SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Akademi Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 24

The Impact of Algorithmic Management on Occupational Health and Safety: Psychosocial Risks

Algoritmik Yönetim Sistemlerinin İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Üzerindeki Etkileri: Psikososyal Riskler

Okan Özbakır(Igdir University)0000-0001-8997-9451
Pages
1530–1577
Publication Date
2026-10-21
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In these systems, where employees are exposed to significant psychosocial risks, integrating occupational health and safety principles, especially during the design phase, will contribute to the development of a more equitable, transparent, and participatory management approach.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Algorithmic management systems, which have become widespread with changing working conditions, are bringing about a new form of work that redefines employees as "digital workers." While these systems transform business processes with their efficiency and speed-oriented structures, they also generate significant psychosocial risks for employees due to the errors and biases they contain.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Numerous studies in the literature show that algorithmic management applications increase employees' stress, burnout, and job security anxiety levels; this indirectly affects work accidents and occupational diseases.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In these systems, where employees are exposed to significant psychosocial risks, integrating occupational health and safety principles, especially during the design phase, will contribute to the development of a more equitable, transparent, and participatory management approach.
🔬Design:Derleme
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Algoritmik Yönetim · İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği · Psikososyal Riskler

Abstract

Algorithmic management systems, which have become widespread with changing working conditions, are bringing about a new form of work that redefines employees as "digital workers." While these systems transform business processes with their efficiency and speed-oriented structures, they also generate significant psychosocial risks for employees due to the errors and biases they contain. Numerous studies in the literature show that algorithmic management applications increase employees' stress, burnout, and job security anxiety levels; this indirectly affects work accidents and occupational diseases. In this study, the international literature on algorithmic management systems is examined, and the risks posed by these systems are evaluated from an occupational health and safety perspective. The findings highlight the need for a systematic approach to psychosocial risks and the importance of developing policies to mitigate these risks. Furthermore, the necessity of restructuring workplace procedures to be compatible with the nature of algorithmic management systems is emphasized. In these systems, where employees are exposed to significant psychosocial risks, integrating occupational health and safety principles, especially during the design phase, will contribute to the development of a more equitable, transparent, and participatory management approach.

Özet

Değişen çalışma koşullarıyla birlikte yaygınlaşan algoritmik yönetim sistemleri, çalışanların “dijital çalışan” olarak yeniden tanımlanmasına yol açan yeni bir çalışma biçimini beraberinde getirmektedir. Bu sistemler, verimlilik ve hız odaklı yapılarıyla iş süreçlerini dönüştürürken, içerdiği hata ve önyargılar nedeniyle çalışanlar açısından önemli psikososyal riskler üretmektedir. Literatürde yer alan çok sayıda çalışma, algoritmik yönetim uygulamalarının çalışanların stres, tükenmişlik ve iş güvencesine ilişkin kaygı düzeylerini artırdığını; bu durumun dolaylı olarak iş kazaları ve meslek hastalıkları üzerinde de etkili olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu çalışmada, algoritmik yönetim sistemlerine ilişkin uluslararası literatür incelenerek söz konusu sistemlerin ortaya çıkardığı riskler iş sağlığı ve güvenliği perspektifinden değerlendirilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, psikososyal risklerin sistematik biçimde ele alınması gerektiğini ve bu risklerin azaltılmasına yönelik politika geliştirme süreçlerinin önemini ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca işyeri prosedürlerinin, algoritmik yönetim sistemlerinin doğasına uygun biçimde yeniden yapılandırılması gerekliliği vurgulanmaktadır. Çalışanların yoğun psikososyal risklere maruz kaldığı bu sistemlerde, özellikle tasarım aşamasında iş sağlığı ve güvenliği ilkelerinin entegre edilmesi; daha adil, şeffaf ve katılımcı bir yönetim anlayışının geliştirilmesine katkı sağlayacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özbakır, O. (2026). The Impact of Algorithmic Management on Occupational Health and Safety: Psychosocial Risks. Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Akademi Dergisi, Sayı: 24, 1530–1577. https://doi.org/10.47994/usbad.1948186

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (92)

