Automation’s effect on the job market has been a widely discussed topic. In the short term, employers have noted difficulties in filling roles and retaining workers, leading to an increase in robotic usage. However, the long-term consequences of these changes on the job market are still uncertain.

One aspect often overlooked is how human workers perceive their robotic counterparts. While automation can alleviate strenuous tasks in blue-collar work, it may also negatively impact worker morale. The Brookings Institution recently released findings from surveys conducted over the past decade, analyzing the impact of robotics on job "meaningfulness."

The institute defines work meaningfulness as the satisfaction of psychological needs such as competence, autonomy, and relatedness, which are crucial for motivating workers and providing purpose in their work.

Data collected from worker surveys in 14 industries across 20 European countries, combined with robot deployment data from the International Federation of Robotics, revealed a decrease in perceived meaningfulness and autonomy levels.

If robot adoption in the food and beverage industry were to match that of the automotive industry, a significant decline in work meaningfulness and autonomy is estimated. The concern arises over whether robotics will make human roles more robotic, despite removing repetitive tasks.

The negative impact of robotization on work meaningfulness is consistent across education levels, skills, and job functions, according to the institute.

To address this trend, simply rejecting automation is not the solution. As long as robots benefit a company's bottom line, adoption will continue to rise rapidly. Brookings suggests that cooperation between humans and machines, rather than competition, is key to enhancing worker well-being.

This approach aligns with the emphasis on collaborative robotics, rather than worker replacement, to avoid adversarial relationships between humans and robots.