Reasons for Monitoring and Surveillance

1

Reasons for Monitoring and Surveillance

Employee or Customer Safety

Increasingly, attacks, robberies, violence, workplace mishaps, other workplace safety issues, and
associated liabilities and damages provide motivation for employers to monitor the workplace.
Remote worker monitoring systems are being used to monitor employees working alone or in
isolation by using simple telephone and/or wireless technology with a standard computer
workstation. Such systems can identify emergencies and guide response teams through a step-by-
step emergency response. Deterrence, responsiveness and enhancing the ability to investigate are
common objectives for use of monitoring measures.

(A) Three major workplace activities that are monitored by organizations
(1) Monitoring Internet Usage
The widespread use of the Internet and electronic mail (“e-mail”) has transformed the way
business is conducted in the typical American workplace. Written communication to almost
anyone in the world now can be completed nearly instantaneously; information about any subject
encountered in a daily job task can be retrieved in seconds from the Internet through multiple
search engines. These technological developments have benefited employers and employees
alike—employers in accomplishing business goals and employees in performing their duties.
Undoubtedly, the Internet and e-mail also have given employees a new means of escaping briefly
from long days at the office. What sports enthusiast, for example, hasn’t taken a quick peek at
ESPN.com on the Internet during working hours to see the latest sports news? Who hasn’t
interrupted his or her work for a moment to send a quick note to a friend about the coming
weekend’s social events?
A recent extensive survey1 of employers and employees to gauge their opinions on Internet and
e-mail use at the workplace revealed that both groups view non-work-related use of the Internet
and e-mail as appropriate, even though, in their mutual opinion, such use may hinder employees’
productivity. As a general matter, most employees believe that some personal Internet or email
2

uses at work is acceptable and that employers should not have the right to monitor what sites
employees are visiting or what e-mails they are sending and receiving. More than 87 percent of
employees surveyed stated that it was appropriate for them to surf non-work-related Web sites
for at least some portion of the workday. Of these, some 55 percent indicated that it was
appropriate for employees to spend anywhere from 15 minutes to 30 minutes on the Internet or
dealing with personal e-mail each workday. Nearly 84 percent of the employees surveyed
indicated that they regularly send non-work-related e-mails each day, with 32 percent sending
between 5 and 10 such messages. Almost 57 percent of employees felt that this personal Internet
and e-mail use decreased their productivity.
(2) Monitoring E-mail
E-mail scanning is a process in which incoming and outgoing mail passes through E-mail
filtering software to search for content which may violate the policies of the employer. Often E-
mails which are flagged by the filtering software will be then reviewed by a human to verify the
validity of the E-mail content. While an employee has the right for privacy, using company
property means a company may monitor the way their equipment is used. A wide misconception
with electronic emails in a work environment is that privacy rights issued with electronic mail is
exactly the same as the private communications of sending and receiving U.S. mail with an
envelope. As long as the services being used are provided by the employer, it is not an invasion
of privacy if they monitor their own systems. For the monitoring of employee electronic mail to
be considered an invasion of privacy, it must fall under certain conditions. The person reading
the electronic mail must engage in this activity intentionally with the purpose of intruding on
private affairs, and the intrusion must be highly offensive to a reasonable person.
(c) Monitoring Telephones
The first type of monitoring system is the call monitoring system. Call monitoring is "listening
to live phone calls and recording one's observations (Riechley, 1996)." The most important
aspect of this system is the observer. The observer can sit next to the person making the call,
which can be helpful with new employees who need training tips. The observer can also be a
secret caller and judge the phone representative by playing a customer role. Lastly, the observer
could wear a headset or another electronic device and listen to the calls from a separate room.
3

