Electronic Employee Monitoring: Privacy, Ethics, and Workplace Impact

Introduction

In recent years, information technology (IT) has transformed workplaces tremendously. For instance, employers worldwide have embraced the use of technology to monitor the activities employees engage in during working hours and to increase the amount of work done on online business platforms. This was largely influenced by findings from numerous studies that established that if left unsupervised, employees tend to waste a lot of time and resources online. In fact, a survey by Websense reported that one third of employees used the internet for personal reasons, which translates to costs of about $85 billion in America due to lost work time (Papini, 2007). Some employees may also use company resources for their own gain, which violates the organization's rules and procedures and decreases their productivity.

According to a study done by the Work Surveillance Project of the Privacy Foundation, of the 100 million online workers around the globe, 35% are being monitored (Weckert, 2005). In the U.S., an Electronic Monitoring and Surveillance Survey reported that more than a quarter of total employers have dismissed employees for misuse of emails and a third have dismissed them for wrongful use of the internet. However, along with the benefits of information technology comes potential problems to an organization: security breaches, violation of privacy, or misuse. This text identifies the roles IT plays in employee monitoring, how it impacts the organization, and it also examines some of the ethical issues it brings forth.

Motivations and Applications of IT in Employee Monitoring

Different organizations use different methods of electronic employee monitoring (EEM). According to Weckert (2005), some of the main motivations include the reduction of prices of applicable software, increased need for internet use in the workplace, the ability to conceal surveillance information from employees, and the belief that monitoring leads to more effective employees. A survey conducted by the American Management Association (AMA) established that 47% of employers used EEM to keep track of emails, 68% to monitor how the internet is used, 60% for security reasons, and 68% to avoid illegal activities (Papini, 2007). This suggests that other motivations for employee monitoring and surveillance include improving employee performance, avoiding wastage of time on non-work-related activities, preventing illegal activities that may be carried out without management's knowledge, and avoiding transfer of confidential and valuable company information to third parties.

Software packages such as LittleBrother are commonly used for monitoring. LittleBrother uses databases that classify all employees' activities as either productive or unproductive, depending on the websites visited and the browsing sessions. Using such packages, the organization is able to identify individuals who mostly visit unproductive sites, how frequently they use them, and at what times of the day. Employers can also use CCTV cameras to monitor hourly movements and to gauge how idle or busy employees are. In customer service, calls are recorded to assess the quality of conversations, which helps improve performance and facilitate better feedback and interactions with customers. Email activities are also monitored, which is advantageous because illegal activities can be identified, the spread of rumors or wrong information avoided, and disrespect to both colleagues and management addressed promptly.

Impact of Employee Monitoring on Organizations and Employees

Employers are the biggest beneficiaries of EEM. They are able to reduce wastage of time and resources, improve employee performance, and assert their authority. This is in agreement with Stanton and Stam (2006), who note that "monitoring and enforcement enable conformity with the behavioral rules of the organization." The costs associated with lost work time are also reduced significantly when surveillance and monitoring technology is used. Stanton and Stam explain that employees hold the success of the organization in their hands, which is compromised once company information is mishandled and resources are misused.

Despite the numerous benefits to the organization, employee monitoring has the opposite effect on the employees. Westin (as cited by Papini, 2007) found that employees who were monitored electronically lost trust in the organization. They work under a lot of pressure when they know they are being surveyed, and they may also conclude that the organization is not confident in their abilities. Stanton and Stam (2006) also state that trust between an organization and its employees is a form of organizational contract. When this level of trust is breached, it will lead to disgruntled employees, which certainly translates to incompetence and decreased productivity in the long run.

Ethical Implications of IT in Employee Monitoring

Majority of employees consider EEM an invasion of their privacy. Employees have their own opinions of how information that concerns them should be handled and dispensed, and the limit of the organization's interference in their private affairs (Papini, 2007). When organizations violate this privacy, they may discover personal information about employees that may influence the decisions they make. Employees also believe they are the only ones who should read emails addressed in their names. However, employers feel differently about the issue and believe that unmonitored employees are less effective and, if they are not engaged in unproductive activities, have nothing to worry about anyway. Employers often feel that so long as employees are aware the emails are being read, it is not a violation of their privacy at all.

Stanton and Stam (2006) claim that the degree of privacy deemed appropriate is different for both employers and employees. Some employees have resorted to suing their employers for invasion of privacy. Legislation is one solution that finds a middle ground and specifies the extent to which information in an organization is considered private. Ethical solutions to this problem also apply and they mostly point towards the consideration of both parties' interests and concerns. According to Weckert (2005), employees are allowed a certain level of monitoring as long as it is not illegal, it meets the necessary standards, and is aimed at achieving good goals, which is only possible if some rights are infringed. Therefore, organizations have to agree with employees on the extent of surveillance and monitoring that is appropriate, and employees have to give their consent as it has been proven that use of personal resources for personal, illegal, and time-wasting activities is frequent in the workplace and negatively affects productivity.

Conclusion

The use of IT in employee monitoring may have its benefits, but in order for it not to compromise employers' relationships with employees, technical, informal, and formal controls should be used effectively to create good working and regulatory environments in the workplace. The key is for both organizations and employees to maintain high levels of integrity and honesty. Only then can the impact of technology be positive and amount to substantial benefits for all who use it. From an ethical point of view, employers should not misuse EEM just because it is legal. On the other hand, just because employees are entrusted with company resources does not make it right for them to extend their use to personal activities such as online shopping, accessing social networks, and other non-work-related activities. Both parties should apply Immanuel Kant's theory that maintains each individual has a level of dignity or a sense of worth that needs to be accorded respect at all times.