In our current evolving landscape of modern work, the blurred lines of technology and human interaction has become a great theme for speculative fiction and comedic reflection. Over the weekend, our group has come together for a viewing of episodes from “The Office,” “The IT Crowd,” and “Severance.” As David mentioned during an earlier tutorial session, these sort of fictional works provides a great opportunity to look through a different lens to view the implications of technological encroachment on workplace dynamics.
I liked “Severance” the most out of the three, the fact that I love dystopian science fiction shows probably played a lot into this. It talks about the loss of personal freedom to corporate control. This speculative fiction, kind of mirrors real-world anxieties about the reach of employers into employees’ lives, which I have personally felt before, which makes it even more chilling. We see the potential of extreme violation of privacy by the workspace here.
Meanwhile, “The Office” and “The IT Crowd” approaches this theme with humor, and we were able to observe insights into the impact of technology on social interactions within the workspace. In “The Office,” the episode “Email Surveillance” humorously critiques the invasion of privacy through workplace monitoring. “The IT Crowd’s” “The Red Door” showed the social dynamics of workplace inclusion, and showing how easily individuals can become excluded or marginalized in a work environment.
These shows do more than to entertain, they use fiction as a medium to critique and reflect upon the complex problems faced in the modern workspace. As a group, there is much we can learn from these narratives, they challenge us to think more critically about the direction of our own project, especially in the field of how technology is redefining work.
In my explorations of secondary sources today, I stumbled upon a discussion about the hospitality industry’s ongoing struggle with labor shortages(I hear the media talk about this all the time, I’m a bit skeptical). Matt Casella, President at Richtech Robotics, writing on Nasdaq shed some light on a solution: “Robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) offer a promising solution. By integrating these technologies, the hospitality industry can not only address its current staffing woes but also lay the foundation for a more efficient and customer-centric future” (Casella, Nasdaq). This perspective, while optimistic, only echoes the investor’s viewpoint. The projected growth in the global hospitality robots market, with a CAGR of 25.5% from 2021 to 2030, as forecasted by Allied Market Research, shows the momentum of this change (Casella, Nasdaq).
Allied Market Research on Global Hospitality Robots
There was also an article that referenced a report by McKinsey, highlighting that “an estimated 50% of all current work activities might be automated by 2055” (Granger, Technology4Hotels). They also mentioned “Certain roles including housekeeping and maintenance seem destined for some form of automation. In these areas, robots and AI could be used to help increase operational efficiency, decrease staff costs and improve the guest experience” (Granger, Technology4Hotels). This view points towards efficiency and staffing cost prioritization, potentially at the expense of the average hospitality worker.
Room service robot, they don’t complain and don’t ask for tips
A Forbes article presents a slightly less grim perspective, suggesting that robots are not replacing human labor but rather enhancing it (Al-Massalkhi, Forbes). “Some restaurants are currently deploying robotic blenders, “arms” that fry and other technologies” (Al-Massalkhi, Forbes). This article suggested that automation serves as a way to alleviate menial tasks rather than eliminate jobs outright, it’s an optimistic take, but I’ll hold on to my reservations.
Flippy, the frying robot, doesn’t need a wage, just need maintenance once in a while
The narrative takes a darker turn when we look at the largely automated pilot McDonald’s that opened it’s doors late 2022, located in Texas, USA. At this restaurant, customers can expect to go through the whole process of ordering and getting food without any human interaction, ordering through a touchscreen and getting served with a conveyer belt, outright eliminating the human element in this process. “The test restaurant plays into fears that jobs will one day be taken over by robots and automation, replacing the need for human employees” (Salam, Guardian). During this period of time, there was also a popular tweet about the restaurant as seen below:
A tweet commenting on the new automated McDonald’s in Texas, USA
What’s even more sinister about this tweet is the fact that the video has been issued a copyright takedown.
Reflecting on these sources reveals the double-edged nature of integrating technology and AI in hospitality. It offers efficiency and cost savings but risks socio-economic disputes. The enthusiasm from investors and management contrasts sharply with the concerns of the working class. Additionally, the impact isn’t limited to manual labor. Generative AI’s breakthroughs are also unsettling white-collar sectors. Coincidentally, this was also one of my uncertainties when I was doing the box of uncertainties project.
