The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Workplace surveillance: an overview
Abstract
This article attempts to review the proliferation of research findings about surveillance in the workplace and the issues surrounding it. It establishes a number of points of departure when considering the issue of workplace surveillance, before reviewing some of the more critical issues. First, it establishes that organizations and surveillance go hand in hand; and that workplace surveillance can take social and technological forms. Personal data gathering, Internet and email monitoring, location tracking, biometrics and covert surveillance are all areas of development. There is also evidence that groups of employees are appropriating information and communication technologies to stare back at their employers, exposing unsavoury practices and organizing collectively, prompting new thinking about resistance. Organizations watch employees primarily to protect their assets, although the nature and intensity of surveillance says much about how a company views its employees. Workplace surveillance has consequences for employees, affecting employee well-being, work culture, productivity, creativity and motivation. If no alternative can be found, managerial attention to task design, supervisory processes, employees’ expectations about monitoring, and an appraisal of the company's operating environment can mediate its downsides. It is argued that in many ways the normality of workplace surveillance, and the prevalence of arguments about how to ‘do it better’, make it difficult to radicalize. As part of what is seen as ‘good’ management practice, it can confer benefits on the employee if conducted in a humane, balanced way, and is considered on a case-by-case–organization-by-organization–basis. However, the introduction of broader debates around information use, rights, power and social structure highlights how surveillance in the workplace may serve to perpetuate existing inequalities and create new ones.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
Entrapped by the ‘electronic panopticon’? Worker resistance in the call centre
Bain, P., & Taylor, P. (2000) · New Technology, Work and Employment · doi:10.1111/1468-005x.00061 · Cited by 546
Stanton, J. M., & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (1996) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.738 · Cited by 148
Cited by
Newlands, G. (2021) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840620937900 · Cited by 439
Wang, B., Liu, Y., & Parker, S. K. (2020) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2018.0127 · Cited by 377
The Challenges of Algorithm-Based HR Decision-Making for Personal Integrity
Leicht-Deobald, U., Busch, T., Schank, C., Weibel, A., Schafheitle, S., Wildhaber, I., & Kasper, G. (2019) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04204-w · Cited by 347
Predict and Surveil: Data, Discretion, and the Future of Policing
Brayne, S. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190684099.001.0001 · Cited by 334
Analyzing Data Granularity Levels for Insider Threat Detection Using Machine Learning
Le, D. C., Zincir-Heywood, N., & Heywood, M. I. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2020.2967721 · Cited by 191
Metadata
- Authors
- Ball, K.
- Venue
- Labor History
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2010-02
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 87-106
- ISSN
- 0023-656X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-9702
- OpenAlex
- W2152879721
- Cited by
- 488
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 65.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.