skip to main content
research-article

Can Workplace Tracking Ever Empower? Collective Sensemaking for the Responsible Use of Sensor Data at Work

Published:13 July 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

People are increasingly subject to the tracking of data about them at their workplaces. Sensor tracking is used by organizations to generate data on the movement and interaction of their employees to monitor and manage workers, and yet this data also poses significant risks to individual employees who may face harms from such data, and from data errors, to their job security or pay as a result of such analyses. Working with a large hospital, we developed a set of intervention strategies to enable what we call "collective sensemaking" describing worker contestation of sensor tracking data. We did this by participating in the sensor data science team, analyzing data on badges that employees wore over a two-week period, and then bringing the results back to the employees through a series of participatory workshops. We found three key aspects of collective sensemaking important for understanding data from the perspectives of stakeholders: 1) data shadows for tempering possibilities for design with the realities of data tracking; 2) data transducers for converting our assumptions about sensor tracking, and 3) data power for eliciting worker inclusivity and participation. We argue that researchers face what Dourish (2019) called the "legitimacy trap" when designing with large datasets and that research about work should commit to complementing data-driven studies with in-depth insights to make them useful for all stakeholders as a corrective to the underlying power imbalance that tracked workers face.

References

  1. Cecilia Aragon, Shion Guha, Marina Kogan, Michael Muller & Gina Neff. (forthcoming). Human Centered Data Science: An Introduction. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Kirstie Ball. 2010. Workplace surveillance: An overview. Labor History, 51(1), 87--106.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Michael R. Berthold, Nicolas Cebron, Fabian Dill, Thomas R. Gabriel, Tobias Kötter, Thorsten Meinl, Peter Ohl, Kilian Thiel & Bernd Wiswedel. 2009. KNIME - the Konstanz information miner: version 2.0 and beyond. SIGKDD Explor. Newsletter, 11(1), 26--31. PACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 5, No. GROUP, Article 219, Publication date: July 2021. 20:18 Naja Holten Møller et al. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Christopher M. Bishop. 2006. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer Verlag, New York. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Pernille Bjørn & Nina Boulus-Rødje. 2015. The multiple intersecting sites of design in CSCW research. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: An International Journal (JCSCW), 24(3): 319--351. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Pernille Bjørn, Mark Wulff, Mathias Schmidt Petræus, & Naja Holten Møller. 2021. Immersive cooperative work environments (CWE): Designing human-building interaction in virtual reality. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: An International Journal (JCSCW).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Jeanette Blomberg & Helena Karasti. 2013. Reflections on 25 years of ethnography in CSCW. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: An International Journal (JCSCW), 22(4--6), 373--423. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Jeanette Blomberg, Jean Giacomi, Andrea Mosher & Pat Swenton-Hall. 1993. Ethnographic Field Methods and their Relation to Design. In Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. (ed.) D. Schuler and A. Namioka. London, UK, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher, 123--155.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Morten Bonde, Claus Bossen & Peter Danholt. 2019. Data-work and friction: Investigating the practices of repurposing healthcare data. Health Informatics Journal, 25(3), 558--566.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Claus Bossen, Lotte Groth Jensen, and Flemming Witt. 2012. Medical secretaries' care of records: the cooperative work of a non-clinical group. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), 921--930. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Claus Bossen, & Martin Foss. 2016. The collaborative work of hospital porters: Accountability, visibility and configurations of work. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), 965--979. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Mads Christophersen, Tue Langhoff, & Pernille Bjørn. 2015. Unforseen challenges: Adopting wearable health data tracking devices to reduce health insurance costs in organizations. In International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction, 288--299.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Adrian Clear, Sam Mitchell Finnigan, Patrick Olivier, & Rob Comber. 2017. "I'd want to burn the data or at least nobble the numbers": Towards data-mediated building management for comfort and energy use. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), 2448--2461. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Frank Codd. 1970. A relational model of data for large shared data banks. Communications of the ACM, 13(6), 377--387. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Andy Crabtree & Richard Mortier. 2015. Human Data Interaction: Historical lessons from social studies and CSCW. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW), 1--20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Lynn Dombrowski, Ellie Harmon, & Sarah Fox (2016). Social justice-oriented interaction design: Outlining key design strategies and commitments. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS), 656--671. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Lynn Dombrowski, Adriana Alvarado Garcia & Jessica Despard. 2017. Low-wage precarious workers' sociotechnical practices working towards addressing wage theft. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 4585--4598. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Paul Dourish. 2019. User experience as legitimacy trap. ACM Interactions, December 2019, 46--49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Paul Dourish. 2017. The Stuff of Bits. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Paul Dourish & Edgar Gómez Cruz. 2018. Datafication and data fiction: Narrating data and narrating with data. Big Data & Society, 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Christina Farr. 2020. Some hospitals are tracking Covid-19 by adding sensors to employees' badges. Accessed 12.08.2020 from CNBC https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/02/hospitals-tracking-covid-19-with-badge-sensors-swipesense-technology.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Brittany Fiore-Gartland & Gina Neff. 2015. Communication, mediation, and the expectations of data: Data valences across health and wellness communities. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1466--1484.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Nanna Gorm & Irina Shklovski. 2016. Sharing steps in the workplace: Changing privacy concerns over time. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 4315--4319. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Richard R. Harper. 1992. Looking at ourselves: An examination of the social organization of two research laboratories. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW), 330--337. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Richard R. Harper, Michael G. Lamming & William M. Newman. 1992. Locating systems at work: Implications for the development of active badge applications. Interacting with Computers 4(3), 343--363. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Simon Head. 2014. Mindless: Why Smarter Machines are Making Dumber Human. Basic Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Emily D. Heaphy. 2017. "Dancing on hot coals": How emotion work facilitates collective sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 60(2), 642--670.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Brent Hecht, Lauren Wilcox, Jeffrey P. Bigham, Johannes Schöning, Ehsan Hoque, Jason Ernst, Yonatan Bisk, Luigi De Russis, Lana Yarosh, Bushra Anjum, Danish Contractor & Cathy Wu. 2018. It's time to do something. Mitigating the negative impacts of computing through a change to the peer review process https://elib.suub.uni- bremen.de/edocs/00106471--1.pdf. PACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 5, No. GROUP, Article 219, Publication date: July 2021. Can Workplace Tracking Ever Empower? 20:19Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Anna Lauren Hoffmann. 2019. Where fairness fails: data, algorithms, and the limits of antidiscrimination discourse. Information, Communication & Society 22(7), 900--915.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Azra Ismail & Neha Kumar. 2018. Engaging solidarity in data collection practices for community health. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2 (CSCW), no. 76. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Leonard Kaufman & Peter J. Rousseeuw. 1987. Clustering by means of Medoids, in Statistical Data Analysis Based on the l_1--Norm and Related Methods, (ed) by Y. Dodge, 405--416.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Rob Kitchin. 2014. Big data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data & Society, 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Young Ming Kow & Waikuen Cheng. 2018. Complimenting invisible work: Identifying hidden employee contributions through a voluntary, positive and open work review system. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on ComputerSupported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), Article 96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Kristian Helbo Kristiansen, Mathias A. Valeur-Meller, Lynn Dombrowski & Naja L. Holten Møller. 2018. Accountability in the blue-collar data-driven workplace. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), paper 332. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Vladimir I. Levenshtein. 1966. Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady, 10 (8), 707--710.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Adrian MacKenzie. 2002. Transductions: Bodies and machines at speed. A&C Black.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Gloria Mark, Shamsi T Iqbal, Mary Czerwinski & Paul Johns. 2014. Bored Mondays and focused afternoons: The rhythm of attention and online activity in the workplace. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 3025--3034. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Helena M. Mentis, Anita Komlodi, Katrina Schrader, Michael Phipps, Ann Gruber Baldini, Karen Yarbrough & Lisa Shulman. 2017. Crafting a view of self-tracking data in the clinical visit. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 5800--5812. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. P Shayan Mirjafari, Kizito Masaba, Ted Grover, et al. 2019. Differentiating higher and lower job performers in the workplace using mobile sensing. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 3(2), Article no. 37. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Phoebe Moore & Andrew Robinson. 2016. The Quantified Self: What Counts in the Neoliberal Workplace. New Media & Society 18(1), 2774 -- 2792.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Michael Muller, Shion Guha, Eric P. S. Baumer, David Mimno, and Sadat Shami. 