BMIB5004 Critical Management and Organisation Studies assignment help

Faculty of Business and Law

Assignment Brief

Assignment 1: Poster and Presentation

The focus of this assignment is to select and visually describe and map out a 

critical issue / real-life problem related to management and organisation studies.

This is agroupeffort. Groups will have to sign agroup Contract.For the assignments, the group will have to find aexamples of critical issues; this means, a specific situation, event, circumstance, phenomenon that is related to management and organisation studies and is intriguing to all group members. You can use the examples to guide you. You can adapt if needed, but ideally, the group should find similar or alternative cases. Examples can be international, and should the group choose that option, you can also translate news articles where appropriate and necessary.

The group should use theories presented during lectures and seminars. Please note that you must not reference the lecture itself: find the original source (book, news article, academic journal article, any other media) and reference that. You should also use the module’s resource listto find examples of theories.You should also explore prestigious journals such as Organization Studies, Journal of Management Studies, Ephemera, Organization Science and Human Relations.

You must document and map what you find. The poster will consist of this mapping / visual component and (short) text-based description.

Assignment Goals

To produce a poster that is

1. empirically grounded;

2. informed by theory;

3. analytically rigorous;

4. engaged with critical analysis;

5. visually creative.

What you need to submit:

• You will need to show and present one printed and one digital version of aposter; the latter must be submitted to Turnitin, via the dedicated link on the module’s shell available in Learning Zone.

• Only ONE digital copy per group must be submitted via Turnitin.

• Word Count: 2250 (+/-10%)

Word count excludes cover page, table of contents, list of tables and/or figures, references.

• Printed Version: the printed version of the poster can make use of any analogue or digital tool to design and incorporate student-created or extant images, graphics, or any other visual element. You are free to imagine and use any design, fonts, format that you think are suitable to communicate your ideas. 

The group will have to print the poster (minimum size A3, ideally A2 – this can also be done by combining two A3 pages, or four A4 pages). The printed version will be used in the presentations during Week 4, Seminar 2. Despite format restrictions, creativity is key! You imagine any style, explore any visual language and ideas. The only request is that the text is legible and accessible.

A reference list in Harvard style must be included in this version.

• Presentation: Presentation will take place on Week 4, Seminar2. The presentation should last between 8 and 10 minutes. Shorter or longer presentations will incur a penalty. The group will have to be ready to answer questions should the seminar leader feel that something needs clarification.
• Digital Version: the online submission should include a digital copy of the hard copy, without alterations.Submission deadline (Turnitin) by Friday March 6th, 12pm (noon).

Digital version must include the following three elements:

1.  cover page, with: title; module code and year; seminar group number; seminar leader’s name; group members’ student ID.

2. Scanned or digital version of the poster (excellent resolution, at scale, and full page).

3. TRANSCRIPT ofpresentation and poster text, using Arial  or Times New Roman font (size 12), 1.5 line spacing; 3cm margins an all sides, with numbered pages and subheadings (bold font, size 14), where appropriate.

This section must include-in-text citations, and a list of references; these must also includehyperlinksto all source materials presented in the research. Citations and references must be in DMU Harvard Cite Them Right format.Watch this videofor more on how to use MSWord for referencing.Should you use archival material, visuals, images, graphics, etc, a list of figures must also beincluded.

How to Submit your Assessment

The DIGITAL POSTERmust be submitted by 12:00 noon (GMT/BST) on Friday 06/03/26. 

You can access the submission link through the module’s Learning Zone.

PRINTED POSTER must be brought to the presentation, happening on SEMINAR 2 on WEEK 4to install, share and present to seminar leader and peers. 

• Your coursework will be given a zero mark if you do not submit a copy through Turnitin.

  Please follow the guidelines presented above for online submission, and take care to ensure that you have fully submitted your work. 

• Please ensure that you have submitted your work using the correct file format, unreadable files will receive a mark of zero. The Faculty accepts Microsoft Office and PDF documents, unless otherwise advised by the module leader.
• All work submitted after the submission deadline without a valid and approved reason will be subject to the University regulations on late submissions.
  • If an assessment is submitted up to 24 hours late, the mark for the work will be capped at the pass mark of 40 per cent for undergraduate modules or 50 per cent for postgraduate modules
  • If an assessment is submitted beyond 24 hours the work will receive a mark of zero percent.
• The above applies to a student’s first attempt at the assessment. If work submitted as a reassessment of a previously failed assessment task is submitted later than the deadline the work will immediately be given a mark of zero per cent
  • If an assessment which is marked as pass/fail rather than given a percentage mark is submitted later than the deadline, the work will immediately be marked as a fail
• The University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events happen which mean that you can’t submit your coursework by the deadline – these events should be beyond your control and not easy to predict.  If this happens, you can apply for an extension to your deadline for up to two weeks, or if you need longer, you can apply for a deferral, which takes you to the next assessment period (for example, to the re-sit period following the main Assessment Boards). You must apply before the deadline. You will find information about applying for extensions and deferrals here.
• Students MUST keep a copy and/or an electronic assignment file.
• Checks will be made on your work using anti-plagiarism software and approved plagiarism checking websites

