The quantified self: What counts in the neoliberal workplace
Open accessAbstract
Implementation of quantified self technologies in workplaces relies on the ontological premise of Cartesian dualism with mind dominant over body. Contributing to debates in new materialism, we demonstrate that workers are now being asked to measure our own productivity and health and well-being in art-houses and warehouses alike in both the global north and south. Workers experience intensified precarity, austerity, intense competition for jobs and anxieties about the replacement of labour-power with robots and other machines as well as, ourselves replaceable, other humans. Workers have internalised the imperative to perform, a subjectification process as we become observing entrepreneurial subjects and observed, objectified labouring bodies. Thinking through the implications of the use of wearable technologies in workplaces, this article shows that these technologies introduce a heightened Taylorist influence on precarious working bodies within neoliberal workplaces.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Precise and numerous performance metrics likely lead workers to focus more on tasks and activities valued by these metrics, reducing their autonomy in organizing work and priorities.
“By the same reasoning, it is likely that precise and numerous performance metrics lead workers to focus more on the tasks and activities that are valued by these metrics, reducing their autonomy in organizing their work and priorities (Moore & Robinson, 2016;Moore, 2017).”
From Algorithms as work designers: How algorithmic management influences the design of jobs (2022) · cites this paper as Moore & Robinson, 2016
Metrification of work in traditional settings leads to lower task significance.
“The metrification of work in traditional work settings has also been found to lead to perceived reductionism (Newman, Fast, & Harmon, 2020), to reduced work meaningfulness, or lower task significance (Moore & Robinson, 2016;Moore, 2017).”
From Algorithms as work designers: How algorithmic management influences the design of jobs (2022) · cites this paper as Moore & Robinson, 2016
Metrification of work in traditional settings leads to reduced work meaningfulness.
“The metrification of work in traditional work settings has also been found to lead to perceived reductionism (Newman, Fast, & Harmon, 2020), to reduced work meaningfulness, or lower task significance (Moore & Robinson, 2016;Moore, 2017).”
From Algorithms as work designers: How algorithmic management influences the design of jobs (2022) · cites this paper as Moore & Robinson, 2016
Cites
Terranova, T. (2000) · Social Text · doi:10.1215/01642472-18-2_63-33 · Cited by 1,749 · cited 2× · see citing works
“No wonder, then, that capital seeks to quantify the fields of cultural production and consumption where work has long been underpaid and undervalued (Terranova, 2000).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Algorithms as work designers: How algorithmic management influences the design of jobs
Parent-Rocheleau, X., & Parker, S. K. (2022) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100838 · Cited by 512 · see citing works
Sánchez-Monedero, J., Dencik, L., & Edwards, L. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3351095.3372849 · Cited by 196 · see citing works
Terry, E., Marks, A., Dakessian, A., & Christopoulos, D. (2022) · Work, Employment and Society · doi:10.1177/0950017020979504 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
The Digital Boss: Algorithms, Housekeeping Apps, and the Digitalization of Domestic Work in Colombia
Mantilla-León, L. C., Jaimes Rodríguez, I., & Maldonado Castañeda, O. J. (2026) · Critical Sociology · doi:10.1177/08969205241304790 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence skepticism in career domains
Adepoju, O. D., Tijani, B., & Karera, S. (2024) · International Journal for Digital Society · doi:10.20533/ijds.2040.2570.2024.0236 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Moore, P., & Robinson, A.
- Affiliations
- Middlesex University London (GB)
- Independent Scholar, UK
- Corresponding author
- Moore, Phoebe
- Venue
- New Media & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-09
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2774-2792
- ISSN
- 1461-4448 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7315
- OpenAlex
- W2281436864
- Cited by
- 427
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 76 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 76.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Locations
- New Media & Society (publishedVersion)
- Middlesex University Research Repository (Middlesex University Of London) (acceptedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Legal and Labor Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
- Keywords
- quantified self, neoliberalism, workplace technology, wearable devices, new materialism, Cartesian dualism, subjectification, precarity, scientific management, productivity measurement, employee well-being, automation, labor power, Global North and Global South
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
