Digital monitoring increasingly converts work activity into observable, comparable, and actionable data. Yet employees do not respond uniformly to such control, and prevailing accounts often isolate acceptance, privacy concern, workarounds, voice, or resistance rather than explaining their relationship. This Original Typology Article develops a proposed Employee-Response Typology for organizing employee agency under digital monitoring and datafied control. Drawing on organizational behavior, work design, workplace privacy, algorithmic management, labor-process, and employment-relations scholarship, the article distinguishes four ideal-typical responses: compliance, concealment, negotiation, and collective resistance. The typology classifies responses by their visibility to organizational authorities, locus of agency, orientation toward the monitoring regime, rule engagement, and temporal stability. It further proposes that employee responses may coexist or change as perceived legitimacy, evaluative opacity, economic dependence, appeal efficacy, managerial reaction, and collective capacity shift. Compliance is separated from consent and performance; concealment from misconduct; negotiation from merely formal voice; and collective resistance from aggregated dissatisfaction. The framework implies that monitoring design should be evaluated not only by data accuracy or observable conformity but also by the response patterns it elicits and the authority relations it institutionalizes. The contribution remains conceptual: the categories are not validated employee classes, the transition paths are not causal estimates, and evidence from platform work cannot be transferred automatically to conventional employment. Longitudinal, multilevel, comparative, and field-experimental research is required to test, revise, combine, or reject the proposed categories and relationships.