This last method could consist of the observer recording the various calls and listening to them at
a later time. Throughout the phone call, the observer takes notes on an evaluation form in order
to evaluate the call and give feedback to the employee.
When designing the form used for the evaluation process, a few points should be followed. First,
the form should be continuously revised in order to accommodate the ever-changing business
world. The forms are pretty complex and sensitive to change, so revising should be done at least
once every quarter. Second, the forms should list various items in to test the skills and
understanding of the employee. If the form is kept too general, then testing in a wide variety of
areas such as knowledge skills, listening skills and verbal skills cannot be accomplished. Next,
the form should be designed directly toward the job it is evaluating. According to Dr. Kathryn E.
Jackson, "the call monitoring form is an assessment instrument used to determine if the rep
has mastered all the skills and knowledge required to deliver excellence on the phone. The
form is used to determine when reps master a skill or if they are struggling with it
(Jackson, 1998)." The supervisor can then determine whether recognition or coaching is needed
for the employee. The form should contain enough space for the observer to take note of
different occurrences or ideas he or she may encounter throughout the process. This way the
observer can give examples when noting a discrepancy. The employee will then be aware of the
exact moment he or she did something right or wrong. Lastly, the form should take all
components into consideration in the determination of the results. Some categories should be
weighted more than others.







4


(B) If a person does not want to be monitored on the job by a computer, should that person have
a choice in the matter?
(1) Yes, it is because Privacy as a Moral Matter
But the fact that employee monitoring is legal does not automatically make it right. From an
ethical point of view, an employee surely does not give up all of his or her privacy when entering
the workplace. To determine how far employee and employer moral rights should extend, it's
useful to start with a brief exploration of how privacy becomes a moral matter.
Michael J. Meyer, SCU professor of philosophy, explains it this way: "Employees are
autonomous moral agents. Among other things, that means they have independent moral status
defined by some set of rights, not the least of which is the right not to be used by others only as a
means to increase overall welfare or profits."
Applying this to the workplace, Meyer says, "As thinking actors, human beings are more than
cogs in an organization—things to be pushed around so as to maximize profits. They are entitled
to respect, which requires some attention to privacy. If a boss were to monitor every
conversation or move, most of us would think of such an environment as more like a prison than
a humane workplace." But, like all rights, privacy is not absolute. Sometimes, as in the case of
law enforcement, invasions of privacy may be warranted.
(2) Secondly, on the monitoring process, workers private information may be exposed or leaked
to irresponsible person and maybe misused the information such as bank account number, private
photo and others.





5


(C) Explain why are companies becoming learning organizations in today’s fast-paced business
world.
In a fast-paced business environment, many organizations recognize the need for a strategy that
allows their firms to prosper. However, failure will eventually result when late nineteenth and
early twentieth century structures prevail in these organizations. In his book, Organization
Theory and Design, Richard Daft says, "This structure was quite effective and became
entrenched in the business world for most of the twentieth century. However, this type of vertical
structure is not always effective, particularly in rapidly changing environments. The solution for
an organization stuck in the past, in terms of strategy, structure, and leadership, which desires to
succeed in the future, is to adopt the approach of the learning organization. What sets learning
organizations apart from traditional organizations is that the former's essential value is problem
solving, where the latter's is designed for efficient performance. In his book, The Age of
Unreason, Charles Handy writes, "The learning organization can mean two things, it can mean
an organization which learns and/or an organization which encourages learning in its people.
These firms thrive on asking questions, testing theories, and changing paradigms. Likewise,
Richard Daft says, "The learning organization promotes communication and collaboration so that
everyone is engaged in identifying and solving problems. The learning organization is based on
equality, open information, little hierarchy, and a culture that encourages adaptability and
participation. The environment for companies today is anything but stable. Managers can no
longer forecast with certainty the outcome of their organizations. This has drawn attention to
chaos theory, which suggests relationships between complex systems, including organizations,
are nonlinear and are composed of many choices that create varying effects and render the
environment unpredictable. In the new environment managers are seeking solutions for today
and the future of their organizations. The learning organization offers hope for the future as they
seek to change key dimensions of their firms in a chaotic environment. A comparison of both
approaches followed by an example will further illustrate the purpose of this article.
Traditionally, the most common organizational structure is controlled through the vertical
hierarchy. Decision making comes from top management and works its way down through the
organization. According to Daft, "This structure can be quite effective. It promotes efficient
6