Criteria for Assessment - How you will be marked

• CONTENT ORGANISATION / CREATIVITY:: Clarity and structure in organising and presenting the selected critical issues  of choice. Evidence of curiosity and creative input applied in the visual character of the poster.
• COLLABORATIVE WORK: we will look for evidence of collaborative and collegial efforts made during seminars and beyond in the production of research and output.
• CRITICALITY: Evidence of reflexivity and critical insight must be present in the work.
• CLASS PRESENTATION: Coherent, accessible formulation of research and output (poster)

 For more punctual information, check theRubric Assessment 1 –Poster and Presentation

Further information on the university mark descriptors can be found here. 

The assignment is designed to assess the following learning outcomes

LO1: critically assess and advise on the social and environmental responsibilities of business; 

LO2: critically assess business models and associated theories and practices; 

LO3: systematically evaluate fundamental aspects of management and organization studies.

Academic Integrity and Use of Generative AI

In submitting a piece of work for assessment it is essential that you understand the University's requirements for maintaining academic integrity and ensure that the work does not contravene University regulations. 

Some examples of behaviour that would not be considered acceptable include plagiarism, re-use of previously assessed work, collusion with others and purchasing your assignment from a third party. Engagement in any of these is an academic offence and may lead to an internal investigation with negative consequences that may affect your grades and progression in the course.

For more information on academic offences, bad academic practices, and academic penalties, please read chapter four of our academic regulations.

Regarding the use of AI for this Assessment

1. Generative AI tools cannot be used for the production of visuals, graphics and design in this assessment.
2. Generative AI tools may be used selectivelyfor research, translation, and editing purposes only.

The group can opt NOT to engage with AI at all (see box below). However, anyuse generative AI must be appropriately acknowledged. Groups should add a statement (see below) explaining which applications were used, how they were used and how this output was used to complete the assignment. Direct use of outputs should be cited.

The following statement must be edited as needed and included at the end of the poster’s digital edition. Failure to include this will result in a deduction of 10% of the final mark.

You can find the library guide on generative AI use here 

Faculty of Business and Law Grade Descriptors

Return of Marked Work

Academic Integrity

Academic Support and Your Well-being

Referencing is the process of acknowledging other people’s work when you have used it in your assignment or research. It allows the reader to locate your source material as quickly and easily as possible so that they can read these sources themselves and verify the validity of your arguments. Referencing provides the link between what you write and the evidence on which it is based.

You identify the sources that you have used by citing them in the text of your assignment (called citations or in-text citations) and referencing them at the end of your assignment (called the reference list or end-text citations). The reference list only includes the sources cited in your text.The main referencing guide can be found hereand includes information on the basics of referencing and achieving good academic practice. It also has tabs for the specific referencing styles depending on whether you require Harvard style used in business or OSCOLA style used by the Law school.

https://library.dmu.ac.uk/refguide/harvard

The University has a wealth of support services available to students; further information can be obtained from Student Gateway, the Student Advice Centre, Library and Learning Servicesand, most importantly, your Personal Tutor. If you are struggling with your assessments and/or deadlines please do seek help as soon as possible so that appropriate support and guidance can be identified and put in place for you. More information can be found on the Healthy DMU pages.

Addenda

PLEASE READ THESE SECTIONS CAREFULLY

1. Group Work

Introduction to Group Work

For this module, you will have to form group of between 5 to 7 peers.

Groups will be formed during Week 1, seminars 1 and 2.

Groups will work together throughout Block 3, in seminars and beyond.

Groups should be consolidated by the end of Week 2 at the latest.

Should any students arrive late to the module, those late arrivals will be managed by the seminar leader, incorporating new team members to existing teams, where appropriate.

The group will sign a Group Contract

Parts of the contract will be co-designed by the group. Signing will be witnessed by your instructor.

