taking charge of their own performance and health, as well as seeking and using opportunities for their own professional and career development.

Data Availability Statement

All datasets generated for this study are included in the article/supplementary material.

Author Contributions

PB and RM have jointly developed the article, and to a greater or lesser extent both have participated in all parts of the study (design, development of the theoretical framework, search, analyses, and writing). The authors approved this version and take full responsibility for the originality of the research.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

* Amick, B. C., and Celentano, D. D. (1991). Structural determinants of the psychosocial work environment: introducing technology in the work stress framework. Ergonomics 34, 625–646. doi: 10.1080/00140139108967341

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Autor, D. H. (2013). The “task approach” to labor markets: an overview. J. Labour Market Res. 46, 185–199. doi: 10.1007/s12651-013-0128-z

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. J. Econ. Perspect. 29, 3–30. doi: 10.1257/jep.29.3.3

Autor, D. H., Levy, F., and Murnane, R. J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration. Q. J. Econ. 118, 1279–1333. doi: 10.1162/003355303322552801

* Ayyagari, R., Grover, V., and Purvis, R. (2011). Technostress: technological antecedents and implications. MIS Q. 35, 831–858. doi: 10.2307/41409963

Baartman, L. K. J., and de Bruijn, E. (2011). Integrating knowledge, skills and attitudes: conceptualising learning processes towards vocational competence. Educ. Res. Rev. 6, 125–134. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2011.03.001

Bass, B. M., and Avolio, B. J. (1994). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. Int. J. Public Administr. 17, 541–554. doi: 10.1080/01900699408524907

Bell, D. (1976). The coming of the post-industrial society. Educ. Forum 40, 574–579. doi: 10.1080/00131727609336501

Blauner, R. (1967). Alienation and Freedom: The Factory Worker and His Industry. Oxford: Chicago University of Press.

Google Scholar

* Bordi, L., Okkonen, J., Mäkiniemi, J.-P., and Heikkilä-Tammi, K. (2018). Communication in the digital work environment: implications for wellbeing at work. NJWLS 8, 29–48. doi: 10.18291/njwls.v8iS3.105275

Braverman, H. (1998). Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.

Brynjolfsson, E., and McAfee, A. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. New York, NY: Norton.

Burns, T., and Stalker, G. M. (1994). The Management of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

* Calitz, A. P., Poisat, P., and Cullen, M. (2017). The future African workplace: the use of collaborative robots in manufacturing. SA J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 15, 1–11. doi: 10.4102/sajhrm.v15i0.901

Card, D., and DiNardo, J. E. (2002). Skill-biased technological change and rising wage inequality: some problems and puzzles. J. Labor Econ. 20, 733–783. doi: 10.1086/342055

Cascio, W. F., and Montealegre, R. (2016). How technology is changing work and organizations. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 3, 349–375. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062352

** Chau, P. Y.K., and Hu, P. J.-H. (2002). Investigating healthcare professionals' decisions to accept telemedicine technology: an empirical test of competing theories. Inform. Manage. 39, 297–311. doi: 10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00098-2

* Chen, W., and McDonald, S. (2015). Do networked workers have more control? The implications of teamwork, telework, ICTs, and social capital for job decision latitude. Am. Behav. Sci. 59, 492–507. doi: 10.1177/0002764214556808

Cherns, A. (1976). The principles of sociotechnical design. Hum. Relations 29, 783–792. doi: 10.1177/001872677602900806

* Chesley, N. (2014). Information and communication technology use, work intensification and employee strain and distress. Work Employ. Soc. 28, 589–610. doi: 10.1177/0950017013500112

** Chow, S. K., Chin, W.-Y., Lee, H.-Y., Leung, H.-C., and Tang, F.-H. (2012). Nurses' perceptions and attitudes towards computerisation in a private hospital. J. Clin. Nurs. 21, 1685–1696. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03905.x

Dillenbourg, P., Järvela, S., and Fischer, F. (2009). “The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: from design to orchestration,” in Technology-Enhanced Learning , ed N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, and S. Barnes (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 3–19.