  1. 6098 sayılı Türk Borçlar Kanunu. M. 417.
  2. 6331 sayılı İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Kanunu. M. 2, 4, 10 ve 17.
  3. Alsulamy, S., Alshayeb, M., Inam, I., & Ahmed, A. (2026). Machine learning applications for predicting safety incidents in construction industry. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-34763-0
  4. Andonova, Y. (2019). Algorithmic management, organizational changes and the digitalization of HR practices: A critical perspective. Digitalization of society and socio‐political issues 1: digital, communication and culture, 27-37. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119687177
  5. Antony, L. (2016). Bias: Friend or foe? Reflections on Saulish skepticism. Implicit Bias and Philosophy, 1, 157–190. https://philpapers.org/rec/ANTBFO
  6. Aslan, T., & Yağımlı, M. (2023). İş sağlığı ve güvenliğinde derin öğrenme tabanlı risk tespit ve analizi. The Journal of International Scientific Researches, 8(2), 223-236.
  7. Atkinson, J., & Collins, P. (2024). Algorithmic management and a new generation of rights at work. Institute of Employment Rights (2024). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4853536
  8. Aykaç, H. B. (2026). Hukuki Yönüyle Platform Çalışmalarında İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği: Riskler ve Çözüm Önerileri. Çalışma ve Toplum, 1(88), 205-248. DOI: 10.54752/ct.1761600
  9. Aytaç, Ö. (2025). Aytaç, Ö. ve Yılmaz, M. (Edts) Gözetım, Çalışma Yaşamı ve Mahremıyet. Sosyolojı, 33. Serüven Yayınları.
  10. Baiocco, S., Fernández-Macías, E., Rani, U., & Pesole, A. (2022). The algorithmic management of work and its implications in different contexts (No. 2022/02). JRC Working Papers Series on Labour, Education and Technology. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/262292
  11. Bajwa, U., Gastaldo, D., Di Ruggiero, E., & Knorr, L. (2018). The health of workers in the global gig economy. Globalization and health, 14(1), 124. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-018-0444-8
  12. Baraza, X., & Torrent-Sellens, J. (2026). Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Risks in Occupational Safety and Health. Encyclopedia, 6(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia6010025
  13. Barr, S. (2026). The production of algorithmic management technologies at an early stage online labour platform. Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) thesis The Open University. https://doi.org/10.21954/ou.ro.00109345
  14. BBC, (2015). https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler/2015/07/150702_volkswagen_kaza
  15. Bellesia, F., Mattarelli, E., & Bertolotti, F. (2023). Algorithms and their affordances: How crowdworkers manage algorithmic scores in online labour markets. Journal of Management Studies, 60(1), 1-37. doi:10.1111/joms.12870
  16. Benlian, A., Wiener, M., Cram, W. A., Krasnova, H., Maedche, A., Möhlmann, M.,. & Remus, U. (2022). Algorithmic Management, Business & Information Systems Engineering, 64(6), 825-839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-022-00764-w
  17. Bowdler, M., Lahti, H., Jelenko, M., Buresti, G., & Valtonen, T. (2025). Algorithmic management and psychosocial risks at work: An emerging occupational safety and health challenge. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 52(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.4270
  18. Broecke, S. (2023). Artificial intelligence and the labour market: Introduction. OECD Employment Outlook, 93.
  19. Bucher, E. L., Schou, P. K., & Waldkirch, M. (2021). Pacifying the algorithm–Anticipatory compliance in the face of algorithmic management in the gig economy. Organization, 28(1), 44-67. DOI: 10.1177/1350508420961531
  20. Cameron, L. D., & Rahman, H. (2022). Expanding the locus of resistance: Understanding the co-constitution of control and resistance in the gig economy. Organization Science, 33(1), 38-58. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1557
  21. Cengiz, İ. (2018). İşverenin iş kazasından doğan hukuki sorumluluğu. Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi, (34), 123-142.
  22. Ceretelli, C. (2026). Decent Work in the Gig Economy: An Appraisal of the EU and ILO Regulation of Digital Labour Platforms. European Papers-A Journal on Law and Integration, 2026(1), 113-138.
  23. Chandola, T., Brunner, E., & Marmot, M. (2006). Chronic stress at work and the metabolic syndrome: prospective study. Bmj, 332(7540), 521-525. doi:10.1136/bmj.38693.435301.80
  24. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied psychology, 86(3), 499.
  25. Demikhov, O. I., Opanasiuk, Y. A., Demikhova, N. V., & Merisalu, Е. (2023). A digital transformation into occupational health and safety systems: a review of the best practices in Europe.
