This dissertation focuses on the construction of future steel work and work environment in relation to the ongoing digital and green transitions. The transitions include a clear focus on technology and has so far been lacking a focus on work. Future steel work run the risk of being forgotten in the transition processes, or only indirectly addressed. The purpose is therefore to investigate how new technology, based on the transitions, is constructed in the steel industry and how this relates to the development of the future work and work environment. This refers to the construction that takes place in the form of the process by which technology is constructed by actors, and to the construction that takes place in the form of descriptions and interpretations of new technology, through which it is given meaning.

The dissertation is based on a sociotechnical tradition but utilizes theories from science and technology studies on the social construction of technology to understand how actors participate and contribute to the development of technology. The empirical data has been produced mainly from semi-structured interviews with managers, project managers, and workers with union roles, which through thematic analysis has resulted in six different main themes: work environment and safety, rationalization, competence, environment, influence, and gender equality. The empirical material also includes documents and empirical data produced during workplace visits, meetings, etc. in the shape of a logbook.

The results demonstrate that work is largely absent in the descriptions of new technology. New technology is primarily interpreted and described as rationalizing the production process or being linked directly to fossil-free steelmaking. At the same time, descriptions of new technology in relation to work indicate that new technology is generally regarded as the solution to existing problems, primarily described as physical. New technology being viewed as the solution to today's problems has also proven to be the case for the environmental challenges, where fossil-free steelmaking is broadly considered to be the solution. The understanding of fossil-free steelmaking in relation to work is reduced to an understanding of the possibility of fewer jobs in the future. Similarly, new technology is seen as contributing to addressing challenges of gender equality, primarily expressed interms of eliminating heavy work tasks and thus being able to influence the gender distribution at the company. On the other hand, new technology is expected to increase the skills requirement for workers that are faced with working alongside a more technologically advanced production system.

From a process perspective, future work can be seen as constructed through investment projects that gradually stabilize the future work and work environment, from social constructions to concrete work tasks. Future work and work environments are stabilized by methods where primarily the physical dimension of the work environment is prioritized, in a process where the most intense stabilization take place at an early stage. The opportunities to create good future work and work environments are reduced to the degrees of freedom and resources that remain, in relation to the project participants' competence regarding work environment and the workers' ability to represent the interests of their respective groups. The consequence is that the process relies on user participation, which can be characterized to include information to workers, worker input and difficulties in recruiting workers as project participants.

The dissertation concludes that the good future steel work is left out of the construction of new technology by the combination of a belief in new technology as the solution to today's problems, and a process that mainly focuses on one of the three dimensions of the work environment. The exclusion of the good work does not mean that work is not affected within the transitions, but rather that the construction of the future work takes place whether it is intentionally in the direction of good work, or indirectly by means of other purposes.

Denna rapport har tagits fram som ett inledande underlag för de två forskningsprojekten Attraktiva arbetsplatser genom Industri 4.0 och Produktion 4.0. Rapportens syfte har varit att öka förståelsen av Industri 4.0 på en övergripande nivå. Målet har varit att med ett arbetsvetenskapligt perspektiv beskriva vad Industri 4.0 är, hur det kan komma att påverka organisationer i framtiden samt positionera detta koncept i en större kontext av nationella strategier och organisationsmodeller.

Industri 4.0 kommer ursprungligen från den tyska strategin Industrie 4.0 som presenterades under 2013. Industri 4.0 har konstaterats att vara ett tekniskt drivet koncept som främst kan karaktäriseras av Internet of Things (IoT), cyber-fysiska system (CPS) och smarta fabriker. På en övergripande nivå kan Industri 4.0 beskrivas som en digitalisering där produkter, maskiner och hela fabriker blir uppkopplade. Denna uppkoppling är möjlig genom vertikal integrering, horisontell integrering och end-to-end-integrering. Det konstateras i rapporten att Industri 4.0 ej är en organisationsmodell, även om Industri 4.0 indirekt kan resultera i att redan kända organisationsmodeller delvis implementeras.