Dolmans, D. H., De Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I. H., and van der Vleuten, C. P. (2005). Problem-based learning: future challenges for educational practice and research. Med. Educ. 39, 732–741. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02205.x

* Dvash, A., and Mannheim, B. (2001). Technological coupling, job characteristics and operators' well-being as moderated by desirability of control. Behav. Inform. Technol. 20, 225–236. doi: 10.1080/01449290116930

Ellström, P.-E. (1997). The many meanings of occupational competence and qualification. J. Euro Industr. Train. 21, 266–273. doi: 10.1108/03090599710171567

* Findlay, P., Lindsay, C., McQuarrie, J., Bennie, M., Corcoran, E. D., and van der Meer, R. (2017). Employer choice and job quality. Work Occupat. 44, 113–136. doi: 10.1177/0730888416678038

Ford, M. (2015). Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Francis, A. (1986). New Technology at Work. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Frey, C. B., and Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 114, 254–280. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019

Gattiker, U. E., Gutek, B. A., and Berger, D. E. (1988). Office technology and employee attitudes. Soc. Sci. Comp. Rev. 6, 327–340. doi: 10.1177/089443938800600301

* Gekara, V. O., and Thanh Nguyen, V.-X. (2018). New technologies and the transformation of work and skills: a study of computerisation and automation of Australian container terminals. N. Technol. Work Employ. 33, 219–233. doi: 10.1111/ntwe.12118

Germain, M.-L. (2011). Developing trust in virtual teams. Perf. Improvement Q. 24, 29–54. doi: 10.1002/piq.20119

** Ghani, J. A., and Deshpande, S. P. (1994). Task characteristics and the experience of optimal flow in human—computer interaction. J. Psychol. 128, 381–391. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1994.9712742

Ghobakhloo, M. (2018). The future of manufacturing industry: a strategic roadmap toward industry 4.0. J. Manuf. Tech. Manage. 29, 910–936. doi: 10.1108/JMTM-02-2018-0057

* Gough, R., Ballardie, R., and Brewer, P. (2014). New technology and nurses. Labour Industry 24, 9–25. doi: 10.1080/10301763.2013.877118

Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., and Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. ETR&D 52, 67–86. doi: 10.1007/BF02504676

Hackman, J. R., and Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. J. Appl. Psychol. 60, 159–170. doi: 10.1037/h0076546

Harteis, C. (2017). “Machines, change and work: an educational view on the digitalization of work,” in The Impact Digitalization in the Workplace: An Educational View , ed C. Harteis (New York: Springer), 1–10.

Heisig, U. (2009). “The deskilling and upskilling debate,” in International Handbook of Education for the Changing World of Work: Bridging Academic and Vocational Learning , ed R. Maclean and D. Wilson (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 1639–1651.

* Holden, R. J., Rivera-Rodriguez, A. J., Faye, H., Scanlon, M. C., and Karsh, B.-T. (2013). Automation and adaptation: Nurses' problem-solving behavior following the implementation of bar coded medication administration technology. Cognition Technol. Work 15, 283–296. doi: 10.1007/s10111-012-0229-4

Huang, Y., Schuehle, J., Porter, A. L., and Youtie, J. (2015). A systematic method to create search strategies for emerging technologies based on the Web of Science: illustrated for ‘Big Data’. Scientometrics 105, 2005–2022. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1638-y

* James, K. L., Barlow, D., Bithell, A., Hiom, S., Lord, S., Oakley, P., et al. (2013). The impact of automation on pharmacy staff experience of workplace stressors. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 21, 105–116. doi: 10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00231.x

** Kamble, S., Gunasekaran, A., and Arha, H. (2019). Understanding the Blockchain technology adoption in supply chains-Indian context. Int. J. Product. Res. 57, 2009–2033. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2018.1518610

Karasek, R., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I., Bongers, P., and Amick, B. (1998). The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. J. Occupat. Health Psychol. 3, 322–355. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.3.4.322

Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: implications for job redesign. Administr. Sci. Q. 24, 285–308. doi: 10.2307/2392498

* Körner, U., Müller-Thur, K., Lunau, T., Dragano, N., Angerer, P., and Buchner, A. (2019). Perceived stress in human-machine interaction in modern manufacturing environments-results of a qualitative interview study. Stress Health 35, 187–199. doi: 10.1002/smi.2853

* Kraan, K. O., Dhondt, S., Houtman, I. L.D., Batenburg, R. S., Kompier, M. A.J., and Taris, T. W. (2014). Computers and types of control in relation to work stress and learning. Behav. Inform. Technol. 33, 1013–1026. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2014.916351

Liker, J. K., Haddad, C. J., and Karlin, J. (1999). Perspectives on technology and work organization. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 25, 575–596. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.575

Littlejohn, A., and Margaryan, A., (eds.). (2014). Technology-Enhanced Professional Learning: Processes, Practices and Tools. New York, NY: Routledge.