Once signed, groups will keep the hard copy, and sharing a digital copy with the module instructor.

Process: what groups will do

The poster and publication are interconnected assignments.

Each group must identify a research focus—an event, situation, phenomenon, or issue relevant to management and organisation studies. Examples of critical themes are provided here.

Assignment 1: Poster (Weeks 1–4)
The group will explore and document the chosen object of study through a poster that maps, visualises and presents initial findings.

Assignment 2: Publication (Weeks 5–7)
The poster’s documentation will form the basis of a report, to be presented in a publication. For this phase, the group will deepen the analysis by engaging with theory to reveal new insights, question assumptions, and link the case to broader concepts, structures, and processes.

Important note: the poster and publication represent moments in an ongoing process of inquiry rather than discrete stages in the production of one final argument. As such, we consider these to be works-in-progress.

To elevate the probability of a desired, positive outcome, we strongly encourage all group members to come to seminars prepared and ready to work collaboratively.

Groups must work with a DIY ethos: no AI-generated visuals, images, or design may be used. Extant, archival visual material can be used, but not manipulated. Digital tools like Affinity, Inkscape, Gimp can be used for design purpose, as long as there is no use of AI. Powerpoint can also be used to produce posters and / or a publication. However, we’d like to strongly encourage the physical production of the material, using drawings, collage or other analogue techniques that the group can think of to create impact and make the work stand out.

While AI is NOT allowed for visuals (see section above) AI use is allowed for research, translation (when appropriate), and text editing. Elicit and Scite (designed for academic work) are recommended.

The seminar leader will keep track of developments during seminars.

Choosing a topic

Choosing a topic or object of study requires careful group discussion and shared commitment. Talk openly about your interests and what you want to use as a lens for critically examining management and organisation.

1. Choose a topic that genuinely interests everyone, one that motivates the whole group and feels worth investing time and energy in.
2. Review the examples in the Learning Zone: identify common themes, what sparked collective curiosity, and whether similar cases from your own backgrounds or communities might be worth exploring.
3. Don’t rush the decision: discuss multiple options and select the case that excites the whole group and offers rich possibilities for analysis from different perspectives (environmental, social, political, theoretical, etc.).

1. The Poster

A poster is a visual tool.

It presents an idea / argument in visual form, on one single surface.

In academia, it is used to present a piece of research in an accessible way.

To achieve this, posters visualise a synthesis of a piece of research.

In this module’s case, the poster is a first stepping stone in the development of a group-led, co-designed piece of research.

This means, that for our module, we understand the poster to be a work-in-progress.

The poster (and eventually publication – see Assignment 2 briefing), its research and design will have to be developed in seminars.

For more insight, visit our Library's guide to Posters.

What should the poster demonstrate?

Visual and descriptive mapping

Identify the actors involved—individuals, groups, organizations, institutions. What are their stated positions, interests, and claims? What actions have they taken? Trace the sequence of events and decisions. Gather multiple accounts and perspectives, paying attention to whose voices are prominent and whose are marginal or absent.

Tensions and Contradictions

Notice where accounts conflict or contradict. Where do actors disagree about what happened, why it happened, or what it means? What seems natural or inevitable to some but contested by others? Where do you encounter language that does work—words that persuade, obscure, justify, or mobilize?

Questioning Assumptions

What are the claims presented by different actors involved in the situation of your choice? What needs to be true for this situation to make sense as described by dominant actors? What concepts or categories are being deployed? Are there any claims that appear technical, or neutral that might be political? Is anything framed as an individual instance, that might be structural in reality, or vice versa?

Visual Representation

Your poster should make visible the complexity explored and uncovered, as described above. Visualise the relationships, tensions, contradictions, but also questions that may arise in group work. You are not expected to provide answers but show what needs critical analysis to explain tensions and contradictions. What can the visual do, that the text count cannot facilitate? Consider how visual forms can reveal patterns, absences, or relationships that narrative alone might miss.

NOTE: This is an iterative process. The visual informs the text and viceversa. This is why collaborative group work in research, visual and text-based mapping during seminars as well, will be crucial to produce interesting results.

1. Examples of critical issues

• You should use the examples below as guidelines, inspiration, or starting points to explore issues of  your group's own interest.
• To think of issues that the group can invest time and effort in, start by identifying commonalities in the cases below.
• Discuss  your ideas and options in your group, but also with your seminar leader before committing to the focus of your research.

The "Great Resignation" in UK Healthcare

See the NHS staff exodus data 2022-2024; burnout testimonies; retention crisis; junior doctors' strikes; international recruitment drives.

