Why use employee monitoring tools?
York International, an employee-owned insurance brokerage firm in Westchester County, New York, deployed ActivTrak’s software as a remote work pilot project around a year ago.
By tracking productivity levels, the company hoped the software would address concerns of senior leaders at York about people working outside of the office. In some respects, it offered a trade-off: by providing greater insight into working behaviors, ActivTrak made it possible for the company to offer employees more freedom and flexibility in their working lives.
“There was some skepticism [around remote working] just because it’s an unknown,” said Myles Block, chief operating officer at York International. ActivTrak’s software “built a level of trust.”
“It was a very early proof-of-concept that [showed] people do work at home; they're not sitting by their pool or at their vacation house, they are doing work. It was a benefit for everybody.”
This year, the app was put to wider use, tracking productivity as all 50 York International employees were forced to work from home due to social-distancing measures.
Block said it can provide an overview of productivity and help employees stay productive outside of the office. “We saw this as a huge opportunity, not just for us as the management team, but for the employees themselves,” he said. “Anything we can do to make them more efficient and more productive, and identify the tasks that they're better at, helps the company — and it helps the employee, too.”
Detailed monitoring of employee actions was not behind the deployment, said Block. “If we did that, even for a mid-sized company like ours, we would need two or three full-time people looking at that granular data. That's not the way we want to be using this. I personally don't feel like it's the right way to use it.
“Nobody wants Big Brother watching them,” Block said, “so there's got to be a certain level of trust, and I do believe we have that with our employees.”
While the tracking data can help uncover team or individual productivity issues, it’s not a replacement for human perception and judgement, said Block.
“There could be dozens of explanations for why somebody is ‘idle’ [on their device]. And again, that comes to the other parts of the equation that you’ve got to evaluate: What are the hard deliverables? Are they meeting their deadlines? What is the quality of their work?
“That's something you still need some managerial judgement for; I think anybody looking to use the software as just a red or green indicator of whether somebody is productive is kind of missing the boat.”
Looking ahead, York International plans to continue to use the tool when staff return to the office. “The proof-of-concept can carry on after we progressed through this crisis into whatever our remote strategy is going forward,” he said.
“I would be very shocked if we made the decision to go back five days a week for everybody in the future... “We're going to be able to make better decisions about what that remote strategy looks like.”
Ultimately, transparency is key, Block said, because the organization is co-owned by its staff.
“We are hyper transparent about everything [such as] our financials. We feel like that's an important part of the employee culture because we're not just teammates, we're co-owners.
“People want that accountability,” Block said. “People want that transparency. I think the responsible employee, whether it's an employee-owned company or not, they want to be held accountable. People were very willing to [provide transparency] because they know they're working, they know they're productive at home, and they want to prove that.”
Worker discomfort with monitoring software
For many employees, however, closely tracking their activities via monitoring software raises red flags.
A survey of 1,800 workers by UK union Prospect indicated that nearly 80% of respondents would be “uncomfortable” with camera-monitoring technology and 66% would be leery of keystroke monitoring.
That level of discomfort could affect employee trust: almost half (48%) said the use of monitoring software would damage their relationship with their manager — a figure that rose to 62% among workers 18 to 24 years old.
“The vast majority of workers are really uncomfortable with the idea of this level of software intrusion coming into our homes or to our laptops,” said Andrew Pakes, director of communication and research at Prospect. “It's a level of intrusion we haven't seen before, particularly in white-collar type jobs.
“We risk sleepwalking into a massive extension of surveillance software into our homes, into our private spaces, in the name of tackling a public health need — but without the discussion about what the other consequences of that are,” Pakes said.
Increased monitoring could put more pressure on employees at a time when they may be balancing work commitments with looking after family while working from home. “This is another thing that can add stress to people,” said Edgar Ndjatou, executive director of Workplace Fairness, a Washington, DC-based worker rights advocacy group.
Businesses that that use granular monitoring tools without informing workers risk a backlash from employees as well as negative publicity. In the US, it is legal to monitor employees without consent in all states except Connecticut and Delaware. In the UK and countries subject to Europe’s GDPR rules, employers have a requirement to notify the “data subject” — in this case, the employee.
In fact, multinational bank Barclays is under investigation by UK regulators over allegations that it used software from Sapience Analytics to monitor individual workers without their knowledge — a move described by a UK union as “dystopian Big Brother tactics.” The lender had previously been criticized for the installation of heat sensors to detect whether staff were at their desks.
“The place where this is hugely problematic is that if you're tracking and monitoring your employees, but your employees don't know that you're doing it,” said Gartner’s Kropp. “That's where you get a lot of employee pushback and resentment and frustration, and anger and accusations of being unethical.”
Transparency means employee consultation
Transparency around any form of monitoring is key, said Kropp. He recommends companies create an “employee ethical Bill of Rights” that governs the use of employee data, drawing clear lines around what is collected and measured, and to have in place such rules among core company values.
Employees are much more comfortable with monitoring if a company explains how and why it’s being done. Gartner research indicates that around 75% of those surveyed were okay with monitoring when consulted. In contrast, only around one in four thought it ethical for companies to collect information without their knowledge.
That echoes Prospect’s survey, which indicates that consultation with workers prior to deployment could reduce apprehension. Around one third (32%) of remote workers said they’d be more comfortable with monitoring software if trade unions or worker representatives were consulted first.
Moore, in her proposal to the EU Parliament, recommends that businesses consult with employees and their representatives to discuss what level of monitoring is appropriate — a process of co-determination. This ensures that the needs of employees are factored in from the very start of any decision to deploy monitoring tools.
“The design of all systems should be directly negotiated as well as practically developed with worker representatives,” she said. “There should be experts within union and worker council groups that work alongside management to co-determine and co-design and collaborate — and roll out collaboratively — so that there can be a form of consent.”
Ndjatou concurs: “If you're going to use this type of software, at least get employee buy-in first. Have an employee or two represented at the table, so they know about the technology, why it's being used, what information is stored or retrieved, for what purpose, and how long it is stored.”
"Communicate, have a plan, engage with employees on the data,” said Selvaggi. “Don’t just tell them what’s happening — get their feedback, get their input, have employees work with the employer on the value of what they’re seeing. From that, you’ll see far more benefits in terms of the outputs that you want over time. You’ll probably learn a whole heck of a lot about your employees, your managers and the apps that you spend money on.”
Determining what constitutes real employee consent can be more problematic than it seems. Workers may feel pressured to comply with the company plans, particularly during a time of upheaval and uncertainty.
“When you ask a worker to consent to be tracked and monitored, you have to ask the question: is it meaningful consent, given the unbalanced relationship between the worker and the manager?” said Moore. “Where [meaningful consent] may not always be possible, there should at least be co-determination; there should be collective discussion.”
“In the work relationship, it is a power relationship,” said Pakes. “And if your employer says this needs to happen, then ‘consent’ is slightly different.”
In many cases, employee productivity can be effectively tracked and monitored without the need for monitoring tools, said Moore. “If it's project-based work, then clearly the proof is in the pudding; if you finished your project on time, I'm not going to start asking you to clock in and clock out every five seconds. It's your responsibility.”
“There are many things you can do that don't require the use of surveillance technology,” said Ndjatou, who suggests managers increase check-ins with workers and set clear expectations for productivity directly.
The use of monitoring tools should be limited — or avoided altogether — when less-invasive methods of tracking will do, Pakes said.
“Do you need the technology in the first place? And if you need some of it, do you need all of it? There needs to be a better understanding of what your KPIs are, what performance you trying to measure, what outcomes you're trying to achieve, and have that conversation with your workforce.
“That will build much better social partnership at work in terms of what... you expect people to deliver.”