* Marler, J. H., and Liang, X. (2012). Information technology change, work complexity and service jobs: a contingent perspective. N. Technol. Work Employ. 27, 133–146. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-005X.2012.00280.x

McClure, P. K. (2018). ‘You're Fired,’ says the robot: the rise of automation in the workplace, technophobes, and fears of unemployment. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 36, 139–156. doi: 10.1177/0894439317698637

McOmber, J. B. (1999). Technological autonomy and three definitions of technology. J. Commun. 49, 137–153. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02809.x

Mulder, R. H., and Baumann, S. (2005). “Competencies of in-company trainers,” in Bridging Individual, Organisational, and Cultural Aspects of Professional Learning , eds H. Gruber, C. Harteis, R. H. Mulder, and M. Rehrl (Regensburg: S. Roderer Verlag), 105–109.

Mulder, R. H., Messmann, G., and König, C. (2015). Vocational education and training: researching the relationship between school and work. Eur. J. Educ. 50, 497–512. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12147

* Ninaus, K., Diehl, S., Terlutter, R., Chan, K., and Huang, A. (2015). Benefits and stressors - perceived effects of ICT use on employee health and work stress: an exploratory study from Austria and Hong Kong. Int. J. Qual. Stud. Health Well Being 10:28838. doi: 10.3402/qhw.v10.28838

Orlikowski, W. J., and Scott, S. V. (2008). 10 sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. ANNALS 2, 433–474. doi: 10.1080/19416520802211644

Parker, S. K., van den Broeck, A., and Holman, D. (2017). Work design influences: a synthesis of multilevel factors that affect the design of jobs. Acad. Manage. Ann. 11, 267–308. doi: 10.5465/annals.2014.0054

Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. New Work, NY: Doubleday.

Roblek, V., Meško, M., and KrapeŽ, A. (2016). A complex view of industry 4.0. SAGE Open 6:215824401665398. doi: 10.1177/2158244016653987

Rodgers, M., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Roberts, H., Britten, N., and Popay, J. (2009). Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. Evaluation 15, 49–73. doi: 10.1177/1356389008097871

Schwab, K. (2017). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. London: Portfolio Penguin.

Shepard, J. M. (1977). Technology, alienation, and job satisfaction. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 3, 1–21.

Sonntag, K. (1992). Personalentwicklung in Organisationen [Human Resource Development in Companies. Psychological Basics, Methods, and Strategies]. Göttingen: Verlag für Psychologie.

** Spell, C. S. (2001). Organizational technologies and human resource management. Hum. Relat. 54, 193–213. doi: 10.1177/0018726701542003

Spenner, K. I. (1990). Skill: meanings, methods, and measures. Work Occupat. 17, 399–421. doi: 10.1177/0730888490017004002

Spiro, R. J., Collins, B. P., Thota, J. J., and Feltovich, P. J. (2003). Cognitive flexibility theory: hypermedia for complex learning, adaptive knowledge application, and experience acceleration. Educ. Technol. 43, 5–10. Available online at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44429454 (accessed April 28, 2020).

Thomas, G. F., Zolin, R., and Hartman, J. L. (2009). The central role of communication in developing trust and its effect on employee involvement. J. Bus. Commun. 46, 287–310. doi: 10.1177/0021943609333522

* Towers, I., Duxbury, L., Higgins, C., and Thomas, J. (2006). Time thieves and space invaders: technology, work and the organization. J. Org. Change Manage. 19, 593–618. doi: 10.1108/09534810610686076

* Tranvik, T., and Bråten, M. (2017). The visible employee - technological governance and control of the mobile workforce. Socio Econ. Stud. 28, 319–337. doi: 10.5771/0935-9915-2017-3-319

** Turja, T., and Oksanen, A. (2019). Robot acceptance at work: a multilevel analysis based on 27 EU countries. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 11, 679–689. doi: 10.1007/s12369-019-00526-x

** Turja, T., Taipale, S., Kaakinen, M., and Oksanen, A. (2019). Care workers' readiness for robotization: identifying psychological and socio-demographic determinants. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 4:67. doi: 10.1007/s12369-019-00544-9

* van Zoonen, W., and Rice, R. E. (2017). Paradoxical implications of personal social media use for work. N. Technol. Work Employ. 32, 228–246. doi: 10.1111/ntwe.12098

Vosniadou, S., Corte, E. de, Glaser, R., and Mandl, H., (eds.). (1996). International Perspectives on the Design of Technology-Supported Learning Environments. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

* Walden, J. A. (2016). Integrating social media into the workplace: a study of shifting technology use repertoires. J. Broadcast. Electr. Med. 60, 347–363. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2016.1164163

Weick, K. E. (1990). “Technology as equivoque,” in Technology and Organizations , ed P. S. Goodman and L. Sproull (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass), 1–44.

