  Shift planning plays a key role for the health and well-being of healthcare
workers. It determines when they work and when they can take time off to
recover or engage in social activities. Current computer-support in shift
planning is typically designed from a managerial perspective and focuses on
process efficiency, with the long-term goal of full automation. This implies
automatic resolutions of emotionally charged scheduling conflicts. In the
present study, we measured the effects of such a fully automated process on
workers' well-being, fairness, and team spirit, and compared them with a more
interactive process that directly involves workers in the decision-making. In
our experimental online study (n = 94), we found positive effects of the more
interactive process on all measures. Our findings indicate that full automation
may not be desirable from the worker perspective. We close with concrete
suggestions to design more worker-centered, hybrid shift planning systems by
optimizing worker control, considering the worker experience, and embedding
shift planning in the broader work context.
