Digitalisation Anxiety in Czech Industrial Workplaces: A Multilevel Qualitative Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14267/1588970X.2026.009Keywords:
digitalisation, workplace anxiety, technostress, job demand–control–support, qualitative interviews, industrial workplaces, Czech Republic, O33, J28Abstract
Digitalisation is reshaping industrial work, yet employees’ lived experience determines whether its promised value is realised. Drawing on 66 semi‑structured interviews with employees in Czech industrial workplaces, this study maps overall stance and delineates multilevel triggers of digitalisation‑related anxiety. A large majority expressed a predominantly optimistic view (53/66; 80.3%), while pessimistic (5/66; 7.6%) and ambivalent (8/66; 12.1%) minorities reported concerns. Anxiety clustered at societal (e.g., macro‑uncertainty about employment and safety due to failures), organisational (implementation quality, availability of qualified staff, training and help desks, transparency of data‑driven monitoring) and individual levels (interpersonal frictions, fatigue, sleep disturbance). Across levels, uncertainty emerged as the primary driver, interacting with perceived decision latitude and support. On this basis, we outline actionable interventions: the transparent communication of scope and timelines; participatory implementation to increase discretion; task‑relevant training and competent help desks; team‑level norms that contain communication overload; and individual bounded‑attention routines that reduce techno‑overload. Conceptually, the paper advances a process‑plus‑content perspective on digitalisation anxiety that integrates societal, organisational and individual triggers and clarifies where to target the socio‑technical system. While qualitative and sector‑specific, the findings are transferable rather than statistically generalisable and provide a practical scaffold for designing interventions that sustain employees’ broadly positive orientation while tempering anxiety during ongoing digital change.
References
Arntz, M., Gregory, T., & Zierahn, U. (2016). The risk of automation for jobs in OECD countries: A comparative analysis. OECD Social, Employment and Migra tion Working Papers, No. 189. OECD Publishing.
Ayyagari, R., Grover, V., & Purvis, R. (2011). Technostress: Technological anteced ents and implications. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 831–858.
Bondanini, G., Giorgi, G., Ariza Montes, A., Vega Muñoz, A., & Andreucci Annun ziata, P. (2020). Technostress: A systematic review of literature through bib liometric analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), Article 8013.
Bordia, P., Hobman, E., Jones, E., Gallois, C., & Callan, V. J. (2004). Uncertainty during organisational change: Types, consequences, and management strat egies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(4), 507–532.
Bordia, P., Hunt, E., Paulsen, N., Tourish, D., & DiFonzo, N. (2004). Uncertainty during organisational change: Is it all about control? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(3), 345–365.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualita tive Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597.
Cambre, M. A., & Cook, D. L. (1985). Computer anxiety: Definition, measure ment, and correlates. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1(1), 37–54.
Carter, N., Bryant Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547.
Court of Justice of the European Union. (2019). Judgment of 14 May 2019, Confed eración Sindical de Comisiones Obreras (CCOO) v Deutsche Bank SAE, C 55/18 (ECLI:EU:C:2019:402).
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115.
Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How suscepti ble are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280.
Gale, N. K., Heath, G., Cameron, E., Rashid, S., & Redwood, S. (2013). Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13(1), Article 117.
Gobble, M. M. (2018). Digitalization, digitization, and innovation. Research Tech nology Management, 61(4), 56–59.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.
Guest, G., Namey, E., & Mitchell, M. (2013). Collecting qualitative data: A field manual for applied research. SAGE.
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
Johnson, J. V., & Hall, E. M. (1988). Job strain, workplace social support, and car diovascular disease: A cross sectional study of a random sample of the Swed ish working population. American Journal of Public Health, 78(10), 1336–1342.
Kallio, H., Pietilä, A. M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi struc tured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954–2965.
Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 285–308.
Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 366–410.
Kummer, T. F., Recker, J., & Bick, M. (2017). Technology induced anxiety: Mani festations, cultural influences, and its effect on the adoption of sensor based technology in German and Australian hospitals. Information & Management, 54(1), 73–89.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE.
La Torre, G., Esposito, A., Sciarra, I., & Chiappetta, M. (2019). Definition, symp toms and risk of techno stress: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(21), Article 4213.