Inom Industri 4.0 väntas framtidens arbete att skifta från rutinarbete till en friare roll. Med ökad komplexitet väntas även arbetet kunna karaktäriseras i större grad som mentalt arbete. En risk som identifierats är en polarisering av arbetskraften, där vissa arbeten berikas och andra utarmas. Visionen om Operatör 4.0 har etablerats inom litteraturen för Industri 4.0. I denna vision beskrivs operatören som en integrerad komponent i det komplexa system som Industri 4.0 utgörs av. Integreringen av operatörer står däremot inför utmaningar gällande integritet, då Operatör 4.0 ställer krav på insamling av data från samtliga individer.

I de komplexa och abstrakta system som Industri 4.0 kräver kommer det bli svårare för människan att hantera de situationer där tekniken, trots allt, inte fungerar. Tekniska lösningar såsom smarta kognitiva stödverktyg och smart personlig skyddsutrustning kan ses som möjliga åtgärder för framtida arbetsmiljöproblem. Risken finns däremot att ett allt för stort tekniskt fokus kan leda till att tekniska lösningar prioriteras över förändringar i den arbetsmiljö som i grunden utgör orsaken till problemen. Givet den decentralisering som ofta benämns inom Industri 4.0 kan både positiva och negativa förändringar förväntas. Decentralisering kan bidra till en ökad frihet i hur och var arbetet utförs, men kan samtidigt öka krav på tillgänglighet och medföra otydligheter i vem som bär ansvaret för arbetsmiljön. Sannolikt kommer Industri 4.0 att resultera i nya arbetsmiljöproblem likväl som gamla problem i en ny kontext. Givet en digitalisering av industrin kan även den digitala arbetsmiljön väntas ta en större plats i framtiden.

Beskrivningar av Industri 4.0 tenderar till att visionärt beskriva konceptet i en positiv anda. Vid första anblick kan Industri 4.0 framstå som oproblematiskt och enfaldigt positivt. Innan Industri 4.0 kan bli verklighet så måste de vetenskapliga, tekniska, ekonomiska, sociala och politiska utmaningarna mötas. Slutsatsen har dragits att ett helomfattande fokus, där teknik implementeras på människans villkor, kommer att vara nödvändigt för att Industri 4.0 ska kunna realiseras framgångsrikt.

This report was as an initial input to the two research projects Attractive Workplaces Through Industry 4.0 and Produktion 4.0. The purpose of the report has been to increase the understanding of Industry 4.0 on a general level. The goal was to describe what Industry 4.0 is, how it may affect organizations in the future as well as position the concept in a bigger context of national strategies and organizational models.

Industry 4.0 was presented as the German national strategy in 2013. Industry 4.0 has been found to be a technological concept that can be characterized by Internet of Things (IoT), Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) and smart factories. On a general level, Industry 4.0 can be described as a digitalization where products, machines and entire factories become interconnected. This is possible through vertical integration, horizontal integration and end-to-end integration. It has been stated that Industry 4.0 is not an organizational model, even though elements of previously known organizational models may be indirectly implemented through Industry 4.0.

Industry 4.0 is expected to shift routine work towards a freer role for future operators. With an increase in complexity, future work is expected to be characterized as mental work to a greater extent. A risk identified is the possibility of a polarization of the workforce, where some jobs are enriched with variation in work content and others depleted. A vision for a future Operator 4.0 has been established within the literature. In this vision, the operator is an integrated component in the complex system of an Industry 4.0 environment. This integration face challenges in terms of integrity and privacy, since the collection of data about individuals will be a necessity.

The complex and abstract systems of Industry 4.0 implies that dealing with technology that, after all, does not work will be increasingly difficult for workers. Technological solutions such as smart cognitive support tools and smart personal protective equipment can be seen as possible solutions to future problems in the working environment. There is a risk, however, that an excessively large technical focus can lead to technical solutions being given priority over changes in the working environment that constitute the cause of the problems. Given the decentralization that is often referred to in Industry 4.0, both negative and positive changes can be expected. Decentralization can contribute to increased freedom in how and where work is carried out, but can at the same time increase requirements for accessibility and cause uncertainty in who is responsible for the working environment. Industry 4.0 is likely to result in new working environments as well as old problems occurring in a new context. Given the digitalization of the industrial sector, the digital working environment is expected to become a more central matter.

Descriptions of Industry 4.0 tends to be visionary and may at first glance appear as unproblematic. Before Industry 4.0 can become reality the scientific, technological, economic, social and political challenges must be addressed. The report concludes that a broad focus, where technology is implemented on human terms, will be necessary for Industry 4.0 to be successful.