2016. Machine Learning and Grounded Theory Method: Convergence, Divergence, and Combination. In Proceedings of the International ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP), 3--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Naja Holten Møller & Signe Vikkelsø. 2012. The clinical work of secretaries: Exploring the interaction of administrative and clinical work in the diagnosing process. In J. C. Dugsdale, M.A. Masclet, J.F. Grasso, H.P. Boujut (ed.) From Research to Practice in the Design of Cooperative Systems: Results and Open Challenges (COOP), 33--47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Naja Holten Møller. 2013. Achieving continuity of care: A study of the challenges in a Danish and a US hospital department. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW), 229--247.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Naja Holten Møller, Irina Shklovski, Six M. Silberman; Lynn Dombrowski, & Airi Lampinen (2017). A constructive- critical approach to the changing workplace and its technologies. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW) Panel.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Naja Holten Møller, Pernille Bjørn, Jonas Christopher Villumsen, Tine C. Hansen Hancock, Toshimitsu Aritake, Shigeyuki Tani. 2017. Data tracking in search of workflows. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), 2153--2165. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Naja Holten Møller. 2017. The Future of clerical work is precarious. ACM Interactions, 25(4), 75--77. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Gina Neff & Dawn Nafus. 2016. Self-Tracking. The MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Gina Neff, Anissa Tanweer, Brittany Fiore-Gartland & Laura Osborn. 2017. Critique and contribute: A practice-based framework for improving critical data studies and data science. Big Data, 5(2), 85--97.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Office for National Statistics. 2019. The Probability of Automation in England.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Samir Passi & Solon Barocas. 2019. Problem Formulation and Fairness. In Proceedings of the ACM conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Samir Passi & Steven J. Jackson. 2017. Data vision: Learning to see through algorithmic abstraction. In Proceedings of Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 2436--2447. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Caroline Criado Perez (2019). Invisible Women. Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men. Chatto & Windus, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Kathleen H. Pine & Max Liboiron (2015). The politics of measurement. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 3147--3156. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Dave Randall, Richard Harper & Mark Rouncefield. 2007. Fieldwork for Design. Theory and Practice. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Evelyn Rupert, Engin Isin & Didier Bigo. 2017. Data politics. Big Data & Society, 1--7. PACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 5, No. GROUP, Article 219, Publication date: July 2021. 20:20 Naja Holten Møller et al.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Andrew D. Selbst, Danah Boyd, Sorelle A. Friedler, Suresh Venkatasubramanian & Janet Vertesi. 2019. Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In Proceedings of the ACM conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Lucy Suchman. 1995. Making work visible. Communications of the ACM, 38(9), 56--64. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Hilda Tellioglu & Ina Wagner. 2001. Work practices surrounding PACS: The politics of space in hospitals. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: An International Journal (JCSCW) 10, 163--188. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Peter Tolmie, Andy Crabtree, Tom Rodden, James Colley & Ewa Luger. 2016. ?This has to be cats" -- personal data legibility in networked sensing systems. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), 491--502. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Satomi Tsuji, Kazuo Yano, Norihiko Moriwaki, Nobou Sato, Minoru Ogushi & Yoshihiro Wakisaka. 2009. Business microscope system. U.S. Patent Application No. 12/022, 630.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Tricia Wang. 2013. Big Data Needs Thick Data. Ethnography Matters. Posted 13. May 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Karl E. Weick. 1995. Sensemaking in Organizations. Foundations for Organizational Science. Sage Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Karl E. Weick, Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & David Obstfeld. 2005. Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409--421. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  64. Christine Wolf & Jeanette Blomberg. 2019. Evaluating the promise of human-algorithm collaborations in everyday work practices. In Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 3 (CSCW), Article 143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Daniela Wurhofer, Thomas Meneweger, Verena Fuchsberger & Manfred Tscheligi. 2018. Reflections on operators' and maintenance engineers' experiences of smart factories. Proceedings of the ACM conference on Supporting Groupwork, 284--296. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Kazuo Yano, Koji Ara, Norihiko Moriwaki & Hiroyuki Kuriyama. 2009. Measurement of Human Behavior: Creating a Society for Discovering Opportunities, Hitachi Review, 58(4), 139.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Shosana Zuboff. 2019. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. The Fight for the Future at the New Frontier of Power. Profile Books. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

(auto-classified)
  1. Can Workplace Tracking Ever Empower? Collective Sensemaking for the Responsible Use of Sensor Data at Work

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!