Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-collar perspective on automation and ergonomic workplace design

Gruchmann, Tim; Mies, Annika; Neukirchen, Thomas; Gold, Stefan Article — Published Version Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-collar perspective on automation and ergonomic workplace design Journal of Business Economics Provided in Cooperation with: Springer Nature Suggested Citation: Gruchmann, Tim; Mies, Annika; Neukirchen, Thomas; Gold, Stefan (2020) : Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-collar perspective on automation and ergonomic workplace design, Journal of Business Economics, ISSN 1861-8928, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Vol. 91, Iss. 2, pp. 151-178, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-020-00991-1 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/288796 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Journal of Business Economics (2021) 91:151–178 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-020-00991-1 ORIGINAL PAPER Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-collar perspective on automation and ergonomic workplace design Tim Gruchmann1 ·Annika Mies2 ·Thomas Neukirchen3 · Stefan Gold2 Published online: 14 May 2020 © The Author(s) 2020 Abstract In many industrial countries, demographic changes towards an aging society go hand in hand with the need for ergonomic workplaces. Therefore, it is necessary to rethink workplace designs and work processes, particularly in industrial professions, such as logistics. As logistics activities are still characterized by a high amount of manual effort, they represent a suitable field for gaining empirical insights into the implementation of automation and ergonomic practices to inform social sustainable warehousing logistics strategies. By assuming a paradox perspective, this study accordingly examines the research question to which extent tensions arise in the context of sustainable warehousing regarding the implementation of technical automation and improved ergonomic processes. To answer this question, automation and ergonomics practices are studied at two logistics service providers and an industrial manufacturer in Germany. By applying a mixed-methods approach, the study analyzes empirical data derived from semi-structured interviews with logistics and human resource managers at four warehouse sites of these companies. Besides identifying relevant criteria and paradoxical tensions in improving handling processes in the specific cases, technology alternatives were evaluated from blue-collar employees’ perspectives using an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) survey. The present study provides evidence that paradoxical tensions with regard to belonging and performing, as well as between organizational levels and through the change process itself are most important in this context. In this line, the current study contributes to theory and practice by providing insights into paradoxical tensions in warehousing logistics and discussing how automation and ergonomic transformational processes can be successfully managed through addressing interrelated demands of blue-collar workers, managers, and customers. BAnnika Mies [email protected] Extended author information available on the last page of the article 123 152 T. Gruchmann et al. Keywords Warehousing logistics ·Automation ·Ergonomics ·Sustainability tensions ·Human-technology interaction ·Sustainable transformation JEL Classification L23 ·M11 ·M54 ·O33 1 Introduction The working environment will be increasingly affected by changes in demographics in the following years. The proportion of the population of working age will decline, while the average age of the workforce will continue to rise (Schaffer et al. 2012). This demographic development will likely lead to a shortage of skilled workers and young employees across all sectors (Bogataj et al. 2019). The logistics sector has already been affected by a shortage of skilled labor. In addition, employees working in logistics professions have a high risk of suffering from musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), as these occupations are often labor-intensive and have repetitive motions (Grosse et al. 2015). This risk is up to 75% higher than the European Union average over all professions (Schneider and Irastorza 2010). Accordingly, technical automation and improved ergonomic designs are relevant for employee well-being and health and safety, thereby supporting socially sustainable development in the logistics sector. The economic effects of advanced workplace designs must not be neglected either. Cost considerations include not only those costs related to the implementation of such measures but also possible payoffs in the form of labor cost reductions and productivity increases (Hendrick 2003; Vink et al. 2006). In this context, a positive relationship between economic productivity and occupational health and safety through investments in ergonomic design and automation technology has already been shown (Neumann et al. 2006; Das et al. 2008). Thus, it is somewhat surprising that intralogistics activities are still characterized by mainly manual tasks (Otto et al. 2017; Schneider et al. 2019). In a broader context, Carter et al. (2019) label working conditions as promising future research fields in sustainable supply chain management. Indeed, the dependence on other supply chain members as well as fierce competition in the sector affect the implementation of socially sustainable practices, particularly when spatial distance increases (Hoejmose et al. 2013; Gruchmann and Seuring 2018). This scattered picture of potential benefits of workplace improvements for employees and employers on the one side, and the actual delay in its implementation on the other hand, in particular in the logistics sector, calls for additional research shedding light onto these inconsistencies and contradictions. In fact, improved workplace design requires the acceptance among all involved stakeholder groups, particularly among blue-collar workers, in order to yield high levels of health and safety. Particularly safety practices are often managed separately due to contradictory stakeholder demands (Pagell et al. 2014). This might lead to the prioritization of production goals over safety performance as a reaction to an external environment pushing for lower costs and faster production. We respond to this need by scrutinizing the challenges of implementing sustainable warehousing through the angle of a paradox perspective (Hahn et al. 2015,2018). Accordingly, the following research question guided this study: What tensions arise in the context of 123 Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-… 153 sustainable warehousing regarding the implementation of technical automation and improved ergonomic processes? Tensions refer to related