EU Think Tank
  • Home
  • Business
  • Leadership
  • Economics
  • Recruitment
  • Innovation
  • Strategy
  • More
    • Customer Experience
    • Managing People
    • Managing Yourself
    • Communication
    • Marketing
    • Organizational Culture
    • Technology
Featured Posts
    • Managing Yourself
    What Are Your Decision-Making Strengths and Blind Spots?
    • August 9, 2022
    • Customer Experience
    Where Net Promoter Score Goes Wrong
    • August 9, 2022
    • Managing Yourself
    What to Do If Your Team Is Underperforming
    • August 9, 2022
    • Managing People
    Solving Tough Problems Requires a Mindset Shift
    • August 9, 2022
    • Technology
    Generating Stronger Business Outcomes Through Customer Data – SPONSORED CONTENT FROM SAP
    • August 9, 2022
Featured Categories
Business
View Posts
Communication
View Posts
Customer Experience
View Posts
Economics
View Posts
Green
View Posts
Health
View Posts
Hiring and Recruitment
View Posts
Innovation
View Posts
Leadership
View Posts
Managing People
View Posts
Managing Yourself
View Posts
Marketing
View Posts
Middle East
View Posts
News
View Posts
Organizational Culture
View Posts
Russia
View Posts
Saudi Arabia
View Posts
Strategy
View Posts
Technology
View Posts
Ukraine
View Posts
Uncategorized
View Posts
EU Think Tank EU Think Tank
7K
9K
4K
1K
EU Think Tank EU Think Tank
  • Home
  • Business
  • Leadership
  • Economics
  • Recruitment
  • Innovation
  • Strategy
  • More
    • Customer Experience
    • Managing People
    • Managing Yourself
    • Communication
    • Marketing
    • Organizational Culture
    • Technology
  • Technology

Monitoring Employees Makes Them More Likely to Break Rules

  • June 27, 2022
  • euthinktank
Total
0
Shares
0
0
0

As remote work becomes the norm, more and more companies have begun tracking employees through desktop monitoring, video surveillance, and other digital tools. These systems are designed to reduce rule-breaking — and yet new research suggests that in some cases, they can seriously backfire. Specifically, the authors found across two studies that monitored employees were substantially more likely to break rules, including engaging in behaviors such as cheating on a test, stealing equipment, and purposely working at a slow pace. They further found that this effect was driven by a shift in employees’ sense of agency and personal responsibility: Monitoring employees led them to subconsciously feel less responsibility for their own conduct, ultimately making them more likely to act in ways that they would otherwise consider immoral. However, when employees feel that they are being treated fairly, the authors found that they are less likely to suffer a drop in agency and are thus less likely to lose their sense of moral responsibility in response to monitoring. As such, the authors suggest that in cases where monitoring is necessary, employers should take steps to enhance perceptions of justice and thus preserve employees’ sense of agency.

In April 2020, global demand for employee monitoring software more than doubled. Online searches for “how to monitor employees working from home” increased by 1,705%, and sales for systems that track workers’ activity via desktop monitoring, keystroke tracking, video surveillance, GPS location tracking, and other digital tools went through the roof. Some of these systems purport to use employee data to improve wellbeing — for example, Microsoft is developing a system that would use smart watches to collect data on employees’ blood pressure and heart rate, producing personalized “anxiety scores” to inform wellness recommendations. But the vast majority of employee monitoring tools are focused on tracking performance, increasing productivity, and deterring rule-breaking.

For example, a social-media marketing company in Florida installed software on employees’ work computers that takes screenshots of their desktop every 10 minutes and records how much time they spend on different activities. The company then uses this data to determine productivity levels and identify rule-breakers. Similarly, Amazon tracks smartphone data for its delivery drivers to monitor their efficiency and identify unsafe driving practices.

Given their prevalence, one might expect that these sorts of systems would be effective in reducing harmful workplace behavior. And indeed, studies have shown that in some contexts, monitoring can deter certain specific behaviors, such as theft by restaurant workers. However, our recent research suggests that in many cases, monitoring employees can seriously backfire.

When Monitoring Backfires

In our first study, we surveyed more than 100 employees across the U.S., some of whom were subject to monitoring at work and some of whom were not. We found that monitored employees were substantially more likely to take unapproved breaks, disregard instructions, damage workplace property, steal office equipment, and purposefully work at a slow pace, among other rule-breaking behaviors. Of course, this survey only determined correlation — so to prove causation, we ran a second, experimental study. We asked another 200 U.S.-based employees to complete a series of tasks, and told half of them that they would be working under electronic surveillance. We then gave them an opportunity to cheat, and found that those who were told they were being monitored were actually more likely to cheat than those who didn’t think they were being monitored.

