Top management’s snooping: Is sneaking over employees’ productivity and job commitment a wise approach?

Hasan, Syed Akif and Subhani, Muhammad Imtiaz (2012): Top management’s snooping: Is sneaking over employees’ productivity and job commitment a wise approach? Forthcoming in: African Journal of Business Management

Abstract

The management’s responsibility is to monitor the employee’s performance but when it becomes a desire of the management to snoop/spy the employees’ performance then this act has a direct influence on the employees and their motivations. The paper investigates the effects of top management’s spying/snooping in the organization on employees’ productivity and job commitment. For the purpose a sample of 3500 employees via self-administered survey technique were analyzed. Tobit Model (Censored regression) has been used to interrogate the effect of snooping/ spying on employee productivity and commitment. Tobit Model marked findings that the approach of top management to snoop/spy on the employees’ productivity and job commitment affects adversely on the employees. Policy makers should adopt informal ways to practice snooping as it causes stress, mental illness, de-motivation and especially when snooping is via other co-workers and employees, it creates major disruption and a rise to politicking in organization, which effect the proper streamlining of business operations across the departments.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Organizational spying/snooping, job commitment, employees’ productivity, stress
• Subjects: O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O1 - Economic Development; M - Business Administration and Business Economics ; Marketing ; Accounting ; Personnel Economics > M1 - Business Administration > M12 - Personnel Management ; Executives; Executive Compensation

References

Meeks BN (2000). Big boss is watching you. Workplace snooping remains privacy quandary. Retrieved September 10, 2011 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3078850/t/big-boss-watching-you/#.Tsn4G7JC-kQ.

Morgan G (1987). The electronic supervisor: New Technology, New tensions. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. OTA-CIT-333. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

LaNuez D, Jermier JM (1994). Sabotage by managers and technocrats: neglected patterns of resistance at work. In Jermier MM, Knights D and Nord WR (Eds). Resistance and Power in Organizations, Routledge, London.

Larson JR, Callahan C (1990). Employees-Rating; Supervisors-Behavior; Performance-level. Journal of Applied Psychology. 75:530 - 8.

Lasprogata G, King NK, Pillay S (2004). Regulation of electronic employee monitoring, Identifying Fundamental Principles of Employee Privacy through a Comparative Study of Data Privacy Legislation in the European Union, United States and Canada. Stanford Technology Law Review. 4.

Al- Rjoub H, Zabian A, Qawasmeh S (2008). Electronic Monitoring: The Employees Point of View. Journal of Social Sciences. 4 (3): 189- 195.

Aiello JR, Kolb KJ (1995). Electronic performance monitoring and social context: Impact on productivity and stress. Journal of Applied Psychology. 80:339.

Vorvoreanu M, Botan CH (2001). Examining Electronic Surveillance in the Workplace, Conference of the International Communication Association.

Dixon T (1995). Invisible Eyes:Report on video surveillance in the workplace. The Privacy committee of New South Wales. 67(3).

Ahmed S (2007). Analysis of workplace surveillance in a quest for an ethical stance. Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics. 2(4): 15-26.