but contradictory demands that may exist in the context of present and future objectives or regarding the competing elements of economic, societal, and environmental sustainability (Slawinski and Bansal 2012). Building on the integrative logic of paradox theory, these conflicting demands are regarded as paradoxical when they represent “contradictory yet interrelated elements that exist simultaneously and persist over time” (Smith and Lewis 2011, p 382). So far, the analysis of sustainability-related issues is rather dominated by instrumental foci, such as the win–win or trade-off paradigms (Matthews et al. 2016; Maas et al. 2018), while only a few researchers have empirically studied sustainability tensions in operations and supply chain management (OSCM) from a paradox perspective (Sandberg 2017). Although sustainable logistics strategies often lead to a win–win situation between economic and environmental goals (e.g., through cleaner technologies), or require trade-offs between economic and social performance (e.g., through higher wages), such an instrumental perspective leaves little room for radical shifts in business practices (Hahn et al. 2018) as it restricts strategic options to those that can be immediately connected to a profit logic. In contrast, the integrative paradox approach to tensions embraces the multi-directional relationships within and between the organization and the system as well as the interrelatedness and complexity of sustainability (Slawinski and Bansal 2012). Paradox theory, furthermore, suggests iterative or cyclical actions, such as continuous improvement processes, that may transform a situation in such a way that interrelated demands can be pursued simultaneously without necessarily having to resolve the actual tension (Smith and Lewis 2011). In this way, we generally respond to Van der Byl and Slawinski’s (2015) call for more empirical research addressing sustainability paradoxes. Acknowledging the actions required for meeting contradictory demands between human labor and machine autonomy, the present study also connects to the literature in terms of human–machine or human-technology interaction, which is utilized to discuss further sustainability transformations in warehousing logistics (cf. Szalma 2009; Klumpp and Zijm 2019). Thus, the present study contributes to theory and practice by investigating paradoxical tensions in warehousing logistics and discussing how automation and ergonomic transformational processes can be successfully managed through addressing interrelated demands in this field. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: In Sect. 2, the relevant literature on sustainable warehousing practices, as well as on corporate sustainability tensions and paradox theory, is concisely presented. In Sect. 3, the research design is described. In Sects. 4and 5, the findings of the multiple case study are reported, and compared with those of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) survey. In Sect. 6, the findings are discussed, while in Sect. 7, the paper is concluded, and recommendations for future research directions are provided. 123 154 T. Gruchmann et al. 2 Literature review 2.1 Ergonomics and automation practices in sustainable warehousing The need for an ergonomic workplace design has been recognized in academic research and business practice and has gained growing attention in recent years. Ergonomics, in this context, is understood as science linking human and automated work, the core objective of which is to optimize working conditions, while taking human abilities and performance limitations into account (Vink et al. 2006). Ergonomic workplace design is particularly important for repetitive work, tasks that involve frequent lifting and lowering motions, and jobs involving heavy load handling (Grosse et al. 2015; Otto et al. 2017). The overall aim of ergonomic workplace design is to align the work process with the human physique and psyche (Conti et al. 2006), as well as to optimally design the arrangement of work pieces and tools in production and logistics. Therefore, rather than applying a technology-centered workplace design, applying a humancentered design has the advantage of best utilizing workers’ capabilities. Accordingly, ergonomics-focused workplace designs have greater usability, maintainability, and operational safety for blue-collar workers (Hendrick 2003). Despite the importance of ergonomic warehousing practices, occupational health and safety practices remain one of the least investigated fields in sustainable logistics and supply chain management (Gruchmann et al. 2019b). Compared to sustainable transportation, sustainable warehousing is a relatively small field in sustainable operations management (Mejías et al. 2016), while other areas, such as engineering, quality, and safety management, have addressed related issues more frequently. Moreover, thus far, the focus within sustainable warehousing has mainly been on environmental issues, such as the proper storing of hazardous materials (proper labeling and documentation) or (forklift) training to transport material safely (Ciliberti et al. 2008). From a wider economic and social perspective, the advantages of health and ergonomics projects are personnel benefits (e.g., reduced skill requirements or reduced absenteeism) and material and equipment benefits (e.g., reduced scrap or reduced maintenance), as well as less tangible positive effects (e.g., increased employee commitment or improved corporate image) (Hendrick 2003). In addition, health and ergonomic interventions are supposed to reduce injury risks and the chance of suffering from MSDs (Lavender et al. 2010). In the logistics context, related automation and ergonomics designs are supposed to reduce weights and distances when employees handle heavy products as well as support correct handling movements (Lavender et al. 2010). Table 1gives an overview of the main health and safety routines and related practices as derived from the literature. 