Why are trained professionals leaving? What are the emotional costs of care work? How do organizations respond?

Explore care work, social reproduction theory, emotional labor, professionalization, workforce control, and crisis narratives.

Amazon Warehouses and Workplace Monitoring

See reports from Coventry, Tilbury, or other Amazon UK (and beyond?) fulfillmentcenters. What happened since 2022? Have there been worker organizing attempts? Have there been unionization efforts? What is the role of surveillance technologies, productivity metrics?

How does technology mediate work? What are workers' lived experiences? How do efficiency and dignity intersect?

Explore: techno-feudalism, techno-managerial control. enshittification, surveillance capitalism, dignity at work, and resistance.

Extinction Rebellion (XR) and “Greening” Corporate Culture

See  XR protests targeting banks, oil companies; corporate sustainability reports. Are there contested narratives regarding climate breakdown and sustainability? Is there a gap between commitments and actions regarding climate breakdown and sustainability?

Who defines sustainability? How do organizations respond to climate activism? Does the state play a role? How is that role defined and put into action? What counts as genuine change?

Explore: sustainability, political ecology, eco-feminism, greenwashing, stakeholder engagement, corporate social responsibility.

UK Maternity Leave and Paternity Leave Reforms

See 2024 UK government's proposed parental leave reforms; current entitlement disparities; low uptake of shared parental leave since 2015. Has there been employer resistance? What are the parents’ perspectives? Have there been feminist perspectives developed on this issue? Why do fathers take less leave despite availability? How do policies reflect assumptions about parenting? Are there assumptions about gender roles? Are there assumptions made about what constitutes work, productive labour, and so on? How do individual choice versus structural constraints relate in this case?

Explore: social reproduction theory, gendered division of labor, gender inequality, ideal worker norms, policy reach and limits.

Indian Farmers' Protests and Agricultural Reform

See 2020-2021 mass mobilization against three farm laws in India; year-long protests at Delhi's borders; government's eventual repeal; 2024 renewed protests. Was there diaspora support? How did farmers organize across regions? What competing visions of modernization emerged? How were protesters represented in India and the UK?

Explore: political economy and ecology, ecofeminism, collective action, globalization, and whose knowledge defines “progress.”
 

1. Group Contract

GROUP CONTRACT

Seminar Number / Days and times:………………..……………………………………………………

Seminar Leader:  ..………………………………………………………………………………………

1. Purpose

We agree to collaborate in producing the group poster and the group publication for BMIB5004.

2. Commitment to Collaboration

We will work together professionally, respectfully, and supportively, contributing constructively in seminars and beyond.

3. Individual Responsibility

Each member accepts individual responsibility and accountability for contributing to the group’s research, discussions, and outputs.

4. Adherence to Guidelines

We will follow all module guidelines and uphold any working practices and expectations co-designed and agreed within the group.

5. Group Organisation and Activity Log

The group will manage its own organisation and maintain a brief activity log documenting contributions, decisions, and progress.

6. Assessment Awareness

We understand that seminar group work contributes to the final marks for both assignments.

7. Guidance and Issue Resolution

If problems arise, we will seek guidance from the seminar leader. Failure by any member to collaborate constructively may affect individual marks and may lead to a group discussion with the seminar leader regarding their removal from the group. Such instances will be based on evidence from group work logs, and may also include observations from the seminar leader.

8. Escalation and Implications

If issues must be escalated beyond the seminar leader, we acknowledge that this may also affect assessment outcomes, including possible individual mark adjustments depending on the severity of the issue, particularly in cases of non‑contribution and collaboration.

AGREEMENTS

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Group Members

1. Rubric Assessment 1 –Poster and Presentation

(This document was produced with machine assisted edits).

Note: This report is provided as a sample for reference purposes only. For further guidance, detailed solutions, or personalized assignment support, please contact us directly.

BMIB5004

Critical Management and Organisation Studies

Amazon Warehouses and Workplace Monitoring:

Surveillance, Resistance, and the Politics of Control

Assignment 1: Group Poster and Presentation

Academic Year 2025–2026

POSTER TRANSCRIPT

1. Introduction: The Critical Issue

This poster critically examines Amazon's use of surveillance technologies and algorithmic management in its UK fulfilment centres, focusing on the documented experiences of warehouse workers in sites such as Coventry and Tilbury (2022–2025). The case presents a paradigmatic example of how digital technologies mediate contemporary labour relations, raising urgent questions about dignity at work, worker resistance, and the structural dynamics of power in platform capitalism.

