Work from home, OK, but at least grace us with your half-smile
Meetings have changed — but shouldn’t you still be able to look people in the eye?
There’s always one. Five friendly, expressive faces — and one grey bubble where your finance chief’s face should be. You’re tempted to nudge: “Camera on?” After all, visibility feels like accountability. But before you push for a rule, it’s worth asking what the evidence — and Canadian privacy norms — actually say.
What the science says about “faces on”
The latest Camera Use During Video Calls study from Stanford’s Nicholas Bloom and colleagues at ITAM and the University of Chicago offers a more nuanced view than the simple “on or off” debate. Their survey, part of the broader Work-from-Home Research project, found that employees who used cameras selectively — for smaller, interactive meetings or discussions involving collaboration and trust — reported higher engagement and satisfaction than those who kept them off throughout the workday.
According to the study, camera use helps build social connection and reduces miscommunication, particularly in hybrid settings where people don’t share physical space. Managers were more likely to perceive “camera-on” colleagues as engaged and accountable, and those employees, in turn, reported feeling more visible and connected to their teams.
But the data also support moderation. Respondents who spent most of their day on video without breaks reported higher fatigue and lower concentration. The takeaway: cameras help when they serve a purpose — not when they simply signal presence.
Zoom fatigue is real
That nuance matters because other research, including work from Stanford’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab, shows that video calls create “nonverbal overload”: unrelenting eye contact, constant self-monitoring, and proximity distortion — the feeling that everyone is sitting uncomfortably close.
These factors make virtual interactions more tiring than in-person ones. In one Journal of Applied Psychology experiment, camera use itself — more than meeting frequency — predicted end-of-day fatigue, particularly for women and newer employees. In short, the red light can take a toll.
Bloom’s 2023 data align with this: while short, camera-on interactions can strengthen bonds, long blocks of mandatory video tend to erode focus.
The Canadian wrinkle: Privacy and proportionality
In Canada, visibility is not just cultural — it’s regulated. Employers must collect only the personal information necessary for a legitimate business purpose, and continuous video feeds can cross that line.
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner’s guidance on workplace monitoring emphasises “necessity” and “proportionality.” Requiring employees to appear on camera for every meeting could be hard to justify, particularly for large groups or information-only sessions. Recording meetings adds another layer: it constitutes the collection and storage of personal information and must be disclosed, limited, and justified.
Canadian law firms summarising the OPC’s 2023 updates have reached the same conclusion: proceed, but with restraint. Spell out the “why” before the “when.”
So… should you ask your CFO?
Sometimes — strategically. The Camera Use During Video Calls research shows that visual presence helps when context and collaboration matter: onboarding, sensitive feedback, problem-solving sessions, or client-facing discussions. Visibility builds trust and aids decision-making.
But a universal camera rule is likely to backfire, replacing accountability with exhaustion. A better approach is to make expectations contingent on meeting purpose, not hierarchy or personality. Ask for cameras when it helps the work — and offer dignified opt-outs for bandwidth issues, shared spaces, or neurodiverse needs.
When you do ask, tie it to outcomes: “Could we do this one on camera to walk through the model together?” feels different from “Cameras on, everyone.”
Five policy moves HR can stand behind
1. Define the purpose before the policy. Outline why camera use matters — for example, client rapport or collaborative workshops — and make it optional for large update calls.
2. Normalise “camera-off” as neutral. Leaders can model this by occasionally joining audio-only and signalling engagement another way (“I’m off video today but taking notes and listening”). This helps level the field for employees who feel pressure to perform visually.
3. Design away fatigue. Shorten meetings, build in five-minute breaks, and encourage participants to hide self-view — all remedies backed by Stanford’s findings on video fatigue.
4. Measure engagement, not faces. Track what actually matters: attendance, participation, and follow-through, not how many cameras are on. Microsoft’s Work Trend Index shows that collaboration now flows across chat, shared documents and reactions — not just video squares.
5. Keep privacy front and centre. If recording is essential, announce it clearly, explain the purpose, limit retention, and control access. Avoid recording by default, in keeping with OPC guidance on necessity and proportionality.
The CFO Test
Back to your finance chief. If the conversation involves nuance, trust or judgment — a sensitive forecast, a major pitch, a performance conversation — a polite, purpose-linked request for video is fair. For routine updates or data walkthroughs, it’s unlikely to add much and may quietly cost energy and goodwill.
The research is clear: cameras can strengthen connection when used judiciously, but constant visibility is neither sustainable nor compliant. In today’s hybrid workplaces, engagement is best measured by results, not rectangles. Ask for cameras when it helps the work — and trust professionalism to do the rest.