What drove this effect? In general, people are motivated to do the right thing by a combination of external factors (such as the threat of punishment or promise of reward) and their internal moral compass. Prior studies in support of employee monitoring generally focus on the former: situations in which targeted monitoring informs an immediate external response to a specific form of misconduct, such as retail workers who know they will be fired if they’re caught stealing on camera. But in many workplace contexts, employers cannot rely on carrots and sticks alone. In these cases, employers must also depend on employees’ internal sense of morality — and our studies showed that monitoring employees causes them to subconsciously feel that they are less responsible for their own conduct, thus making them more likely to act immorally.

Specifically, when we surveyed the participants in our studies, we found that those who were monitored were more likely to report that the authority figure overseeing their surveillance was responsible for their behavior, while the employees who weren’t monitored were more likely to take responsibility for their actions. This reduction in agency in turn made the monitored employees more likely to act contrary to their own moral standards, ultimately leading them to engage in behavior that they would otherwise consider immoral.

To Boost Agency, Treat Employees Justly

Clearly, monitoring can have some major negative side effects. But is it possible to gain the benefits of monitoring employees without pushing them to abandon their morals? Being monitored is likely to always have at least some negative impact on people’s sense of agency and moral responsibility, but our studies did identify one mechanism that can reduce this effect: When employees feel that they are being treated fairly, they are less likely to suffer a drop in agency and are thus less likely to lose their sense of moral responsibility in response to monitoring. In our experiment, we increased perceptions of employer fairness both by varying how respectfully the administrator interacted with the participants, and whether they received the cash reward they had been promised, and we found that monitored participants were less likely to cheat if they felt they were treated justly.

So what does this mean for employers? There are countless ways leaders can enhance perceptions of justice (and thus preserve employees’ sense of agency). As a starting point, rather than unilaterally implementing a monitoring system, leaders should find ways to give employees visibility and input into when surveillance is appropriate and when it should be off-limits — and then stick to those boundaries. For example, financial services instant messaging platform Symphony enables managers to monitor employee conversations only to the extent necessary for record-keeping and legal compliance, with strict guidelines in place preventing any surveillance without a strong justification. Leaders should also find ways to give employees access to their own data, as well as aggregated, anonymized data collected from relevant teams. That data should in turn be used in ways that benefit employees (for example, to inform wellness initiatives or professional development opportunities). And of course, leaders should do their best to communicate openly and transparently with employees about what data will be collected and how it will be used — in fact, one survey found that even just explaining the scope and purpose of monitoring can boost employees’ acceptance of the practice by about 70%.

When used right, monitoring employees can prevent accidents, boost performance, and improve overall wellbeing. But our research demonstrates that it can also reduce employees’ sense of agency and personal responsibility, potentially increasing the prevalence of the very behaviors that these systems are meant to deter. To mitigate this risk, leaders must ensure that they treat employees fairly, foster accountability, and frame monitoring as a tool for empowering — not punishing — employees.

Total
0
Shares
Share 0
Tweet 0
Pin it 0
You May Also Like
Read More
  • Technology

Generating Stronger Business Outcomes Through Customer Data – SPONSORED CONTENT FROM SAP

  • euthinktank
  • August 9, 2022
Read More
  • Technology

Is Your Company Squandering Digital Opportunities?

  • euthinktank
  • August 8, 2022
Read More
  • Technology

Big Tech Has a Patent Violation Problem

  • euthinktank
  • August 5, 2022
Read More
  • Technology

Research: We Make More Virtuous Choices When Using Pen and Paper

  • euthinktank
  • August 3, 2022
Read More
  • Technology

How Well Does Your Company Use Analytics?

  • euthinktank
  • July 27, 2022
Read More
  • Technology

Coding Isn’t a Necessary Leadership Skill — But Digital Literacy Is

  • euthinktank
  • July 26, 2022
Read More
  • Technology

Proven Strategies for a Best-in-Class Data-Led Enterprise Webinar – SPONSORED CONTENT FROM Workday

  • euthinktank
  • July 23, 2022
Read More
  • Technology

Is Data Scientist Still the Sexiest Job of the 21st Century?

  • euthinktank
  • July 16, 2022

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured Posts
  • 1
    What Are Your Decision-Making Strengths and Blind Spots?
    • August 9, 2022
  • 2
    Where Net Promoter Score Goes Wrong
    • August 9, 2022
  • 3
    What to Do If Your Team Is Underperforming
    • August 9, 2022
  • 4
    Solving Tough Problems Requires a Mindset Shift
    • August 9, 2022
  • 5
    Generating Stronger Business Outcomes Through Customer Data – SPONSORED CONTENT FROM SAP
    • August 9, 2022
Recent Posts
  • To Keep Your Customers, Keep It Simple
    • August 8, 2022
  • Is Your Company Squandering Digital Opportunities?
    • August 8, 2022
  • Analytics 3.0
    • August 8, 2022

Sign Up for Our Newsletters

Subscribe now to our newsletter

EU Think Tank
  • Home
  • Privacy Policy
  • Guest Post
  • Contact

Input your search keywords and press Enter.