Abstract
The authors use data from the British Skills and Employment Surveys to document and to try to account for sustained work intensification between 2001 and 2017. They estimate the determinants of work intensity, first using four waves of the pooled cross-section data, then using a constructed pseudo-panel of occupation–industry cells. The latter approach suggests biases in cross-section models of work intensity, associated with unobserved fixed effects in specific occupations and industries. The pseudo-panel analysis can account for slightly more than half (51%) of work intensification using variables that measure effort-biased technological change, effort-biased organizational change, the growing requirement for learning new things, and the rise of self-employment. The authors interpret the work intensification and these effects within a power-resources framework.
Highlights
The authors use data from the British Skills and Employment Surveys to document and to try to account for sustained work intensification between 2001 and 2017
In addition to studying this particular period in the evolution of work intensity in one liberal market economy, our article aims to contribute a better understanding of which aspects of technological and organizational change are the salient determinants of work intensification
We have documented a steady process of moderate work intensification in one country over the 16 years following 2001—a rise in the required work intensity index by 0.20 of a standard deviation, which, from the cited evidence, will have had significant effects on workers’ health and well-being
Summary
The authors use data from the British Skills and Employment Surveys to document and to try to account for sustained work intensification between 2001 and 2017 They estimate the determinants of work intensity, first using four waves of the pooled cross-section data, using a constructed pseudo-panel of occupation–industry cells. The latter approach suggests biases in cross-section models of work intensity, associated with unobserved fixed effects in specific occupations and industries. ILR REVIEW intensification across whole nations or groups of nations has been extensively reported (e.g., Gallie and Zhou 2013) What is behind this seemingly widespread phenomenon? We ask whether the factors associated with high work intensity in cross-sectional analyses remain important after controlling for unobserved occupation–industry-specific fixed effects in a pseudo-panel analysis
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call