Chapter 27 Exercises: Remote Work Surveillance

Exercise 27.1 — Bossware Deep Dive: Platform Analysis

Type: Individual research assignment Time: 60–75 minutes

Instructions

Choose one of the following remote monitoring platforms and conduct a thorough analysis using publicly available information (company website, product documentation, privacy policy, news coverage, user reviews).

Platforms (choose one): - Hubstaff - Teramind - ActivTrak - Time Doctor - InterGuard - Crossover WorkSmart

Part A: Technical Capabilities (300–400 words) Document exactly what the platform captures: screenshot frequency options, keystroke monitoring capabilities, webcam options, URL and application monitoring, data retention defaults, and any AI analysis features. Cite specific product documentation where possible.

Part B: Privacy Policy Analysis (200–300 words) Read the platform's privacy policy and answer: 1. Who owns the monitoring data — the employer or the platform? 2. Does the platform permit secondary uses of monitoring data (product improvement, research, third-party sharing)? 3. How long is data retained by default? 4. What happens to data when an employer account is closed?

Part C: Worker Perspective (200–250 words) Find at least three reviews of this platform from the perspective of monitored workers (not employers). Sources might include Glassdoor reviews mentioning monitoring software, Reddit threads, or news articles quoting workers. What are workers' primary concerns?

Part D: Summary Assessment (150–200 words) Based on your research, rate this platform on three dimensions (1–5 scale, with written justification): - Transparency to monitored workers - Proportionality (monitoring intensity relative to stated purpose) - Data security and retention practices

Exercise 27.2 — Theory X vs. Theory Y: Management Philosophy Interview

Type: Interview-based qualitative research Time: 45–60 minutes (plus 20–30 minutes for write-up)

Instructions

McGregor's Theory X/Theory Y framework describes fundamentally different assumptions about workers and what motivates them. This exercise asks you to investigate management philosophy through direct conversation.

Interview two people who have experience managing or supervising others — this can be formal managers, sports coaches, teacher supervisors, restaurant managers, or any other supervisory role. Use the following questions (adapt language as appropriate):

  1. When you're not able to directly observe the people you supervise, what do you assume they're doing?
  2. If you found out someone on your team was doing personal tasks during work hours, what would your first response be?
  3. What do you think is the most effective way to ensure people do their jobs well?
  4. If you were offering a remote position, would you use monitoring software? Why or why not?
  5. What's the difference between accountability and surveillance, in your view?

Write-Up (400–500 words): Classify each interviewee's apparent management philosophy using McGregor's framework. Quote specific interview responses to support your classification. Identify any tensions or contradictions in their expressed philosophy. Finally, reflect: did either interviewee articulate a view of worker monitoring that you found persuasive or compelling? Why or why not?

Exercise 27.3 — The Intimate Archive: A Privacy Mapping Exercise

Type: Individual mapping exercise with written reflection Time: 40–50 minutes

Instructions

This exercise makes concrete the privacy implications of remote monitoring's "intimate archive" by mapping what specific data would be captured.

Scenario: Imagine you are working remotely from your current home or residence, using an employer-provided laptop with monitoring software that: takes screenshots every 5 minutes, logs application and URL activity, records keystroke counts (not content), and tracks mouse movement for activity percentage calculation.

Part A: Create an "intimate archive" inventory For a typical 8-hour workday (or a workday you can realistically imagine), document what the monitoring system would capture:

  1. List 5 screenshots the system would likely take. For each, describe: what is on your screen, what is visible in the room background, and whether there is any personal content or information in the frame.

  2. List the applications and URLs you would visit during the day, including any personal browsing. For each, classify whether it is work-related, personal-but-benign, or personal-sensitive (containing health, financial, or relationship information).

  3. At what points during the day would you have low keystroke/mouse activity that would register as "idle time"? List at least 3 such periods and describe what you would actually be doing.