  26. Demiral, Y. (2004). Çalışma Yaşamında Psikososyal Etmenler. TTB Mesleki Sağlık ve Güvenlik Dergisi, 5(20), 22-26.
  27. Dworkin, R. (1986). Law’s Empire, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/~cruzparc/empire.pdf
  28. Enarsson, T., Enqvist, L., & Naarttijärvi, M. (2022). Approaching the human in the loop–legal perspectives on hybrid human/algorithmic decision-making in three contexts. Information & Communications Technology Law, 31(1), 123-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2021.1958860
  29. Engeler, E. (1967). Algorithmic properties of structures. Mathematical systems theory, 1(2), 183-195. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/bf01705528
  30. Erdemir, E., & Koç, U. (2006). İş yeri İzleme Faaliyetlerinin Çalışanlar Tarafından Algılanışı: Eskişehir Örneği. 14. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi, 555-562, Atatürk Üniversitesi İİBF Yayını
  31. EU-OSHA. (2025). AI-driven and algorithmic worker management in EU workplaces: Discover the facts and figures, https://healthy-workplaces.osha.europa.eu/en/media-centre/news/ai-driven-and-algorithmic-worker-management-eu-workplaces-discover-facts-and-figures
  32. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2021). Digital platform work and occupational safety and health: A review. Publications Office of the European Union.
  33. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2022). Digital platform work and occupational safety and health: Overview of regulation, policies, practices and research. Publications Office of the European Union.
  34. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2022a). Artificial intelligence for worker management: Implications for occupational safety and health. Publications Office of the European Union.
  35. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2022b). Artificial intelligence for worker management: An overview. Publications Office of the European Union.
  36. European Parliament and Council. (2024). Directive (EU) 2024/2831 on improving working conditions in platform work.
  37. European Parliament and Council. (2024). Directive (EU) 2024/2831 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on improving working conditions in platform work. Official Journal of the European Union.
  38. Ezer, B. (2022). Teslimat platformu kuryelerini işçi olarak kabul eden İspanyol Kraliyet Kararnamesi “El Real Decreto Ley 9/2021” Üzerine Bir İnceleme. İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, 80(3), 785-817.
  39. Fazelpour, S., & Danks, D. (2021). Algorithmic bias: Senses, sources, solutions. Philosophy Compass, 16(8), https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12760
  40. Gazeteoksijen, (2021). https://gazeteoksijen.com/bilim-ve-teknoloji/tesla-fabrikasindaki-robot-muhendise-saldirdi-sirketteki-kazalar-artiyor-198196
  41. Gökçe, H. (2026). Kuryelerin Bağ-Kur kapsamında olmaları hatalı, https://www.ekonomim.com/ekonomi/kuryelerin-bag-kur-kapsaminda-olmalari-hatali-haberi-866479
  42. Gronsund, T., & Aanestad, M. (2020). Augmenting the algorithm: Emerging human-in-the-loop work configurations. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 29(2), 101614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2020.101614
  43. Hakansta, C., Lind, R., Strauss-Raats, P., & Blüme, P. (2024). Algorithmic management: experiences and responses. Policy Study December 2024. https://feps-europe.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Algorithmic-management.-Experiences-and-responses.pdf
  44. Head, J., Kivimäki, M., Siegrist, J., Ferrie, J. E., Vahtera, J., Shipley, M. J., & Marmot, M. G. (2007). Effort–reward imbalance and relational injustice at work predict sickness absence: The Whitehall II study. Journal of psychosomatic research, 63(4), 433-440. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2007.06.021
  45. Health. ICOH. 2009. Accessed May 1, 2026 https://www.occhealth.co.za/_assets/articles/182/1036.pdf
  46. Howard, J., & Schulte, P. (2024). Managing workplace AI risks and the future of work. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 67(11), 980-993.
  47. İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Kurulları Hakkında Yönetmelik, m. 8.
  48. İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Risk Değerlendirmesi Yönetmeliği, M. 6, 8 ve 12.
  49. Johnson, G. (2020). Algorithmic bias: On the implicit biases of social technology. Synthese, 1‐21, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02696-y
  50. Karasek Jr, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative science quarterly, 285-308.
  51. Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of management annals, 14(1), 366-410. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0174