2.2 Paradox perspective on corporate sustainability tensions Organizations and their managers often face complex dynamics and competing demands when engaging in sustainable practices (Schad and Bansal 2018). These can range from diverging short-term and long-term goals (Slawinski and Bansal 2012), the need to reconcile varying stakeholder and organizational interests, both on different levels of analysis and within various contexts (Smith and Tracey 2016; Carollo 123 Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-… 155 Table 1 Health and safety routines and related practices Routines Related practices Management commitment Management commitment to automation and ergonomics projects increases the probability of successful implementation as this is often related to the commitment of resources being assigned to these projects (Hendrick 2003; Yazdani et al. 2018) Process orientation Process orientation and the notion of continuous improvement support a clear improvement trajectory with an automation and ergonomics focus (Shevchenko et al. 2018) Accountability Operational workers and managers are held accountable for complying with health and safety rules, as well as measured and rewarded for working safely (Shevchenko et al. 2018; Yazdani et al. 2018) Leadership and expertise Ergonomics interventions require knowledge of related (automation) technologies and their implementation (Hendrick 2003). In addition, (leadership) capabilities and an aligned human resource management strategy (e.g., in the form of training) are very relevant for effective and adequate implementation (Shevchenko et al. 2018) Employee involvement Successful implementation projects also utilize the experience of operational workers in a participatory process where a professional ergonomist serves as a facilitator. Obvious deficiencies that have relatively inexpensive improvements can lead to quick payoffs and more acceptance among team members (“simple solutions first”) (Hendrick 2003; Yazdani et al. 2018) and Guerci 2018), and in general, the recurring choice between profit and social or environmental issues (Epstein et al. 2015). Such tensions are recognized as an inherent part of sustainability and organizational processes (Smith and Lewis 2011; Hahn et al. 2015). Tensions thereby arise from elements or propositions that individually are logical and desirable, but contradictory and incompatible in combination. A tension can hence be defined as “two phenomena in a dynamic relationship that involves both competition and complementarity” (English 2001, p. 59). The paradox perspective on tensions adds an aspect of persistence to this definition and recognizes paradoxical tensions as “two sides of the same coin” (Lewis 2000, p. 761). In OSCM, contradictions are traditionally acknowledged as trade-offs (Sandberg 2017), addressing the existing, inherent conflicts by prioritizing certain sustainability goals. While early research on sustainability in OSCM investigated transportation logistics issues through a win–win and/or trade-off lens between economic and environmental/social sustainability (e.g., Brix-Asala et al. 2016), recently researchers tackled sustainability issues in logistics from a paradox theoretical perspective (Pålsson and Sandberg 2019). While the term trade-off in OSCM research is often treated synonymously with the term tension in organizational research (Sandberg 2017), a trade-off implies a different approach to solving the contradiction, namely by choosing one element over the other (Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015). As part of a paradoxical tension, the diverging poles are interrelated and persistent over time, such that a forced decision between the two poles is only temporary, and the tensions will reappear eventually (Smith and Lewis 2011). Unlike the traditional problem-solving rationale of the contingency approach, which is driven by an “either/or” or “if/then” mentality, 123 156 T. Gruchmann et al. paradox theory applies a “both/and” mentality and focuses on coexistence (Lewis and Smith 2014; Wannags and Gold 2020). Building on extant research, Smith and Lewis (2011) developed a typology of organizational tensions, distinguishing between the categories of learning, belonging, organizing, and performing, as well as their respective combinations (see Table 2). Learning paradoxes relate to the transformation process in terms of the past to the future and reflect diverging temporal perspectives (e.g., short-term vs. long-term perspectives). Belonging entails those tensions that arise between diverging interests and the identities of stakeholders in relation to each other and the organization (e.g., individual vs. organizational interests). Organizing paradoxes stem from diverging internal dynamics, such as competing processes or incentives (e.g., control vs. flexibility). Performing paradoxes emerge based on contrasting performance expectations, for example, those from diverging internal and external goal setting. A further systematic framework for classifying tensions in the context of corporate sustainability was proposed by Hahn et al. (2015), going beyond organizational management and considering the larger systemic context. Starting with tensions between social, financial, and ecological issues, which intersect with all other dimensions, the authors identified that tensions can arise between different levels of analysis (i.e., individual level, firm level, systemic level), within temporal or spatial contexts or as a part of the change process related to the implementation of sustainable practices. Table 2 relates this framework to the theoretical underpinnings by Smith and Lewis (2011), which will be the focus of the later analysis. To identify, analyze, and understand the inherent sustainability tensions in the context of warehousing, the present study builds upon these two seminal frameworks on tensions from organizational and sustainability research. 3 Research design Based on the aim of the study of deepening the understanding of sustainability tensions in warehousing logistics, a mixed-methods approach was used. Our research, accordingly, triangulates the qualitative findings of a multiple case study by means of an AHP survey. This cross-validation was pursued between intra-organizational levels and functions to enhance the validity of the observed tensions (Voss et al. 2002). This implied that potential paradoxical tensions were assessed from several perspectives, namely, the logistics and human resource managers’ perspectives and the blue-collar employees’ perspectives, to analyze interrelated demands regarding ergonomics and automation projects. Finally, the theoretical categories of sustainable warehousinglogistics tensions were aggregated following the theory building approach as proposed by Gioia et al. (2013). 