In our latest team discussion on Wednesday, our agenda was to solidify our project direction with an action plan. Earlier in the day before this meeting, we had a workshop with Elizabeth where she was talking about being aware of the time schedule, and shared a quote “Don’t make the Right Decision; Make the Decision Right.” This really resonated with me regarding our group dynamics.
We are struggling a bit with very diverse ideas and the challenge of reaching a collective consensus. I don’t know if it’s placebo or something else, but I felt like the group meeting session later in the day flowed much more constructively with members including myself, XQ, and Khyathi, showing greater openness to compromise. This shift didn’t mean we stopped voicing our concerns, but it meant we were challenging and probing ideas more effectively while keeping the conversation on track within the scope of our project. We did have the occasional diversions into topics like Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, and even some backtracking into Western vs Eastern working dynamics, but each time we managed to quickly reign the conversation back into focus on our primary objective.
Our project’s aim became clear, we wanted to explore the impact of technological advancements on labor within the hospitality sector, particularly within tech company canteens. This choice was made with the desire to provoke thought on the broader social implications of tech replacing human roles, touching on the themes of, as Nina puts it, design activism and social change. While I remain a bit skeptical about the assumption of “most” tech companies are actively developing technologies to replace human labor in the hospitality sector, this is mostly a practical concerns as I’m not sure how many of these type of tech companies exists in London, or even the UK. With that said, I still recognized the value in examining the hospitality sector within these settings as it could unveil some insights into privilege, social divides, and the interplay between technological progress and human livelihood.
Having finally reached an actual consensus, for the last time I hope haha. We are going to move forward with our research, both primary and secondary, looking for research, references and evidence to support our project, and allowing us to advance with a clear direction and purpose.
Today’s discussions is a pivotal moment in our project’s development, marked by a passionate(heated actually, haha) debate over our new direction. Initially, I was really drawn(probably because I have experienced this and is really biased) to the theme of employee burnout as I have personally experienced it myself, struggling within a seemingly fun and stress free(company canteens, bars, swimming pool, pool tables etc.) yet ultimately draining corporate environments. I was advocating for a focus on the mental well-being of employees under the stress of burnout. Despite my inclination towards this topic, we as a group, led by insights from Louason and Nina, collectively decided to pursue another equally compelling topic – the ethical implications of technology replacing human labor, particularly in the hospitality sector within tech companies.
This new angle speculates into the future of work, where technological advancements may lead to further job displacement and increase the social class gap. Khyathi also added another angle to our discussion, pointing out that this evolution of technology, pushing out human workers, could erode interpersonal relationships within the society as it would cause people to spend less time interacting with other people. This is a perspective that I found debatable given the breadth of human connections and interactions beyond work and hospitality, for example, family and friends. Khyathi also highlighted to me that the progression of technology and the stress/anxiety caused by the fear of getting replaced will contribute to employee burnout, so we will still be able to cover some aspects of the burnout issue.
After we had finally set a theme, we started brainstorming ways we can present this. It quickly transformed into something like a creative workshop, which was really fun! We started fleshing out a fictional future workspace scenario set in a tech company’s canteen. We envisioned personas including the CEO, a Food Engineer Supervisor overseeing kitchen automation, a human Chef anxious about being replaced, and a Waiter who has already been substituted by serving machines. We also looked at roles of corporate workers at the tech company(sales, marketing, product designers, engineers etc) who contributes to the success of these automation technologies, which might eventually lead to their own job displacement. It’s cyclical and ironic, and we hope to be able to illustrate that in this narrative.
Personas
Today’s meeting session, while intense, showed a depth of engagement and diverse perspectives within our group, and also reminded me of the importance of compromise and collaboration in moving our project forward.
Next steps: deepen our research to substantiate our claims (or maybe prove ourselves wrong), also we’ve set the place we want to visit, Google Canteen, not sure if we can get access to it but I’m optimistic.
In today’s tutorial with David, we looked deep into the complexities of our initial project discussions, which centered around our own personal experiences and observations of the working environment. In my previous two journal entries, I realize, may have presented a somewhat unilateral perspective, shaped predominantly by personal observations and inherent biases that they carry. These reflections stemmed from my own experiences or working across different time zones from Taiwan, and always having to adhere and adapt to my US or EU coworkers time schedule, instead of having a balanced schedule. And another experience is my observation of a trend in Taiwan, where senior positions often went to white, English-speaking individuals, who more often then not doesn’t have any relevant industry experience, this is a sentiment Nina, coming from Shanghai, could relate to.
