CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 56Legal and Labor StudiesEthics and Social Impacts of AIDigitalization, Law, and Regulation

Big Data in the workplace: Privacy Due Diligence as a human rights-based approach to employee privacy protection

Open access
Ebert, Isabel, Wildhaber, Isabelle, Adams-Prassl, Jeremias·2021·Big Data & Society
DOI 10.1177/20539517211013051
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Data-driven technologies have come to pervade almost every aspect of business life, extending to employee monitoring and algorithmic management. How can employee privacy be protected in the age of datafication? This article surveys the potential and shortcomings of a number of legal and technical solutions to show the advantages of human rights-based approaches in addressing corporate responsibility to respect privacy and strengthen human agency. Based on this notion, we develop a process-oriented model of Privacy Due Diligence to complement existing frameworks for safeguarding employee privacy in an era of Big Data surveillance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/20539517211013051

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The more data are fed into AI processes, the more effective its use.

    “The more data are fed into AI processes, the more effective its use (Gal et al. 2020;Ebert et al. 2021).”

    From Artificial intelligence and work: a critical review of recent research from the social sciences (2024) · cites this paper as Ebert et al. 2021

  • Algorithmic management raises issues of privacy, not just at the workplace but also at home, notably following the pandemic-induced shift to home-based working.

    “Surveillance and control: algorithmic management raises obvious issues of privacy (Bhave et al. 2020;Ebert et al. 2021;Fukumura et al. 2021;Tsamados et al. 2022), not just at the workplace, but also at home, notably following the pandemic-induced shift to home-based working (Collins 2020).”

    From Artificial intelligence and work: a critical review of recent research from the social sciences (2024) · cites this paper as Ebert et al. 2021

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ebert, I., Wildhaber, I., & Adams-Prassl, J.
Affiliations
  • University of St.Gallen (CH)
  • Faculty of Law, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Corresponding author
Ebert, Isabel
ORCID
Ebert, Isabel
Venue
Big Data & Society
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2021-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
ISSN
2053-9517 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1177/20539517211013051
OpenAlex
W3157830328
Cited by
56
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
48.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Big Data & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (acceptedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Swiss National Science Foundation
  • Economic and Social Research Council (Grant No ES/ S010424/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Legal and Labor Studies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
Keywords
employee privacy, human rights-based approach, workplace surveillance, employee monitoring, algorithmic management, big data, corporate social responsibility, human agency, datafication, privacy preservation

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