We use cookies to personalise and enhance your experience on this site. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of marketing and social media cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.
Governing the Innovation Ecosystem: How Perceived Rights and Worker Voice Shape the Distribution of Risk and Benefit
How can we ensure technological change delivers better work, rather than reinforcing existing inequalities?
Drawing on our research on automation archetypes, this report examines who benefits and who bears the risks through technological transition. Using survey data from more than 5,000 UK working adults, it explores how different forms of automation are experienced across demographic groups and occupational grades, and how workers’ perceived rights and access to representation shape these experiences.
Looking beyond individual workplaces, the research asks what role institutions, worker voice and countervailing power should play in shaping how technology is designed, deployed and governed, highlighting the importance of anticipatory governance to ensure that the risks and benefits of technological change can be identified, monitored and managed before they become embedded.
Key findings include:
Demographic groups and occupational grades are exposed to different forms of automation, and many of these differences persist even after accounting for exposure to different technologies. For example, workers identifying as Black, Caribbean or African report higher levels of telepresence and matching compared to White workers, indicating greater exposure to monitoring and algorithmic management.
Higher-level occupations are more likely to experience high-discretion augmentation, while lower-level roles are more exposed to forms of monitoring, algorithmic management and control.
Some groups perceive lower levels of rights at work than others. Perceived rights vary according to factors including occupational grade, pay, training and access to workplace representation.
Workers who perceive stronger rights are more likely to experience high-discretion augmentation and less likely to experience some forms of monitoring and algorithmic control. However, rights alone do not protect against every risk.
Trade unions can provide important countervailing power. Access to unions is associated with stronger perceived rights, highlighting their role in helping workers understand, exercise and negotiate their rights as technology changes work.
Worker voice does not always provide the same protection. The findings suggest that non-union voice mechanisms do not necessarily protect workers from harmful forms of automation, highlighting the importance of meaningful bargaining power through unions alongside participation.
The report's recommendations include:
Government should monitor the full range of automation archetypes across the economy and feed these insights into the wider regulatory ecosystem and public investment, including through regulatory sandboxing and Good Work Algorithmic Impact Assessments.
UKRI and Innovate UK should consider the distribution of automation risks and benefits in their research and innovation funding, including further research into perceived rights and technological transitions.
Government should benchmark worker protections and access to justice, identifying where existing rights and protections may be insufficient as technology changes work.
Trade unions should be recognised for their role in providing countervailing power during technological transitions, including through statutory union access to workplaces where AI and monitoring technologies are deployed.
A statutory collective bargaining right should be established on the introduction and use of AI at work.
Employers and HR functions should meaningfully involve workers in the procurement, implementation and review of workplace technologies, assessing their impacts against Good Work frameworks.
Overall, the research asks a bigger question: what kind of institutions do we need to make technological change fairer – and ensure it can be anticipated, monitored and managed before the risks become embedded?