Zuboff, S. (1988). In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power. New York, NY: Basic Books.

* Zubrycki, I., and Granosik, G. (2016). Understanding therapists' needs and attitudes towards robotic support. The roboterapia project. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 8, 553–563. doi: 10.1007/s12369-016-0372-9

* Studies included in the systematic review.

** Supplementary studies.

Keywords: technology, work characteristics, continuous vocational education and training, automation, work demands, systematic review

Citation: Beer P and Mulder RH (2020) The Effects of Technological Developments on Work and Their Implications for Continuous Vocational Education and Training: A Systematic Review. Front. Psychol. 11:918. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00918

Received: 14 February 2020; Accepted: 14 April 2020; Published: 08 May 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Beer and Mulder. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Patrick Beer, patrick.beer@ur.de

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

technological advancement research paper

Related Papers

Airat Sulaiman

Ramesh Paudel

European Scientific Journal ESJ , Alma Selmani

Technological developments that occurred in the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century, increased the use of technology in almost every aspect of human life and also its importance. The evolution of technology has meant that today anyone can use it at any time: everyone can have access to the Internet for different purposes. This thesis will focus on learning technology in higher education in Albania and specifically will use a survey on the use of technology by students of the Faculty of Economy during their studies. The main purpose of this work is to examine how much support there is and how students use technology in their learning process. The task has three main objectives: • To determine the attitudes and the degree of acceptance of technological change from students of faculty • To determine the extent of use of technologies during their studies, analyzing the types of technology frequently used by. • To determine how e-learning is recognized and how necessary is its usage by students's perspective. The methodology used is a qualitative analysis conducted through the distribution of questionnaires to students of faculty, as the main stakeholders of this research. Finally, from the analysis conducted it is concluded that students prefer technology; the most used technology is the laptop, less used is Instant Messaging and recognition of the concept of e-learning is at the average level, but still seen as a possibility to have a better study. Introduction Technology can be defined as the key word of this early twenty-first century. Technological developments that have occurred in the late twentieth century, where we can mention the invention of the airplane, telephone, computer and internet; and developments of the twenty one century, like:

Technology and education. Innovation and hindrances, JALT Special Issue

Margarita Kefalaki , Jürgen Rudolph , Fotini Diamantidaki

Researches worldwide show that technology and innovative practices can improve the educational experience (e.g. Gunasekara et al., 2021; O’Brien, 2020; Shelley, 2020; Qing & Diamantidaki, 2020; Bonk et al., 2020). We continue to seek alternatives to traditional communication, knowing that the the world we live in will never be the same again (Kefalaki & Diamantidaki, 2021), yet we need to acknowledge that this technological advancement is not applicable in all parts of the world where access to technology is not always possible due to socioeconomic conditions. This special issue will explore the successes with technology and its challenges to allow us to reflect on its use and purposes.

ABAYOMI A Y O D E J I . ADEDOKUN

The technology use has been an enormous factor in educational development all over the globe. Despite technological constraints in many developing countries, emphasis on technology use cannot but be ref-erenced. There has been a pattern of technology use and integration in many colleges, but the passion for technology use has not been completely appraised by all the stakeholders. Obviously, technology use can positively and negatively affect student learning. However, control over negative uses of technology rests in the hand of both parents and teachers. Apparently, technology use in today's educational system should create an atmosphere that fosters creativity among the students.

omar villanueva

Constantin Cucos

Sophia Cristina Escosia

RELATED PAPERS

Hayati Yusoff

Asep Miftahudin

Research, Society and Development

Paulo Ricardo Bavaresco

2015 54th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)

Peter Glynn

16_FITRI RAMADANI

Sasha Halenko

Yuyung Nur jayanti(C1C020154)

Rheumatology

Harshit Singh

Journal of Gorgan University of Medical Sciences

Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology

Alexey Manikhas

Afterimage: The Journal of Media Arts and Cultural Criticism

Kathryn Kramer

Jual Talenan Kayu Di Bali

vendor suppliermurah

Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Uyo, Uyo, Nigeria

TARI EYENGHE

Genetics and Molecular Research

jianggui shan

THE 9TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE INDONESIAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY ICICS 2021: Toward a Meaningful Society

Hasnah Natsir

Development, Growth and Differentiation

ChemMedChem

Kriangsak Khownium

marzieh tabaeian

Quality of Life Research

Zaeem Siddiqi

Mohamad Hudaeri

Journal of Perinatology

Martin Keszler

The Journal of Supercritical Fluids

Paula Pereira

Ernani Chaves

Selma G A R R I D O Pimenta

Journal of Biological Control

Mannar Mani

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024