  52. Khundakji, B. (2025). Rıder Deaths is a Global Issue, Report on Motorcycle Delıvery Worker Fatalıtıes in Turkey, Delivery Worker Rights Association. https://kuryehaklari.org/.
  53. Kivimäki, M., Virtanen, M., Elovainio, M., Kouvonen, A., Väänänen, A., & Vahtera, J. (2006). Work stress in the etiology of coronary heart disease—a meta-analysis. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 431-442.
  54. Kocabaş, F., Aydın, U., Özgüler, V. C., İlhan, M. N., Demirkaya, S., Ak, N., & Özbaş, C. (2018). Çalişma ortaminda psikososyal risk etmenlerinin iş kazasi, meslek hastaliklari ve işle ilgili hastaliklarla ilişkisi. Sosyal Güvence, 14, 28-62. DOI: 10.21441/sguz.2018.68
  55. Kuhn, K. M., & Maleki, A. (2017). Micro-entrepreneurs, dependent contractors, and instaserfs: Understanding online labor platform workforces. Academy of management perspectives, 31(3), 183-200. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2015.0111
  56. Küçük, N., & Tınaz, P. (2022). Gig ekonomide psikososyal riskler “nitel bir analiz”. Beykoz Akademi Dergisi, 10(1), 103-126. DOI: 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2022.10/1.103-126
  57. Laskaris, Z., Hussein, M., Stimpson, J. P., Vignola, E. F., Shahn, Z., Cohen, N., & Baron, S. (2024). A price too high: injury and assault among delivery gig workers in New York City. Journal of urban health, 101(3), 439-450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-024-00873-9
  58. Lee, M. K. (2018). Understanding perception of algorithmic decisions: Fairness, trust, and emotion in response to algorithmic management. Big data & society, 5(1), https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718756684
  59. Lee, M. K., Kusbit, D., Metsky, E., & Dabbish, L. (2015, April). Working with machines: The impact of algorithmic and data-driven management on human workers. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1603-1612). http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702548
  60. Lenaerts, K., Waeyaert, W., Gillis, D., Smits, I., & Hauben, H. (2022). Digital platform work and occupational safety and health: overview of regulation, policies, practices and research. Report.
  61. Lu, Y., Yang, M. M., Zhu, J., & Wang, Y. (2024). Dark side of algorithmic management on platform worker behaviors: A mixed‐method study. Human Resource Management, 63(3), 477-498. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22211
  62. Manika J, Lund S, Robinson K, Mischke J, Deepa M. (2016). Independent work: choice, necessity, and the gig economy. McKinsey Global Institute. 2016. https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/independentwork-choicenecessity-and-the-gig-economy. Accessed May 1, 2026
  63. Marmot M, & Bell R. (2009). Health inequities in a globalising world of work: Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Icoh Specıal Issue, 4-7, https://www.occhealth.co.za/_assets/articles/182/1036.pdf
  64. Möhlmannn, M., Alves de Lima Salge, C., & Marabelli, M. (2023). Algorithm sensemaking: how platform workers make sense of algorithmic management. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 24(1), 35-64. DOI: 10.17705/1jais.00774
  65. Nilsson, K., Håkansta, C., Strauss-Raats, P., Lee, M. K., & Bodin, T. (2025). 65 Algorithmic management and occupational safety and health in the logistics sector. BMJ Journal,82, https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2024-EPICOHabstracts.65
  66. Noponen, N., Feshchenko, P., Auvinen, T., Luoma-Aho, V., & Abrahamsson, P. (2024). Taylorism on steroids or enabling autonomy? A systematic review of algorithmic management. Management review quarterly, 74(3), 1695-1721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-023-00345-5
  67. O’Neill, C., Kelly, L., Goldenfein, J., Phan, T., & Sadowski, J. (2025). When algorithmic management was new. Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, 19(2), 244-260. DOI: 10.13169/workorgalaboglob.19.2.0008
  68. Oğuz, Ö. (2025). Platform Çalışanlarının Haklarının Korunması: Türk İş Hukuku ve Karşılaştırmalı Hukuk Bağlamında Bir Değerlendirme. İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(1), 49-59.
  69. Öztemiz, A. B. (2005). Örgütlerde stresin verimlilik ve performansla etkileşimi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14(1), 271-288.
  70. Parsakia, K., & Tabar, S. H. S. A. (2024). The future of occupational health: Anticipating risks in the evolving workplace. Journal of Foresight and Health Governance, 1(2), 30-45.
  71. Pastuh, D., & Geppert, M. (2020). A “circuits of power”-based perspective on algorithmic management and labour in the gig economy. Industrielle Beziehungen. Zeitschrift für Arbeit, Organisation und Management, 27(2), 11-12. https://doi.org/10.3224/indbez.v27i2.05