3.1 Multiple case study through semi-structured interviews Case studies are particularly well suited for complex structures as such studies allow intense interaction with the informant and draw on multiple sources of information, 123 Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-… 157 Table 2 Categorization of organizational sustainability tensions Organizational tensions based on the framework by Smith and Lewis (2011) Organizational tensions related to the framework by Hahn et al. (2015) Learning Tensions between (building upon or destroying) existing and novel activities during processes of renewal, change, and innovation Change, isomorphism vs. structural change Learning/organizing Tensions between clear routines, which cause stability and efficiency, and the desire to enable dynamic, flexible, agile outcomes Change Learning/performing Tension between development of future capabilities while ensuring success in the present Change within a temporal context Belonging Tensions around individual and collective identities and between different values and roles Level, individual vs. organizational Belonging/learning Tension between the need for adaption and the individual desire to retain Change within a level context Belonging/organizing Tensions between the individual and the collective; individuality vs. collective action Level, individual vs. organizational or systemic Organizing Tensions regarding collaboration and competition, empowerment and direction, flexibility and control Level, organizational vs. supply chain Organizing/performing Tensions between means and ends; employee vs. customer demands, high commitment vs. high performance Level, organizational vs. stakeholder Performing Tensions around the plurality of competing organizational performance goals in the face of divergent stakeholder demands Level, organizational vs. stakeholder Performing/belonging Tension between identification and goals; actors negotiate their individual identities with social and occupational demands Level, individual vs. organizational 123 158 T. Gruchmann et al. Table 3 Cases Case company Description Respondents (1) Logistics service provider A Logistics service provider A operates a warehouse, where order picking and coand repacking activities for the consumer goods industry are carried out manually to a large extent Warehouse Manager [1], Head of Sales and Customer Services [2], Human Resource Manager [3] (2) Logistics service provider B At logistics service provider B’s site, coand repacking processes as well as display construction as a value-added service (VAS) take place for the consumer goods industry Process and Project Manager [4], Area Manager VAS [5], Human Resource Manager [6] (3) Manufacturer’s warehouse site C Warehouse sites C and D belong to a medium-sized manufacturing company with extensive experience in outbound production logistics. The company manufactures products for industrial applications and building fasteners (e.g., screws and dowels). In Europe, numerous distribution centers ensure the fast availability of the products Warehouse Manager site C [7], Shift Supervisor [8], Human Resource Manager [9] (4) Manufacturer’s warehouse site D Warehouse Manager site D [10], Shift Supervisor [11], Human Resource Manager [12] leading to rich and robust data (Eisenhardt and Graebner 2007;Yin2009). Case study research has developed into an established research design for operations management and has often been implemented through a combined withinand cross-case analysis (Stuart et al. 2002). Eisenhardt (1989) advocates the use of case studies to build and refine theory in so far under-conceptualized areas, which is the case for sustainable warehousing. In order to pursue our research objective of exploring paradoxical tensions in warehousing logistics, cases were selected based on their ability to generate new insights that would help in the development of related theory (Eisenhardt 1989). In line with a theoretical sampling procedure, polar types of automation levels were chosen: two logistics service provider warehouses, A and B, with rather low automation levels and two industrial manufacturer warehouse sites, C and D, with rather high automation levels. Thus, four warehouse locations were sampled to compare within and across industries (consumer goods industry and construction/automotive industry), which is in line with Eisenhardt’s (1989) guidelines on a sufficient case study sample size. Table 3gives an overview of the cases and interview respondents. Data collection In sum, 12 qualitative interviews were conducted with key respondents in automation and ergonomics, based on an interview topic guide (see the Appendix). The interview guide was sent to the interviewees in advance so that they 123 Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-… 165 Table 7 Cross-case analysis of the observed tensions Abductive code from the data Coupling with dimensions of paradox theory (Smith and Lewis 2011) Coupling with framework by Hahn et al. (2015) Logistics service provider A Logistics service provider B Manufacturer sites C and D Observed paradoxical tensions in sustainable warehousing Strain perception (health) Belonging paradox Individual vs. organizational levels X X Diverging strain perception vs. ergonomic workplace design Acceptance (employee, internal) Belonging/learning paradox Transformation process X X X Adoption of new vs. retention of existing workplace design Efficiency (productivity) Belonging/performing paradox Individual vs. organizational levels X X X Acceptance vs. efficiency of ergonomic workplace design Process (technology) Performing/learning paradox Transformation process X Process vs. automated workplace design Versatility (customer, external) Performing/organizing paradox Organizational vs. supply chain levels X X Versatility vs. automated workplace design 123 166 T. Gruchmann et al. Strain perception: Logistics activities are perceived as physically strenuous. Efficiency: The process can be carried out in a timeefficient manner. Versatility: Processes are flexible to meet customer requirements. Process: The technology used is adequate for the process requirements. Acceptance: The process is accepted by blue-collar workers. 1st order constructs Belonging paradoxes: contradictory evaluations of the perceived strain as well as contradictory performance goals between individual and organizational levels lead to a low acceptance during change processes and, accordingly, blue-collar worker’s retention of existing workplace designs. Performing paradoxes: competing performance goals between company customer/supply chain levels as well as insufficient human-machine/ humantechnology interaction hinder technical automation and improved ergonomic designs 2nd order constructs Diverging strain perception vs. ergonomic workplace design (Belonging paradox) Acceptance vs. efficiency of ergonomic workplace design (Belonging/performing paradox) Versatility vs. automated workplace design (Performing/organizing paradox) Process vs. automated workplace design (Performing/learning paradox) Adoption vs. retention of existing workplace design (Belonging/ learning paradox) Aggregate theoretical dimensions Employee-centered organization Employee-centered process technology and product design Fig. 2 Exploring tensions in sustainable warehousing sions identified in the cases, while the single categories are described in detail in the following sections. Figure 2gives a graphical representation of the Gioia approach. To address the observed tension, organizations, process technologies, product designs have to be employee-centered. 