Amazon's UK warehouse operations have become a focal point for debates about the future of work. Workers are subjected to productivity monitoring systems that track rates of individual performance — the number of packages scanned per hour — and may trigger automated disciplinary processes when targets are not met (Delfanti, 2021). The introduction of AI-driven cameras and wristband trackers has intensified the sense of surveillance among workers, while simultaneously rendering their labour increasingly legible and controllable by management (Zuboff, 2019).

2. Mapping the Actors and Their Positions

The poster maps the key actors involved in this situation:

• Amazon (management): frames monitoring as a tool of operational efficiency and worker safety. Its public communications emphasise innovation and the creation of 'good jobs'.
• Warehouse workers: report feeling dehumanised, pressured, and unable to meet targets without risking injury. Many describe the system as producing a state of permanent anxiety (GMB Union, 2023).
• GMB Union and independent organisers: have challenged Amazon's labour practices through strike action (e.g. the Coventry strikes of 2022–2023), demanding union recognition and better working conditions.
• UK media and investigative journalism: outlets such as The Guardian and open Democracy have documented worker testimonies, surfacing lived realities largely absent from official company statements.
• Policymakers and regulators: have begun scrutinising algorithmic management practices, though legislative responses remain limited.

3. Tensions and Contradictions

A central tension in this case lies between Amazon's discourse of efficiency and fairness and workers' lived experiences of precarity and control. Amazon consistently presents its monitoring systems as neutral, objective, and beneficial, framing productivity metrics as transparent performance standards (Moore, 2018). Yet workers and union representatives describe these same systems as instruments of coercion — ones that individualise responsibility for structural failures, discipline the body, and suppress collective voice.

A further contradiction emerges in the rhetoric of corporate social responsibility. While Amazon's ESG reports emphasise worker wellbeing, pay improvements, and investment in training, investigative reports and parliamentary inquiries have documented high rates of injury, elevated rates of ambulance call-outs at warehouse sites, and systematic resistance to union recognition (Aloisi & De Stefano, 2022). This gap between the stated and the actual constitutes what scholars identify as 'greenwashing' in the social domain — or 'social washing.'

4. Theoretical Lenses

The poster draws on three interconnected theoretical frameworks to analyse this case:

5. Critical Analysis: Questioning Assumptions

A key assumption underpinning Amazon's public position is that productivity metrics are inherently fair because they are data-driven. This naturalises a particular understanding of work — one that equates human value with measurable output and treats bodies as interchangeable inputs in a logistical system. Critical management scholars such as Fleming (2015) have challenged this view, arguing that managerial control is never neutral: it always reflects and reproduces particular distributions of power.

What is systematically rendered invisible in Amazon's account is the emotional, physical, and psychological toll of working under constant surveillance. The reduction of complex human labour to a 'rate' metric erases the social dimensions of work — cooperation, care, informal knowledge — in favour of a thin, measurable abstraction. This is not merely an ethical concern; it is also analytically significant, because it reveals how organisations construct particular subjects (the efficient worker) while suppressing others (the worker in pain, the organiser, the person who cannot sustain the pace).

Furthermore, Amazon's framing of strikes and union recognition campaigns as exceptional disruptions obscures the structural conditions that make them predictable outcomes. The Coventry dispute was not an anomaly but a manifestation of deeper contradictions in the business model: one that depends on labour intensification while simultaneously claiming to value its workforce.

6. Visual Description of the Poster

The physical poster (minimum A3, ideally A2) is designed around a central visual metaphor: an eye—hand-drawn—overlaid on a map of Amazon's UK fulfilment network. The eye represents surveillance; the network map grounds the abstract in a concrete geography of labour.

Radiating outward from the central image are four clusters of hand-written and collaged text, each representing a key actor (Amazon management, workers, GMB union, and media/public). Excerpts from worker testimonies (drawn from investigative journalism) are positioned alongside fragments of Amazon's official communications, creating a visual tension between the official and the experiential.

A timeline, running along the bottom edge of the poster, documents key events: the first Coventry strike (January 2022), subsequent industrial actions (2023), union non-recognition rulings, and parliamentary interventions. Arrows and annotations connect these events to theoretical concepts, rendered in a distinct typographic style to distinguish analysis from description.

Colour is used deliberately: red for instances of conflict and contradiction; green for resistance and collective action; black and grey for corporate and institutional actors. No AI-generated images or graphics have been used. All visuals are hand-drawn or collaged from printed news materials.