These observations and personal biases that I had, led to a narrative that seemed to create an adversarial divide between Asian and Western work cultures. However, I understand that these problems are multifaceted and complex, deeply rooted in cultural, educational, and system biases rather than simple geographical distinctions. A remind from David today really struck a chord with me: “Privilege has no color.” This statement underscores the reality that the benefits and disadvantages within societal structures often transcend racial lines, pointing instead to a broader class divide. This is a scenario that our group initially presumed to be a future event, where the cultural lines of the West and the East are blurred, and all that remained is the class divide, but this is in fact a present-day reality.
Reflecting on this, I was reminded of Ursula K. Le Guin’s “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas,” which we read in our workshops last Wednesday. The utopian city of Omelas – a city whose prosperity relies on the suffering of a single child – is a really powerful metaphor for our current society. It highlights an uncomfortable truth: the comfort and prosperity enjoyed by some are often predicated on the suffering of others, like how the comfort of tech workers in their fancy offices is predicated by the laborious work of the hospitality workers operating within their company.
“The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”
Given these insights, our group is considering a pivot from the initial East vs West discourse. We are exploring themes like burnout and the challenges faced by hospitality workers in tech companies, among others. This shift reflects a broader understanding of workplace issues that transcend cultural boundaries, focusing instead on the systemic inequalities.
As we move forward, a collective decision on our project’s direction will be made after further discussion and reflection after classes tomorrow as we digest that we have learned today. This process, while time consuming, is important as it helps us make more informed decisions through putting our minds together.
Just another thing to add, as the tutorial with David ended, an interesting observation highlighted the subtle cultural influence within our group, being predominantly Asians (Chinese & Indian). As David and Nina were engaged in a post-class discussion, I noticed that most of our group members remained seated, fiddling with their phones, except for Khyathi, who was the exception to this pattern. This moment was a reflective moment of the broader cultural practice prevalent in the Asian workplace culture, of not leaving before the leader/authority figure. Although David is technically not our leader in this setting, but a peer, a tutor, the deeply ingrained cultural and educational norms still influenced our behavior. This really goes to show how cultural nuances influence even the most routine of our actions.
We had a second meeting scheduled in this first week, on Friday we met on teams to discuss further about the specifics of this project. We particularly focused on selecting an appropriate location and workplace for this project. We’ve decided to concentrate on offices near King’s Cross, targeting companies with a global presence and an established office environment. Some examples included tech companies like Google and Samsung. Although there’s an understanding that gaining access for a tour and interviews might be challenging, we are optimistic and plan to approach with a proposal.
Our discussion also revolved around the evolution of work, spanning from the past and present to our speculations for the future, in our context of Asian work culture vs the Western work culture. We feel like colonialism has left a lasting impact in the Asian countries which has been colonized before (which is most of it). This past is still mirrored in the present scenario, where exploitation of workers, manufacturing demands, and environmental concerns are burdens for these Asian countries to carry, while the Western countries reap the benefits. This dynamic really shows how colonialism is still kind of alive and kicking in our present society.
As we speculated into the future, I had a slightly different idea. I thought that with the ongoing globalization and modernization, the primary divide of Asian versus the Western could shift to a more pronounced disparity between the upper and lower classes. This perspective sparked a thoughtful discussion within our group, even comparing it to the caste system in the Indian culture. We were really interested in how these evolving dynamics could shape future work environments and societal structures, but we were far too ahead so we dropped this discussion and plan to come back to it in future weeks.
By the end of this discussion, each of us were allocated a subject that is within our interest to look into. I will be looking into the context of Western vs Eastern working culture, XQ on how the result-based culture impacts the Asian working culture, Khyathi on the caste system and it’s impact on the Asian workplace, and Nina on international working in the context of globalization and colonialization. Our next steps involve reaching out to potential companies for tours and interviews, alongside further refining our speculative scenarios based on our research findings and discussions.