5.1 Tensions between individual and organizational levels (diverging strain perception vs. automation and ergonomic workplace design) Regarding the strain perceived while carrying out manual operations, different, contradictory perspectives were observed. From an individual logistics manager’s perspective, all manual activities were evaluated as being particularly physically strenuous. Based on this manager’s perspective, the division of labor is based on an assessment of the required physical effort, such that physically more strenuous tasks tend to be performed by men, and tasks that require particular dexterity tend to be performed by women. In contrast, from the blue-collar employees’ perspective, these activities were seldomly perceived as very strenuous. At logistics service provider B, for instance, employees have reported shoulder and arm pain in individual cases if they construct displays for a long period of time, although the majority of the blue-collar workers did not perceive this activity as very strenuous. Taking into account the results of the AHP, the blue-collar workers most valued alternatives that promote an ergonomic workplace, such as advanced motion sequences. Accordingly, contradictory evaluations of perceived strain exist between the supervisor level and the level of those being supervised, although certain health and safety routines were in place. This belonging paradox represents the tension between the embeddedness of individual and collective identities (Smith and Lewis 2011) in the health and safety context, in which the individuals perceived the manual operations as more taxing than the collective. Therefore, the implications for underlying processes and competencies remain largely underspecified, leading to tensions between individual actions and other organizational levels (Hahn et al. 2015). A respondent accordingly argued: “Stress and strain is different for everyone” [12]. Another human resource manager stated: “There is a loss of information and different interpretations” [9]. 123 Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-… 167 5.2 Tensions between adoption of new and retention of existing workplace designs (particularly acceptance vs. efficiency of ergonomic workplace design) Within the observed cases, all logistics managers reported a lack of acceptance of new assistive technologies in the long run. Despite the active involvement of the blue-collar workers within the implementation process (for example, in cases A and D), a positive attitude towards the assistive technologies by blue-collar workers was recorded only in the first few weeks after the solutions were implemented. In this line, a warehouse manager said: “In the beginning, [assistive technologies] were positively evaluated and accepted, but eventually, they were not used anymore” [1]. This tension can also be confirmed by the AHP results, in which the blue-collar respondents ranked assistance technologies the lowest. As an example, the use of pallet trucks and scissor lifts to adjust heights was negatively perceived by the blue-collar workers due to handling reasons, even though logistics service provider A actively involved blue-collar workers during the implementation process and the AHP results indicated that blue-collar workers perceived such equipment generally positively. This example represents a belonging/learning tension between the recognized needs for height adjustment and the individual desire to retain his or her habitual manual handling routines (FallonByrne and Harney 2017). Learning paradoxes are generally evident in such transition processes, particularly when small, incremental changes fall short of addressing the required changes (Hahn et al. 2018). Due to these process discontinuities, the bluecollar employees’ attitudes towards introducing additional means of automation, such as autonomous transportation and picking, are also low. Another interviewee said, with respect to this, that the “acceptance among employees of innovations is low. You cannot change everything at once” [3]. Some employees refused to use the technical equipment due to handling reasons and the necessary longer processing time and demanded a return to manual processes. For example, at warehouse site D, attempts have been made to simplify the order picking of cardboard boxes by using new conveyor technology, in which the boxes only have to be pulled down from the conveyor technology and packed onto a pallet. The pallet is placed on a pallet truck to adjust the height. However, upon testing the pallet truck, the manufacturer initially found that employees considered this handling to be too time-consuming as the pallet had to be positioned precisely. This individual rejection, despite the blue-collar workers’ actual positive attitudes towards height adjustment, mainly relates to efficiency concerns, indicating a performing/belonging tension originating from unchanged performance targets during change processes. Accordingly, the manufacturer can address this tension by clarifying its stance on the workers’ occupational demands, which eventually leads to the acceptance of (slower) height adjustment. Furthermore, the example shows the involvement of a certain temporal context related to the change process (Hahn et al. 2015). A respondent confirmed: “You have to introduce changes slowly not to overburden the employees” [1]. A similar explanation for these tensions was given by a shift supervisor: “Because everything is designed for profit, productivity, and quality, this issue is a bit neglected, although we are still very good. And I would simply wish for or I would hope that my efforts can counteract this a little bit and that I can also focus a little more on people” [11]. 123 168 T. Gruchmann et al. 5.3 Tensions in technological change processes (process vs. automated workplace design) In addition, process-related tensions could be observed in the manufacturer’s case, stemming from the use of outdated technologies, as well as capacity bottlenecks. Accordingly, the manufacturer (cases C and D) still sees potential for improvement in the manual handling of materials and, for example, in the consignment picking of cardboard boxes onto pallets. So far, the blue-collar workers continue performing manual tasks, such as assembling products into cardboard boxes, labeling and scanning by hand, and packing boxes onto pallets, because the workers perform these processes more quickly than machines. Furthermore, the underlying time pressure is amplified by process-related challenges due to capacity bottlenecks and a limited number of channels in the flow rack at the manufacturer’s warehouse site C, so that the entire system comes to a standstill when overfilled. In addition, process control in some areas takes place visually, that is, via the manual control of an article with a list in paper form or on a monitor. A shift supervisor stated: “We’re still working, very much focused on sight, so they control the items visually using a list or monitor” [8]. Both examples illustrate that efficiency concerns and tensions arising from outdated technologies and capacity bottlenecks reinforce each other and conflict with advanced ergonomic processes and further automation. They hence constitute a learning tension, based on the underlying change process of moving from old to new processes, in combination with performing tensions, derived from performance targets that conflict with demands for enhanced automated workplaces. These tensions can also be confirmed by the AHP results, in which the blue-collar respondents ranked assistance technologies the lowest. Another logistics manager said that “cranes are still rejected. In addition, they do not use the shipping conveyors. It’s too slow for them. It’s too much technology” [10]. 