production and in-depth skill development, and the hierarchy of authority provides a sensible
mechanism for supervision and control in large organizations. Although this structure may
promote efficiency, in a rapidly changing environment, this type of structure may become
overloaded. Because decisions rest solely with management, they are not able to respond to
changes in the market quickly enough to succeed. In the learning organization, structure is more
horizontal, and tasks are created around processes rather than departmental functions.
Furthermore, the hierarchy is considerably flattened, with only a few top managers in finance
and HR functions. Daft says, "Self-directed teams are the fundamental work unit in the learning
organization. Boundaries between functions are practically eliminated because teams include
members from several functional areas. In a rapidly changing environment, the structure of a
learning organization allows firms to quickly change and adapt to new market demands. In
traditional organizations, strategy is formulated by top managers of the firm, which every worker
is expected to abide by. Executives use strategy to guide their organizations through efficiency
and performance. Workers have little or no say in the direction and strategy of the firm. In
learning organizations, however, both management and informed workers who are in contact
with suppliers, customers, and new technology, contribute ideas and help develop the strategy.
The strategy of a learning organization is positioned for success because strategies are more
informal and allow for quick changes. According to Mintzberg et al, "Their strategies are
sufficiently open-ended to allow for the unexpected, so that their capabilities of organizational
learning can deal with rapidly changing situations.
The leadership in traditional organizations will directly influence the strategy, structure, and
environment, or indirectly through the culture of the organization. In his article, The Genesis of
Configuration, Danny Miller adds, "The personalities of the very top cadre of managers are
expected to have dominated influence on the goals, strategies, structures...there will be strong
associations of ...needs for achievement and power, and neurotic style, with the strategies and
structures of the firm.
Conversely, the leadership in learning organizations does not have binding control. Instead,
Mintzberg et al, say, "Managers have to learn the art of asking questions, best done at close
proximity to operations. In a learning organization, managers become accustomed to walking
around and interacting with their subordinates in their work settings. Whereas information,
7

knowledge and control of tasks were directed by top management, with learning organizations,
information is shared and control of tasks is with employees.
As an example, we will consider Founders Bookstore Services and then give it an organizational
makeover to transform it into a learning organization. Founders Bookstore Services was started
in 1991 by Dick Reiter after many years of experience in the college store industry, where he
concentrated on Christian colleges and universities. Due to financial problems in 1997, the
company was sold to College Bookstores of America and has since operated as a division of
CBA. According to Randall Wiersma, senior vice president, the strategy of Founders Bookstores
has been to compete successfully in their Christian college store niche and operate in a
decentralized manner. Operating in a decentralized approach is sound advice, but the
organization’s strategy should describe goals and objectives. According to Jay Gailbraith, "The
Company’s strategy specifies goals and objectives to be achieved...It sets out the basic direction
of the company.
As a learning organization, the strategy for Founders should be approached with the following:
Because each retail store operates on a college or university campus, and uses a certain number
book wholesalers and suppliers, the strategy should incorporate the overall goals of CBA, the
university, ideas from employees, and input from suppliers and vendors. Further, the strategy
should be to create what I call, "Jack-in-the-box teams, where each team is encouraged to think
"outside-the-box. Similar to the toy, turning the handle are the teams thinking creatively for
ideas to challenges.
The structure for Founders follows the idea of the learning organization. With only a few top
executives at corporate, each retail store employee works on the task-at-hand and customer
relationships, not department functions. Further, each store operates as self-directed teams with a
manager to facilitate daily operations. Technology at Founders serves the purpose of supplying
information to keep operations running at a high level. Each retail store operates as an
entrepreneurial firm, where employees are empowered and have complete information to act
quickly to needs.
8

The learning organization thrives on strategy-structure alignment. For the employees at
Founders, there should be a clear understanding of organizational strategy with a structure that
allows the employees to serve the needs of customers. Alignment also keeps the communication
of the organization simple, clear, and without confusion. Finally, the leaders at Founders
Bookstores need to act as facilitators. Because the strategy will involve more input from
employees and use jack-in-the-box teams, leadership will involve more walking around and
interacting with subordinates, and keeping the lines of communication open.
In conclusion, while there are many organizations that use the traditional model approach, the
market demands of the present are quickly changing. The future will prove more turbulent for
organizations that are not prepared to meet these demands. A makeover to the learning
organization offers a solution to organizations that desire to stay competitive as they retain a lean
structure, a strategy that involves input from key people, and leadership that facilitates
involvement and change.















9





Reference
Website
(1) http://www.pegasuscom.com/aboutol.html
(2) http://EzineArticles.com/159431

(3) http://www.skyrme.com/insights/3lrnorg.htm

(4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_monitoring