Is employee surveillance beneficial?

When is employee surveillance appropriate?
(Perspectives shared on LinkedIn)

Majority of companies have successfully moved to remote  Or hybrid  working during the pandemic.

As remote & hybrid working has become the norm, companies have started tracking employees & virtually monitoring them through digital tools like desktop monitoring, video surveillance etc.

These systems are designed to reduce rule-breaking

Yet recent research  done by Harvard Business Review suggests that  in some cases, they can seriously backfire.

It was found across two studies that monitored employees were substantially more likely to break rules.

Cases reported were cheating on a test, stealing equipment, and deliberately working at a slow pace.

Some employees were found to be struggling to cope with surveillance.

Results also showed that surveillance adversely affected employees’ sense of personal responsibility.

Monitoring employees led them to subconsciously feel less responsibility for their own conduct.

This ultimately made them more likely to act in ways that they would otherwise consider immoral.

However, when employees feel that they are being treated fairly, they are less like to lose their sense of moral responsibility in response to monitoring.

The study concluded that in cases where monitoring is considered necessary  employers should take steps to enhance the perceptions of justice to preserve the employees’ sense of moral agency.

Companies need to draw boundaries and get feedback about when surveillance is appropriate before turning om the Spy Mode.

Would love to hear your views in the comments below.