Introduction
Introducing surveillance tools for employees demonstrates a counterproductive effect, which seems paradoxical. At first glance, improved rule enforcement systems increase their effectiveness; however, practice shows this is rarely the case. Explaining this paradox is not easy, as many factors can influence employee behavior, and each case requires separate consideration. However, two behavioral effects that explain this paradox can be identified: the Hawthorne effect and the so-called “self-fulfilling prophecy” effect.
The Hawthorne Effect
The Hawthorne effect is the influence of observation on the subjects’ behavior during the experiment. Paying attention to workflow has had a greater impact on employees than other objective physical factors (Mostafazadeh-Bora, 2020). Employees perceive programs that track work productivity as distrustful and challenging.
The effect is significantly reduced if the employee does not know if he is being watched (Mostafazadeh-Bora, 2020). The desire to break the ban may arise from simple curiosity, an attempt to test one’s strength in “cheating the system.” By implementing tracking tools and defining strict rules, the employer demonstrates to the employee the potential for violating them.
On the other hand, an essential aspect of compliance with the norms is the employee’s moral code. A company that uses surveillance tools to monitor its employees demonstrates a lack of trust in its employees. Management presumes that its employees may engage in inappropriate behavior, thereby reducing mutual trust.
The employer is increasingly perceived as an enemy, leading to a desire to harm them. Supervised workers feel less individual responsibility for their actions (Yeung, 2018). It is easier to break the rules if the individual is treated as a potential violator. Thus, the Hawthorne effect is realized, and the fact of observation encourages employees to cheat.
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
A “self-fulfilling prophecy” occurs when a group of people becomes aware of a possible development in events, leading to the actualization of that incident. Typically, this happens when a stakeholder group judges the likelihood of a particular event to be high and acts accordingly, thereby increasing the likelihood of that event. Surveillance systems are meaningless without severe sanctions for employees who violate the rules (Yeung, 2018). In this case, using surveillance tools demonstrates the company’s weakness in countering undesirable employee behavior.
A firm that can stop violations will refrain from using tracking methods to understand the employee. An efficiency tracker is a simple and understandable threat to an employee. Its work is predictable, so the worker can develop a way to get around it. At the same time, when employees are unaware of security measures, this causes fear of the unknown and limits the possibility of breaking the rules.
Conclusion
The effects of the Hawthorne and “self-fulfilling prophecy” explain why such seemingly deviant employee behavior is expected under total surveillance. The stimulation of distrust between employees and the company, the reduction of individual responsibility, and the demonstration of the potential for rule violations characterize manifestations of the Hawthorne effect. The self-fulfillment of the “prophecy” occurs when the company demonstrates its inability to enforce the laws, forcing it to resort to observation. Also, in this way, the company provides the violator with information about the nature of the “threat”, which allows for the development of an effective strategy for its “elimination”.
References
Mostafazadeh-Bora, M. (2020). The Hawthorne effect in observational studies: Threat oropportunity? Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 41(4), 491-491.
Yeung, K. (2018). Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation. Regulation & Governance, 12(4), 505-523.