PRESENTATION TRANSCRIPT

Opening — Introducing the Issue (approx. 1 min)

Good morning / afternoon. Our group has chosen to examine Amazon's warehouse operations in the United Kingdom as our critical issue. Specifically, we focus on the use of surveillance technologies and algorithmic management systems, and what these mean for workers, for organisations, and for broader questions about the politics of work.

This is not simply a story about one company. It is, we argue, a lens through which to examine some of the most pressing contradictions in contemporary capitalism: between efficiency and dignity, between the rhetoric of care and the reality of control.

Describing the Case (approx. 2–3 min)

Amazon operates over twenty fulfilment centres across the UK. Sites in Coventry, Tilbury, and Rugeley have attracted particular attention. Workers at these sites are subject to real-time tracking: their scanning rates are monitored second-by-second, and automated systems can flag underperformance and initiate disciplinary processes without direct human intervention (Delfanti, 2021).

In 2022 and 2023, workers in Coventry—organised informally at first, then through the GMB Union—staged a series of strikes, demanding better pay, improved conditions, and formal union recognition. Amazon refused to recognise the union. Workers continued to organise.

Our poster maps these dynamics visually. The central image — an eye superimposed on Amazon's UK logistics network — reflects the pervasiveness of monitoring. The radiating clusters show the different voices and positions in this situation: management, workers, union, media.

Theoretical Framing (approx. 2 min)

To make sense of this situation, we draw on three theoretical frameworks. First, Shoshana Zuboff's concept of surveillance capitalism (2019) helps us understand how worker data — scanning rates, movement patterns, error logs — is not merely used for management but constitutes a form of capital in itself: behavioural data harvested and used to predict and modify future behaviour.

Second, Alessandro Delfanti's (2021) analysis of 'bionic' work in Amazon warehouses extends a Marxist tradition to show how digital infrastructure functions as a new kind of Taylorism — breaking work down into measurable micro-tasks and replacing human discretion with algorithmic instruction.

Third, Sharon Bolton's (2007) work on dignity at work gives us tools to think about what is at stake for workers: not only wages and conditions, but recognition, autonomy, and the right to be treated as more than an input. Worker resistance, on this account, is not irrational or disruptive — it is a demand for recognition.

Critical Analysis (approx. 2 min)

What is striking about Amazon's public communication on these issues is the consistent use of the language of neutrality and objectivity. The monitoring system is presented as a technological given, not a managerial choice. Yet as critical scholars remind us, technology is not neutral: it embeds values, distributes power, and produces particular kinds of subjects (Orlikowski, 1992).

We also want to draw attention to what is absent from Amazon's account: the physical injuries documented in parliamentary testimony, the high ambulance call-out rates at warehouse sites, and the accounts of workers who felt unable to take toilet breaks without triggering performance alerts. These absences are not accidental — they are effects of a discursive strategy that seeks to render management decisions technical and therefore beyond political contestation.

Our poster tries to make these absences visible — literally, by juxtaposing Amazon's official language with workers' words, drawn from investigative journalism.

Closing Reflection (approx. 1 min)

We want to close by noting that this case remains unresolved. As of 2025, Amazon has not recognised the GMB Union at its Coventry site, despite continued worker organising. This ongoing situation reminds us that the dynamics we have mapped are not historical: they are live, contested, and consequential.

We have found this process of research and visual mapping to be genuinely challenging — not least because it required us to think carefully about whose accounts we were centring and why. We are happy to take questions.

REFERENCES

Aloisi, A. and De Stefano, V. (2022) Your Boss Is an Algorithm. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

Bolton, S. C. (2007) Dimensions of Dignity at Work. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Delfanti, A. (2021) The Warehouse: Workers and Robots at Amazon. London: Pluto Press.

Fleming, P. (2015) The Mythology of Work: How Capitalism Persists Despite Itself. London: Pluto Press.

GMB Union (2023) Amazon Workers Strike Again in Coventry [Online]. Available at: https://www.gmb.org.uk/news/amazon-workers-strike-coventry (Accessed: 1 February 2026).

Moore, P. (2018) The Quantified Self in Precarity: Work, Technology and What Counts. London: Routledge.

Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) 'The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations', Organization Science, 3(3), pp. 398–427.

The Guardian (2023) Amazon workers in Coventry hold fresh strike [Online]. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jan/25/amazon-workers-coventry-strike (Accessed: 28 January 2026).

Zuboff, S. (2019) The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. London: Profile Books.