5.4 Tensions between organizational and customer/supply chain levels (versatility vs. automated workplace design) In addition to the tensions between the individual and organizational levels, tensions between the organizational and supply chain levels were reported that hinder a reduction in the product variety and, therefore, the implementation of fully automated solutions (particularly in cases A and B of the logistics service provider). Logistics service provider A, for instance, has fully automated technical solutions that are integrated into the overall process flows at the site and, thus, into their customers’ supply chains. However, such systems are usually designed for a specific application and, therefore, cannot be comprehensively replicated for a large variety of products. Logistics service provider A stopped pursuing its goal of full automation in coand repacking operations. A respondent accordingly stated how “plans [for fully automated solutions] are always rejected because of [the] large variety of article variants that are assembled in various ways and with different packaging schemes” [2]. Here, the service logistic providers are trapped between the tension of organizing and performing, represented by their customers’ desire for individual packaging to remain competitive and flexible and (performing), also, by the need to create better working 123 Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-… 169 conditions with less manual work through automation processes (organizing). Thus, these organizing/performing paradoxes can arise if the company stresses competitive and financial performance purposes. Additional external challenges come from seasonal demand peaks, “with a higher workload and increasing stress for the employees” [3]. Acknowledging the contradictory demands between the customer’s wish for process versatility and the possibilities of decreasing manual effort with process standardization, ergonomic alternatives allowing for flexibility, such as exoskeletons, were ranked highly by employees in the AHP. With such solutions, logistics organizations can meet competing demands simultaneously by separating them (Smith and Lewis 2011). In this line, a respondent said: “Warehouse locations are quickly built up and then I say, we have to start, and you have to be very flexible. As a logistics company in the market, that’s not easy. It’s also a stressful job. This must not be forgotten” [6]. 6 Discussion New (digital) technologies provide opportunities for growth and innovation for logistics companies when implemented successfully (Cardona et al. 2013). Accordingly, the main contribution of the present paper is the operationalization of previous theoretical research on paradoxical tensions and its evaluation against empirical data in the warehousing logistics context. This is facilitated by an empirical analysis of four warehousing locations, particularly by elaborating on the question of which tensions exist in the observed cases. Our study revealed that tensions represent a major hurdle for technological change processes, even if ergonomic improvements provide clear advantages for blue-collar workers. On an individual level, tensions and paradoxes are likely to be created through increased cognitive requirements for blue-collar activities that innovate in warehousing logistics. The risk of such an “artificial divide,” which has already been postulated for transportation logistics activities, can also be seen for warehousing logistics (Klumpp and Zijm 2019). In particular, a higher level of machine autonomy will transform related jobs from primarily executive roles to supervisory roles instead (cf. Klumpp and Zijm 2019). Therefore, at the individual level, tensions have to be addressed with a human-centered interaction perspective (Szalma 2009) calling for employee-centered organizations, process technologies, and product designs. The observed tensions include the core underlying different organizational levels and change processes and require the reconfiguration of existing resources, enabling the organization to “reflexively revisit” the processes in a changing environment (Felin and Foss 2009, p. 161). Tensions between human and technological agency, for instance, can be addressed with separation and differentiation strategies, at least regarding disruptive technology transformations, such as artificial intelligence (Klumpp and Zijm 2019). Although the results of the AHP indicate rather strong reluctance regarding higher levels of machine autonomy and automation, such transformations might at least address tensions stemming from the use of outdated technologies, as well as capacity bottlenecks (see the manufacturer’s cases). Considering the empirical findings on an organizational and supply chain level, the observed tensions can be explained through the higher spatial distance between 123 170 T. Gruchmann et al. warehousing logistics and the customer compared to other logistics functions, such as transportation (cf. Hoejmose et al. 2013). Taking into account the general business context of logistics and its dependence on other supply chain members, fierce competition in the logistics sector (cf. Gruchmann and Seuring 2018) can be seen as another driver of tensions. Particularly, customer pressures with regard to price and flexibility led to labor outsourcing practices at least at one of the case companies. Such labor outsourcing enables companies to keep operations inside their warehouse facilities and, at the same time, flexibly react to changing customer requirements and order volumes (Jaffee and Bensman 2016). By carving out paradoxical tensions on an individual, organizational, and supply chain level, the present study deepens our understanding of why automation and ergonomic workplace design is not implemented to its potential, even though there is evidence that it would help improving health and safety as well as foster operational performance (Neumann et al. 2006; Das et al. 2008). In this way, we respond to calls for more research on working conditions in supply chains (cf. Carter et al. 2019), and contribute to a more complete picture why intralogistics activities are still characterized by mainly manual