Legner, C., Eymann, T., Hess, T., Matt, C., Böhmann, T., Drews, P., Mädche, A., Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2017). Digitalization: Opportunity and challenge for the Business and Information Systems Engineering community. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 59(4), 301–308.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
Longley, P. A., Goodchild, M. F., Maguire, D. J., & Rhind, D. W. (2015). Geographic Information Science and Systems (4th ed.). Wiley.
Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760.
Meuter, M. L., Bitner, M. J., Ostrom, A. L., & Brown, S. W. (2005). Choosing among alternative service delivery modes: An investigation of customer trial of self service technologies. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 61–83.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Nambisan, S., Lyytinen, K., Majchrzak, A., & Song, M. (2017). Digital innova tion management: Reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 223–238.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analy sis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qual itative Methods, 16, 1–13.
O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–13.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoag wood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and anal ysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544.
Patton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research, 34(5 Pt 2), 1189–1208.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE.
Pfaffinger, K. F., Reif, J. A. M., Huber, A. K., Eger, V. M., Dengler, M. K., Czakert, J. P., Spiess, E., & Berger, R. (2021). Digitalisation anxiety: Development and val idation of a new scale. Discover Mental Health, 1(1), Article 3.
Pope, C., Ziebland, S., & Mays, N. (2000). Analysing qualitative data. BMJ, 320(7227), 114–116.
Rafferty, A. E., & Griffin, M. A. (2006). Perceptions of organisational change: A stress and coping perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(5), 1154–1162.
Ragu Nathan, T. S., Tarafdar, M., Ragu Nathan, B. S., & Tu, Q. (2008). The conse quences of technostress for end users in organisations: Conceptual develop ment and empirical validation. Information Systems Research, 19(4), 417–433.
Raub, A. C. (1981). Correlates of computer anxiety in college students (Doctoral dis sertation, University of Pennsylvania).
Riedl, R., Kindermann, H., Auinger, A., & Javor, A. (2012). Technostress from a neu robiological perspective: System breakdown increases the stress hormone cor tisol in computer users. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 4(2), 61–69.
Robinson, O. C. (2014). Sampling in interview based qualitative research: A theo retical and practical guide. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11(1), 25–41.
Salanova, M., Llorens, S., & Cifre, E. (2013). The dark side of technologies: Tech nostress among users of information and communication technologies. International Journal of Psychology, 48(3), 422–436.
Tarafdar, M., Gupta, A., & Turel, O. (2015a). Special issue on the dark side of infor mation technology use: An introduction and a framework for research. Infor mation Systems Journal, 25(3), 161–170.
Tarafdar, M., Pullins, E. B., & Ragu Nathan, T. S. (2015b). Technostress: Negative effect on performance and possible mitigations. Information Systems Journal, 25(2), 103–132.
Tarafdar, M., Tu, Q., Ragu Nathan, B. S., & Ragu Nathan, T. S. (2007). The impact of technostress on role stress and productivity. Journal of Management Infor mation Systems, 24(1), 301–328.
Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., & Sørensen, C. (2010). Research commentary—Dig ital infrastructures: The missing IS research agenda. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 748–759.
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32 item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357.
van Nes, F., Abma, T., Jonsson, H., & Deeg, D. (2010). Language differences in qualitative research: Is meaning lost in translation? European Journal of Ageing, 7(4), 313–316.
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144.
Woods, M., Paulus, T., Atkins, D. P., & Macklin, R. (2016). Advancing qualita tive research using QDAS? Reviewing potential versus practice in published studies using ATLAS.ti and NVivo, 1994–2013. Social Science Computer Review, 34(5), 597–617.
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in the journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY) 4.0 international license agreement and published open access, making them immediately and freely available to read and download. The CC-BY license agreement allows authors to retain copyright while allowing others to copy, distribute, and make some uses of the work.
Users have the right to copy, distribute and transmit an article, adapt the article and make commercial use of the article. The CC BY license permits commercial re-use of an open access article, as long as the author is properly attributed. This license permits, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided by the original work is properly cited.
Suitable reference form: Title of Article, Author, Journal Title, Volume, Issue.
If and when the manuscript is accepted for publication by the journal, the authors agree to automatically transfer the first right of publication to the journal, and permit the journal to apply a DOI to their articles and to archive them in databases and indexes. Copyrights for articles are retained by the authors.