Part B: Reflection (300–400 words) 1. Who would be comfortable seeing the archive you've described? Who would you not want seeing it? 2. What does your archive reveal about your life beyond your work performance? 3. If you multiplied this one-day archive over six months of employment, what portrait of your life would it produce? 4. What, if anything, would you change about your work behavior if you knew this archive was being created? Is that behavior change desirable from a productivity standpoint?

Type: Legal research assignment Time: 45–60 minutes

Instructions

The legal landscape for remote employee monitoring varies significantly by state. This exercise asks you to research the specific legal framework in your state (or a state of your choosing if you prefer).

Research questions: 1. Does your state have a specific electronic monitoring notification statute? (States with such laws include Connecticut, Delaware, and New York — but others may have relevant provisions.) 2. Does your state constitution include a right to privacy that has been applied in employment contexts? (California's Article I Section 1 is the most prominent example.) 3. Has your state legislature introduced any bills in the past three years addressing remote work monitoring or employee privacy? What happened to them? 4. Does your state have a data protection or privacy law (like the CCPA in California) that might apply to employment monitoring data?

Sources to consult: - Your state legislature's website (search for electronic monitoring + employees) - The National Conference of State Legislatures (ncsl.org) database on employee monitoring laws - The Electronic Privacy Information Center (epic.org) workplace privacy resources - State attorney general or labor department websites

Written output: A 400–500 word memo summarizing your state's legal framework for remote employee monitoring, identifying the key protections (if any) workers have, and noting any significant gaps compared to the EU framework described in the chapter.

Exercise 27.5 — Counter-Surveillance Design Challenge

Type: Creative design exercise (individual or pairs) Time: 45–55 minutes

Instructions

This exercise asks you to design a remote work monitoring system that achieves legitimate employer goals while incorporating worker-protective principles.

Starting point: An employer has 50 remote employees in a customer service role. They have three legitimate concerns: 1. Ensuring that customer interactions are handled professionally and that performance standards are being met 2. Ensuring that employees working during scheduled hours are actually available to handle customer contacts 3. Ensuring that sensitive customer data on company systems is protected

Design challenge: Create a monitoring system that addresses all three concerns without using screenshot monitoring, continuous keystroke logging, or activity percentage scoring.

Your design must specify: 1. What data is collected and for what specific purpose 2. Who has access to which data 3. What data workers themselves can see 4. How long data is retained and what the deletion policy is 5. What is explicitly not monitored (and why) 6. How workers can contest data they believe is inaccurate or misleading

Reflection (200–250 words): What did you discover about the relationship between monitoring and the legitimate goals it supposedly serves? Were you able to address all three employer concerns without the most invasive monitoring techniques? What did you have to give up to protect worker privacy?

Exercise 27.6 — Productivity Theater: An Empirical Exercise

Type: Structured self-observation exercise Time: 2 hours of data collection + 30 minutes analysis

Instructions

This exercise tests the epistemological claim at the heart of activity-score monitoring: that mouse/keyboard activity is a reliable proxy for productive work.

Data collection (two 1-hour sessions):

Session 1: "High-activity" session. Set a timer for 1 hour and work on a task that requires constant keyboard and mouse interaction (typing a paper, data entry, navigating complex software). At the end of the hour, estimate: How much genuinely productive output did you produce? How engaged/focused were you?

Session 2: "Low-activity" session. Set a timer for 1 hour and work on a task that requires minimal keyboard/mouse interaction (reading, listening to a lecture or podcast, thinking through a complex problem, planning). At the end of the hour, estimate: How much genuinely productive output did you produce? How engaged/focused were you?

Analysis (300–400 words): 1. Compare your self-assessed productivity in the two sessions. Which session produced more valuable output? 2. How would an activity-score monitoring system have evaluated each session? Would the scores have accurately reflected the quality of your work? 3. What types of work are systematically undercounted by activity-score monitoring? 4. What are the implications for workers whose jobs involve substantial reading, thinking, listening, or other low-activity behaviors?