The CFO who won't turn his camera on — should you care?

Five tiles blink to life on your screen — cheerful waves, polite smiles, a smattering of good lighting. Then one square remains blank, the initials of your chief financial officer floating in grey silence. You wonder, not for the first time, whether to ask, “Mind turning your camera on?” After all, seeing faces feels more human. But in today’s hybrid world, is being on camera really the same as being engaged? 

When cameras help — and when they don’t 

New research from Stanford University economist Nicholas Bloom and colleagues Jose Maria Barrero and Steven Davis, part of their Work-from-Home Research program, suggests there’s more to camera use than simple etiquette. Their 2023 report, Camera Use During Video Calls, found that employees who use video selectively — switching it on for collaborative or relationship-heavy meetings and off for routine updates — report higher engagement, better communication and fewer misunderstandings. 

Managers, the study found, are also more likely to rate camera-on workers as attentive and accountable. In smaller groups, facial cues and body language help conversations flow, restoring some of the connection lost in remote work. But the benefits taper off fast in back-to-back video sessions. Too much visibility, the data show, quickly becomes draining. 

“Camera use works best when it has purpose,” Bloom’s team noted. “Prolonged use without breaks reduces focus and energy.” 

Why video meetings feel so exhausting 

Australians, like workers everywhere, know the strange weariness that follows a day of Zoom or Teams calls. Psychologists have long pointed to what Stanford researchers call “non-verbal overload”: prolonged eye contact, seeing your own reflection for hours, and the sense that colleagues are sitting only centimetres from your face. 

A study in the Journal of Applied Psychology found that simply having the camera on — more than the number of meetings — predicted fatigue by day’s end. The effect was particularly strong for women and newer employees. The researchers argued that appearing on video often triggers “impression management”, a subtle pressure to look engaged, well-presented and alert — energy that could otherwise go toward the work itself. 

That fatigue doesn’t mean video has no place. It means it should be used like caffeine: powerful in moderation, counterproductive when constant. 

The local lens: Work culture and privacy 

Australian employers are navigating the same hybrid balancing act as their global peers. The latest data from the Survey of Working Arrangements and Attitudes show that roughly a quarter of paid workdays in advanced economies are now done from home. In Australia, that figure has held steady since mid-2022. 

But local workplace culture adds a wrinkle. While Australians value approachability and connection, they’re also wary of micromanagement and surveillance. Continuous video expectations can feel invasive — particularly for employees working from shared homes, caring for children, or living in smaller spaces. 

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner has made clear that employers must collect only personal information reasonably necessary for business purposes. Recording meetings or requiring cameras “always on” could stretch that standard. Transparency and proportionality are key: explain why video matters, limit recording, and allow discretion where practical. 

So, should you ask the CFO? 

Maybe — but only if the purpose warrants it. For a sensitive discussion, a planning session, or a client pitch, seeing each other’s expressions can build trust and help interpret tone. A polite, purpose-anchored request — “Would you mind having video on for this one so we can run through the numbers together?” — is entirely reasonable. 

For regular updates or data reviews, though, insisting on video is unlikely to yield much beyond irritation. It can also reinforce hierarchy if leaders demand visibility from others but reserve the right to remain off camera themselves. 

The Stanford findings suggest that the healthiest teams normalise both modes. Leaders turn video on when connection counts, off when deep focus matters, and never confuse visibility with commitment. 

Five practical moves for HR 

1. Be clear about intent. Define when and why video is genuinely useful — coaching, collaboration, or client rapport — and skip it for routine briefings. 
2. Model balance from the top. Senior leaders can help destigmatise “camera-off” moments by occasionally doing the same and signalling their participation through comments or shared notes. 
3. Design meetings with energy in mind. Keep sessions short, rotate facilitators, and encourage breaks between calls. Remind people they can move or stand while listening. 
4. Focus on contribution, not camera time. Measure participation by engagement, ideas and follow-through, not by who keeps their video feed on. 
5. Respect privacy and context. Avoid recording unless necessary, explain the reason when you do, and be considerate of bandwidth limits and home environments. 

The bigger picture 

The camera question, at heart, is a question about trust. Remote and hybrid work have blurred the boundary between the professional and the personal. The impulse to “see” someone is understandable — it reassures us that people are paying attention. But research increasingly shows that connection isn’t confined to a camera frame. 

As Australian workplaces continue to settle into hybrid rhythms, the smartest HR policies will focus less on what employees look like onscreen and more on how they contribute off it. 

So the next time your CFO’s tile stays grey, take a breath before you nudge. If the work’s getting done, and the conversation’s moving forward, maybe that’s visibility enough.