The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Employment 5.0: The work of the future and the future of work
Open accessAbstract
This systematic review brings together the collection of recent scholarly outputs on the disruptive impact of digital transformation on the work. This paper draws from a sample of 53 outputs from 2011 to 2020. We identify three key theoretical perspectives: socio-technical systems theory, skill-biased technological change, and political economy of digital transformation. The articles provide complementary insights on cross-cutting themes of technological unemployment, wage inequality and job polarisation. They also highlight often conflicting views about technology ownership, work-less utopia and the imperative of education reforms. Drawing on the findings across the whole spectrum of theoretical and analytical perspectives, we offer critical reflections about the factors that will define the work of the future, in terms of skills, creativity and opportunities for autonomous workers. We also discuss the political and institutional processes that will shape the future of work. Finally, we offer recommendations for future research and policy interventions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?
Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019 · Cited by 8,727
The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change: An Empirical Exploration
Autor, D. H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2003) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355303322552801 · Cited by 6,205
Explaining Job Polarization: Routine-Biased Technological Change and Offshoring
Goos, M., Manning, A., & Salomons, A. (2014) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.104.8.2509 · Cited by 2,111 · cited 1×
“[28] used an European Union Labour Survey to classify occupations into high-paying, middling, and low-paying categories.”
MethodIndustry 5.0: A survey on enabling technologies and potential applications
Maddikunta, P. K. R., Pham, Q.-V., B, P., Deepa, N., Dev, K., Gadekallu, T. R., Ruby, R., & Liyanage, M. (2022) · Journal of Industrial Information Integration · doi:10.1016/j.jii.2021.100257 · Cited by 1,890
Gig economy platforms: Boon or Bane?
(2019) · OECD Economics Department Working Papers · doi:10.1787/fdb0570b-en · Cited by 137
Cited by
CreAItive Collaboration? Users' Misjudgment of AI-Creativity Affects Their Collaborative Performance
Bangerl, M. M., Disch, L., David, T., & Pammer-Schindler, V. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713886 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Kolade, O., & Owoseni, A.
- Venue
- Technology in Society
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-11
- Volume
- 71
- Pages
- 102086
- ISSN
- 0160-791X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4292822289
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 75.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