tasks (cf. Otto et al. 2017). Furthermore, the concept of tensions may provide a fertile angle for shedding light on other management phenomena featuring contradictory or inconclusive evidence; rather than integrating or synthesizing data and knowledge in the sense of a meta-analysis (e.g., Orlitzky et al. 2003), it provides an intellectual pattern for (re-)assessing inconsistent empirical observations along separate lines, thus facilitating sense-making without forcing uniformity of conclusions. The present study also responds to Van der Byl and Slawinski’s (2015) call for more empirical research addressing sustainability paradoxes by assuming a paradox theory perspective towards tensions in logistics and, specifically, sustainable warehousing. By doing so, the paradox theoretical perspective has highlighted barriers in automation and ergonomic transformational processes, which have previously been addressed solely with a win–win or trade-off lens (cf. Van der Byl and Slawinski 2015). As a result, paradoxical tensions with regard to belonging and performing were examined as the most important, while learning and organizing paradoxes played a minor role in the case companies. Thus, constraints relating to organizational cultures and policies in warehousing create tensions between individual actions and organizational strategies (cf. Hahn et al. 2015). This is also in line with previous research, which particularly sees performing paradoxes as being at the very center of corporate sustainability transitions (Hahn et al. 2018). The explored belonging and performing paradoxes further reflect the importance of the social dimension in sustainable warehousing, which has been mostly neglected in previous research (Gruchmann et al. 2019b). Nonetheless, it can be argued that the varying strain perception and the overall low acceptance of automation and ergonomic change processes may be related to certain learning deficits and tensions in terms of how and why new technologies can be incorporated into daily work routines. Although these know-how related tensions were not as present as others in the cases, it is necessary to build managerial capabilities to encourage behavioral change processes (Fallon-Byrne and Harney 2017). To raise awareness among bluecollar workers regarding the physiological demands of their jobs, communication is seen as a means to change habitual routines. A respondent, nonetheless, said: “The 123 Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-… 171 communication on the floor or in the warehouse, that’s not easy. There are language hurdles, and sometimes we have a high proportion of employees who are not so fluent in German. And, they often do not have a computer. So, we cannot just write an e-mail” [4]. To overcome “the paralysis that decision-makers often experience when confronted with tensions” (Hahn et al. 2018, p. 237), the analysis of the empirical data further allows for informing strategies to manage the observed tensions. Managing tensions derived from the individual employee level and the transformational processes requires advanced strategies to combine them into a more manageable situation (Hahn et al. 2015). Thus, logistics managers may not only try to eliminate or resolve tensions but also try to create a more conducive climate for ergonomic change. This allows for integrative paradox strategies to solve blue-collar workers’ tensions. Typical paradoxes discussed in this vein are related to collaboration vs. competition, empowerment vs. direction, and control vs. flexibility (Smith and Lewis 2011; Hahn et al. 2018). These tensions arise from the embeddedness of individual and corporate decisions in the wider organizational context. Accordingly, related strategies for managing these tensions must address the meaning and significance that employees attribute to health and safety practices (Fallon-Byrne and Harney 2017). In this line, Poole and van de Ven (1989) suggest three main strategies for managing paradoxes: (1) The opposition or acceptance strategy focuses on the recognition and persistence of the paradox. This entails keeping the tension open, addressing both poles without emphasizing one over the other or merging them. (2) Spatial or temporal separation divides the paradox through physical segregation or allocation to different levels of analysis or by focusing on the conflicting goals in separated periods. (3) Synthesis strategy introduces an additional, merging element that helps to connect the diverging goals. All the three main strategies are briefly discussed in the following paragraphs, taking into account findings from other disciplines, such as human resource management (HRM), to influence employee climate perceptions by symbolically framing and communicating values and behaviors. In the context of sustainable warehousing, acceptance strategies must address contextual and boundary conditions (internal and external) in automation and ergonomics projects (Fallon-Byrne and Harney 2017). Acceptance strategies for managing tensions would have to address the impact of this on organizational-level outcomes (see the logistics service provider B and manufacturer cases C and D). The cases provided evidence that partial automation, in contrast to full automation, should be favored for improving working conditions in warehouse professions, favoring customer demands over automation processes, which also seems to be in favor of the employee’s desire to retain the old habits. The tension related to the organizational desire for innovation and securing future capabilities, thereby, remains open and might 1 day resurface. In addition, the cases advise advanced communication to overcome language and cultural barriers. Separation strategies for managing tensions draw upon innovation and knowledge management (Bellingkrodt and Wallenburg 2013) while potentially prioritizing manual procedures over automated solutions. Accordingly, logistics managers have to enable organizational learning (Felin and Foss 2009) and organizational interventions in the form of communication and consultation (Fallon-Byrne and Harney 2017), 123 172 T. Gruchmann et al. as well as employee empowerment (Subramony 2009). Thus far, “the employees see within change a negative consequence for themselves. They fear losing their jobs” [6]. To manage these performing paradoxes in particular, related strategies for corporate change must shape expectations within the organization regarding lowering efficiency expectations when implementing new technologies (Hahn et al. 2015), which also can be seen in the observed cases. In this line, the cases point to a (re-)evaluation of assistive technologies from a cognitive ergonomics perspective, as they were ranked the lowest in the AHP. Accordingly, change processes must respect not only physical efficiency but also cognitive personal demands. Considering a synthesis strategy, several