An Executive Interview with Steven Sutherland, General Manager – Powerfleet Africa & Middle East
In a world where data privacy concerns are accelerating as fast as technology itself, the conversation around AI-powered cameras in fleet operations has become increasingly complex – and often misunderstood.
To unpack the reality behind the perception, we sat down with Steven Sutherland, General Manager Enterprise at Powerfleet Africa & the Middle East, about a simple but important shift in thinking.
What if AI isn’t watching drivers at all… but monitoring risk?
Q: Steven, let’s start with the biggest concern in the market today – privacy. Why is there still so much hesitation around AI cameras?
Steven S.: It’s largely driven by perception. The moment people hear the word camera, they immediately assume they are being recorded.
From there, the conversation goes straight to privacy concerns – who’s being filmed, where the data goes, and who has access to it.
In many cases, that concern becomes a barrier to adoption.
Organisations hesitate because they believe deploying this technology will conflict with personal data regulations. But that’s where the misunderstanding begins.
Because the purpose of these systems is not to record people. They are designed to identify and prevent risk.
Q: That’s an important distinction. So if AI isn’t focused on people, what is it actually doing?
Steven S.: AI doesn’t care who you are. It doesn’t care about your name, your face, or the registration plate of the vehicle in front of you.
What it cares about is what’s happening in that moment.
Are you driving too close to the vehicle ahead? Are you changing lanes without indicating? Are you wearing your seatbelt? Are you showing signs of fatigue?
These are some of the behaviours that can cause accidents. These are the things that matter.
So instead of thinking about AI as a camera, we should think of it as a set of intelligent eyes focused on health and safety.
Q: But many still believe that to achieve this, video must be recorded and stored. Is that true?
Steven S.: Not at all – and this is one of the most important points to understand.
Today, AI processing happens directly on the device.
That means decisions are made in real time, without the need to store or transmit video. In practice, that means:
- You don’t need to record video
- You don’t need to upload anything to the cloud
- You don’t even need to connect the system to the internet
The camera can simply monitor, detect risk, and alert the driver – without storing a single second of footage.
The idea that safety requires surveillance is no longer accurate. The technology has evolved beyond that.
Q: So you’re saying it’s possible to have full safety functionality without compromising privacy?
Steven S.: Exactly. In fact, we can go even further.
You can configure the system to:
- Use only road-facing cameras
- Disable in-cab recording entirely
- Blur faces and license plates automatically
- Send only event-based alerts, without video
Or, in the strictest environments, you can operate completely offline – where no data leaves the vehicle at all.
This is particularly important in regions where strict data sovereignty laws still prevail, like parts of the Middle East and Africa.
So yes, you can absolutely achieve health and safety objectives without compromising on personal data privacy and regulatory requirements.
Q: If the technology is already capable of this, why does resistance still exist?
Steven S.: Because the focus is often on the perceived risk of data misuse, rather than the real and immediate risks on the road.
Driver fatigue, distraction, blind spots and delayed reaction times are everyday realities. These are the factors that lead to incidents. When those risks are overlooked, the conversation becomes unbalanced.
So it becomes a bit like saying, “I won’t wear a seatbelt because I don’t like how it looks.”
You’re rejecting something that protects you… because of a secondary concern.
We need to rebalance that thinking.
Q: Let’s talk about the driver experience. How should drivers see this technology?
Steven S.: Drivers should see it as a supporting technology and not as a surveillance tool.
Driving is demanding. You’re managing speed, traffic, road conditions, fatigue – all at once.
AI can do something humans can’t: it can monitor multiple risk factors simultaneously, without ever losing focus.
It becomes:
- Your blind spot assistant
- Your fatigue warning system
- Your real-time safety advisor
It’s there to help you arrive safely. That’s it.
Q: How does this translate into high-risk industries like oil & gas or mining?
Steven S.: In those industries, the stakes are extremely high.
You’re dealing with hazardous materials, remote locations, and long driving hours. The margin for error is very small.
Compliance is critical – but so is real-world safety.
What we’re seeing is that while regulations differ from country to country, the underlying safety challenges are very similar.
So the opportunity exists to create a common safety narrative while adapting to local regulatory frameworks.
AI plays a key role here because it can be configured to meet both compliance requirements and operational safety needs.
Q: If you could shift one perception in the market today, what would it be?
Steven S.: I would change the idea that AI cameras are there to watch people. They’re not.
They’re there to monitor what could go wrong and prevent it.
If that understanding shifts, adoption becomes easier, trust improves, and organisations are better positioned to protect their people. Because ultimately, this isn’t about technology.
It’s about responsibility and accountability.
Closing Thought
As the conversation around AI continues to evolve, one point stands out.
The future of fleet safety will not be defined by how much we record, but by how effectively we prevent. And perhaps the most important realisation of all is this.
AI doesn’t watch drivers. It monitors risk – so drivers don’t have to face it alone.
