The algorithmic personalization paradox: gig workers' lived experiences of supportive coaches and micromanaging bosses

Abstract

Purpose The article challenges the irony of algorithmic personalization, in which gig workers are subjected to a custom-made algorithm that alternates between the roles of a helpful tutor and a micromanaging boss. Design/methodology/approach It uses qualitative interviews with 22 respondents to examine the duality in the context of self-determination theory. Findings The results suggest that algorithmic personalization can fulfil and frustrate the two basic psychological needs of autonomy and competence; employees are actively using adaptive mechanisms to resolve the conflict. In theory, the article provides a psychologically based model that explains the pernicious nature of algorithmic personalization and underscores the urgency of designing algorithms in a human-centred manner for practice-based interventions. Research limitations/implications Theoretically, the article contributes a psychologically grounded model explaining these divergent outcomes. Practical implications Practically, it advocates for human-centric algorithmic design. Originality/value The originality of the study lies in its re-evaluation of the autonomy-versus-control paradox, understanding it in light of personalization, and thus shedding light on the subjective psychological dynamics that either make technology empowering or oppressive.