Reflecting on our initial group discussion and tutorial for the Future of Work collaboration project today, conversation with the group and tutor started with a personal introduction round, highlighting our different experiences and backgrounds. My unique position in this, being the only person who has spent some significant time in a corporate environment, provides me with some personal experience which I can draw upon. At first, we touched on the issue of burnout at work, which is something I have personally experienced, this is something that I have struggled with for a long time, and have never really worked out how to combat this issue. I loved video games, and I worked in the video game hardware industry. There is a direct link between my professional work and personal hobby, this seemed like the perfect match. However, it led me down the path of overwhelming burnout, where I dread going to work and I avoid my gaming devices, which I used to love so much, it affected both my work and personal life.
Transitional to the topic on work-life balance, we found something that we were all very interested in. We think that this is a critical issue, especially from an Asian perspective. Our group, being predominantly Asian, shared insights on our own observation of cultural differences in work ethic and expectations between Asian and Western labor. We went into the subject of manufacturing labor outsourcing to Asian countries and its ramifications, of how these “blood” factories produce the world’s electronic devices, brand wear, and more, and how these Asian laborers are exploited while the rest of the world enjoys the goods produced by them. Nina’s comparisons of these practices to modern-era colonialization was really spot on, and I agree with her. I also shared my own personal observations of the stark work culture differences between Asian and Western counterparts in a global companies. The expectation for Asian employees to adjust their schedules for Western colleagues really shows the deep cultural disparity in valuing personal time and work commitment.
Our discussions brought up the societal differences in perceptions of labor rights in Asia and Western cultures. From my own observations, strikes in the UK are often met with public sympathy and support, this shows an understanding and respect for laborers. On the other hand, in Taiwan, public and media reactions to strikes are really harsh. Strikers are often labeled as selfish, and I think this really highlights the cultural divide in value placed on individual versus collective needs, which is another area of Western vs Asian culture.
As we move forward, our decision to potentially narrow our project’s scope to this cultural comparison is still tentative. We are open to integrating new insights from tomorrow’s speculative design lectures, which might add to, or allow us to pivot our project direction. This initial dialogue with the team today has laid a great foundation for our collaborative journey, and made clear the importance of personal experiences and critical reflection in tackling this new project and bringing on ideas of a more inclusive and equal global work environment.
Today, I want to share a reflection on a recent intervention project I presented, part of the Box of Uncertainties project. This project intersected at the crossroads of video game culture and the public perception of violence, which is a space filled with media-fueled stereotypes and personal anecdotes.
Media-fueled stereotypes
Video games have long been in the crossfire of debates on societal violence. Politicians often use it as a scapegoat of violence that is happening in their countries, and mainstream media helps to paint a dire picture, suggesting a direct correlation between in-game violence and real-world aggression. My project aimed to peel back these layers of assumption and prompt a more nuanced discourse. The central question that guided my exploration was: “How can I challenge the stereotype of violence in gaming and enhance the public’s perception of video games?“
The Intervention: A Digitally Distributed Poster
As a response, I created a poster that juxtaposes everyday objects with gaming peripherals, and symbols of violence often seen in game, in this case, weapons. Combined with the text on the poster, I hope to provoke people into reflecting on whether individuals close to them, people they know and care about who engage in violent video games, are indeed violent human beings as often portrayed, challenging them to reconsider their bias.
Intervention Poster
The poster was distributed through my own social media channels, followed by an invitation to fill a survey to capture reactions. The results were varied. A majority expressed a softened stance towards violence in video games, yet many remained unmoved in their previously held beliefs. I also just recognized a risk in this approach after gathering the responses. If a viewer does have a violent gamer in their life, the poster might reinforce negative stereotypes instead, and from my survey, out of all the participants who have gamers in their lives, 25% of these people identify these gamers as violent individuals. Based on my secondary research, I did not expect the percentage to be this high. This statistic is a stark reminder of the complexities of this topic.
The Path Forward
This project has been eye-opening, reflecting not just societal perceptions, but also the complexities of individual experiences. The path to challenging entrenched stereotypes is a winding one, and the results showed the necessity of properly thinking through my approach and making informed decisions instead of just jumping the gun.
As I continue on this journey, the experience gained here will undoubtedly inform future endeavors. The intersection of video games and violence is a microcosm of broader societal dynamics, and it deserves a balanced, thoughtful exploration – one that acknowledges the shades of gray in a conversation too often rendered in black and white.