authors have also emphasized the role of leadership skills focused on higher order thinking and expertise, abstraction, and cognitive variety (Helfat and Winter 2011). In this approach, logistics and human resource managers have to address the meaning and significance of employees’ contributions to automation and ergonomics innovations. Creating a positive climate in this setting can influence employee perceptions, behaviors, and values to integrate existing disparities, such as gender disparities (Mossholder et al. 2011). Regarding such an implementation strategy, transformation processes must bridge the intended strategy and the enacted strategy through a better understanding of the tensions when striving for corporate sustainability (Fallon-Byrne and Harney 2017), emphasizing the role of routines, path dependencies, and organizational learning. In particular, and in light of the increasing difficulty in recruiting personnel in logistics professions, such strategies might help to innovate current workplaces for them to remain/become attractive employers and combat the development that “only a few employees are available in the job market” [3]. 7 Conclusion and outlook This study has explored sustainability tensions in warehousing logistics based on paradox theory. It provides evidence that partial automation and ergonomic alternatives allowing high process flexibility, such as exoskeletons, are highly relevant for improving working conditions in logistics professions and, simultaneously, have a high acceptance rate among blue-collar workers. However, the implementation of such automation and ergonomic practices must be accompanied by additional transformational actions, particularly to address (social) sustainability tensions internally and externally. Accordingly, the present study contributes to theory and practice by providing an answer to the question of to what extent tensions arise from implementing technical automation and improved ergonomic designs in warehousing logistics. The current research design features some limitations. While aiming to complete the picture of how logistics service providers can implement sustainable intralogistics practices, it was not possible during the interviews and the AHP survey to extensively consider all warehouse activities. Furthermore, the interviews might have been biased by the interviewees’ personal expectations and desires. Another limitation linked to our qualitative research approach is its sample size, which does not allow for any statistical generalization of the findings but only for a certain degree of theoretical abstraction and generalization. Another limitation linked to the AHP approach is that the respon123 Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-… 173 dents work in a sufficiently narrow field which excludes further stakeholder groups. These limitations point to future research directions. First, future research might test the results using survey research with a larger sample size and additional stakeholders. Second, additional in-depth comparisons between different logistics activities, such as transportation and packaging logistics, also in different institutional settings, would enhance the theoretical generalizability of the findings. Third, from a broader theoretical perspective, the fusion of the dynamic capabilities’ theoretical lens (cf. Teece et al. 1997; Teece 2007) and the paradox theoretical lens appears to be promising, considering our empirical findings that highlight the role of dynamic capabilities on both individual (manager, blue-collar worker) and organizational levels. Exceeding the scope of the present study, little is known about how dynamic capabilities are created and linked to managerial strategies of dealing with sustainability-related tensions in warehousing logistics (cf. Fallon-Byrne and Harney 2017). In this line, the alignment of sensing, seizing, and transformation capabilities with tension management strategies could be a fruitful avenue for future research. Acknowledgements The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Julian Schneider from UCAM Universidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia, Spain, for supporting the data collection as well as Kristina Nestler from FOM University of Applied Sciences, Essen, for her support in conducting and analyzing the interviews. Furthermore, we would like to thank Thomas Hanke and Matthias Klumpp from FOM University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Logistics and Service Management, Essen, for their guidance as project managers of the ADINA project and for supporting the research activities of this study in general. Open Access funding provided by Projekt DEAL. Funding A part of the presented results comes from the research project “ADINA” (Project number EFRE0800863). The "ADINA" project is supported by grants from the State of North Rhine-Westphalia using funds from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) 2014-2020 "Investments in Growth and Employment". Particularly, the data collection and analysis of this study done by the first and third author was facilitated through this funding. The first and the third author were research assistants at the FOM University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Logistics and Service Management, Essen, and thereby employed through the “ADINA” project. The second and fourth author were not part of this funding and mainly contributed to the theoretical framing of the study. Compliance with ethical standards Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 123 174 T. Gruchmann et al. Appendix Interview topic guide 1. Introduction to the study •Introduction to the study, the study’s aims, and the researchers •Assurance of confidentiality and anonymity 2. About the interviewee •What is your function within the company, and which tasks are associated with this function? •Where is this function located in the company? •Can you tell me something about your career (e.g., seniority, industry affiliation)? 3. Workplace design •Where are the warehouse activities located in the overall process? •What are the individual activities and the sequence of activities (including durations)? •Which tools and equipment are in place (technical, ergonomic, logistical)? •What have your colleagues complained about in the past? •How do you assess the process (the quality of the process result)? •Which working time models or rotation models are used? •How do you train new workers? Is any advice on ergonomics or health protection provided? 4. Process design •What is the storing and picking strategy? •Which packaging is used, and why? •Are there any automated process steps? •Are ergonomic devices in use? •What attempts to improve the workplace have been made in the past? •Which were successful? Which were not? Please state reasons for the failures. Socio-demographic AHP 123