Since emerging around 2010, maker culture and the maker movement have drawn little attention from digital labour research. This article fills the gap by exploring sociocultural dynamics that have emerged in maker culture, such as how makers in China mobilise their agency to struggle for a path forward to achieve decent work and a better society. The article first reviews research on the Chinese maker community as well as digital labour, in particular the dualism of exploitation and workplace resistance in current digital labour research. It argues that makers, in the case studied, mobilise certain agency initiating from sociocultural dynamics beyond the framework of exploitation. The article then explicates the argument with cases collected from our fieldwork in Shenzhen’s maker community in July–August 2017. It shows makers’ practices originating from the open-source ethos, such as an awareness of sharing and mutual support in moulding a ‘micro-innovation’ model, and in creating products that aim to benefit vulnerable communities and build up a sustainable ecosystem. The article thus turns the current economic discussion on maker culture in a new direction: the sociocultural impact of the maker movement. Furthermore, it suggests that this research on the sociocultural impact fills the gap between existing digital labour research and maker studies.

This paper links the ideas of Norbert Elias to the conceptualisation of power and subjectivity that has developed in British industrial and organisational (I/O); sociology. It examines the relevance of power and subjectivity to British I/O sociology and reviews theoretical positions that have influenced this field. Elias's work is examined in some detail, exploring his approach to power, agency, the self, individualisation and discourse. His work is then applied to a re-examination of the perspectives on power and subjectivity contained within labour process, Foucauldian and actor network theory. The paper attempts to show how Elias's work re-frames our understanding of power and subjectivity through a stress on interdependencies and their asymmetry, the ‘networked’ nature of agency, and the interwoven form of human and socio-political development. It argues that Eliasian analysis maintains the critical concern with power asymmetries witnessed in labour process theory, yet avoids some of the difficulties in conceptualisation of power and subjectivity that are apparent in labour process, Foucauldian work and actor network theory. Elias's work also illustrates the need for a lengthier historical perspective than is typically observed in industrial and organisational sociology, and points to the value of studies which look beyond the context of the workplace. Finally, attention is paid to some of the limitations of Elias's work.