  72. Pi̇şken, E. (2025). Sağlık Hizmetlerinde İyonlaştırıcı Radyasyon Riskine Maruz Kalan Personelin İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Değerlendirmesi ve Analizi (Master's Thesis, Istanbul Aydin University (Turkey)).
  73. Posner, R., A. (2006). “The Role of the Judge in the Twenty-First Century,” Boston University Law Review, 86, 1049-1068.
  74. Puraite, A., Zuzevičiūtė, V., Bereikienė, D., Skrypko, T., & Shmorgun, L. (2020). Algorithmic governance in public sector: Is digitization a key to effective management. Independent Journal of Management & Production, 11(9), 2149-2170. http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9228-1396
  75. Rahman, H. A. (2021). The invisible cage: Workers’ reactivity to opaque algorithmic evaluations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(4), 945-988. https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392211010118
  76. Rani, U., Kumar Dhir, R., Furrer, M., Gőbel, N., Moraiti, A., & Cooney, S. (2021). World employment and social outlook: the role of digital labour platforms in transforming the world of work. Geneva: International Labour Organisation.
  77. Rani, U., Pesole, A., & Vázquez, I. G. (2024). Algorithmic Management practices in regular workplaces: case studies in logistics and healthcare. European Union. doi:10.2760/712475
  78. Schmid, A. L., & Wiesche, M. (2026). Algorithmic Management in Traditional Organizations. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-025-00981-z
  79. Semujanga, B., & Parent-Rocheleau, X. (2024). Time-based stress and procedural justice: can transparency mitigate the effects of algorithmic compensation in gig work?. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 21(1), 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21010086
  80. Stark, D., & Vanden Broeck, P. (2024). Principles of algorithmic management. Organization Theory, 5(2), https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877241257213
  81. Suresh, H., & Guttag, J. (2021, October). A framework for understanding sources of harm throughout the machine learning life cycle. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization (pp. 1-9).
  82. T24, (2026). Motokuryeler için hazırlanan yasal düzenlemenin ayrıntıları belli oldu, https://t24.com.tr/ekonomi/motokuryeler-icin-hazirlanan-yasal-duzenlemenin-ayrintilari-belli-oldu,1297792?_t=1777635040949
  83. Todolí-Signes, A. (2021). Making algorithms safe for workers: occupational risks associated with work managed by artificial intelligence. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 27(4), 433-452.
  84. Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, K. W. (1951). Some social and psychological consequences of the longwall method of coal-getting: An examination of the psychological situation and defences of a work group in relation to the social structure and technological content of the work system. Human relations, 4(1), 3-38.
  85. Tuomi, A., Jianu, B., Roelofsen, M., & Ascenção, M. P. (2023, January). Riding against the algorithm: algorithmic management in on-demand food delivery. In Enter22 e-Tourism Conference (pp. 28-39). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25752-0_3
  86. Vatansever, Ç. (2014). Risk değerlendirme’de yeni bir boyut: Psikososyal Tehlike ve riskler. Çalışma ve Toplum, 1(40), 117-138.
  87. Vignola, E. F., Baron, S., Abreu Plasencia, E., Hussein, M., & Cohen, N. (2023). Workers’ health under algorithmic management: Emerging findings and urgent research questions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(2), 1239. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021239
  88. Wood, A. J. (2021). Algorithmic management consequences for work organisation and working conditions (No. 2021/07). JRC working papers series on labour, education and technology. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/233886
  89. Yudina, M. A. (2024). Algorithmic management in the focus of sociology of technology. Rudn Journal of Sociology, 24(3), 734-746. DOI: 10.22363/2313-2272-2024-24-3-734-746
  90. Zayid, H., Alzubi, A., Berberoğlu, A., & Khadem, A. (2024). How do algorithmic management practices affect workforce well-being? A parallel moderated mediation model. Behavioral Sciences, 14(12), 1123.
  91. Zhang, M. M., Cooke, F. L., Ahlstrom, D., & McNeil, N. (2025). The rise of algorithmic management and implications for work and organisations. New Technology, Work and Employment, 40(3), 659-671. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12343
  92. Benlian, A., Wiener, M., Cram, W. A., Krasnova, H., Maedche, A., Möhlmann, M.,. & Remus, U. (2022). Algorithmic Management, Business & Information Systems Engineering, 64(6), 825-839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-022-00764-w