Qualitative case study explores employees' perceptions of AI monitoring in a Dutch financial organization, indicating both acceptance and privacy concerns.
New forms of hybrid and remote work have precipitated the need for closer monitoring of employees in their work environments. Hence, the global increase in the use of AI-enabled surveillance and monitoring of workers. The surveillance and monitoring literature indicates a limited understanding of how employees perceive workplace monitoring in an increasingly data-driven world of monitoring and data collection. Our research question is: How do employees perceive AI-enabled monitoring in contemporary workplaces from a privacy perspective? Drawing on a multi-method qualitative case study, we explored how monitoring is practiced and experienced by employees in a large Dutch financial organisation. Our study reveals a general acceptance of employee monitoring to foster learning and career development. Employees agree that monitoring is essential for more effective management of the workforce. However, they expressed frustration and privacy concerns, questioning the accuracy of data collection and use. We present five propositions that need to be considered to prepare employees for future workplace monitoring: more transparency related to being monitored, a deeper understanding of monitoring technologies and tools in use, transparency in processing and using monitoring data, enhanced employee awareness of privacy and employee rights when monitored, and the importance of humans-in-the-loop (HITL).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bosua et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: