Increased Use of Remote Work Technologies: Toward Greater Control of Employees? A Case Study on Cameras
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter examines the increasing use of remote work technologies, specifically webcam-based monitoring, and its implications for employee control in telework settings. Specifically, it investigates how technological controls influence managerial oversight, employee autonomy, and workplace relationships, particularly within the financial services sector. Through qualitative interviews with teleworkers and managers, the chapter explores the perceptions and acceptance of webcam monitoring. Findings reveal a tension between organizational control needs and employees’ expectations of privacy and autonomy. While technological surveillance enhances security and compliance, it also raises employee concerns about stress, hyperconnectivity, and managerial overreach. The study highlights key factors influencing employee acceptance of webcam monitoring, such as managerial transparency, educational approaches, and the proportionality of control measures. Additionally, the research underscores the necessity of balancing organizational oversight with employees’ rights and well-being. Practical recommendations include fostering trust-based managerial practices, clearly defining monitoring purposes, and ensuring compliance with legal frameworks. By analyzing the evolving nature of telework and control technologies, this chapter provides valuable insights for organizations navigating the complexities of remote work management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".