News and analysis Hot topic
Hot topic
Barclays bank found itself at the centre of a ‘Big Brother’
debate when it announced it would be installing software
on employees’ computers that would monitor
productivity in real time. It has since decided not to go
ahead with the system, but the discussion around
employee ‘spyware’ remains. Questions around
employee wellbeing and privacy, as well as the overall
ethics surrounding this type of employee performance
monitoring, all need to be addressed.
Amina Florian, global
HR director, OLIVER
Group UK
In a working environment
you should be focusing on
the output rather than
how that output is created. Software that
focuses on how much time it has taken
for someone to do something, rather than
the quality of the outputs that are being
generated by people, is not effective at all.
Everybody works in different ways.
One employee may work for four hours a
day and have had a long break but they
may have created just as good quality
work as someone who spent nine
hours a day working. This is because
everybody’s working style is different.
While companies are entitled to
monitor staff I think that the
physiological contract employers have
with their employees is much more
important. The Barclays style of employee
monitoring makes for a complete
breakdown of that trust, and I personally
feel it wouldn’t make employees want to
work any harder.
Mary Walker, partner,
Gordons
Employee performance
monitoring is a useful
management tool.
Whether it is GPS data on
company vehicles, communications via
mobile phone or email, or ‘clocking in’
data, employers have access to a wealth of
information that gives them the facility to
better monitor performance.
Immediacy of data is the big difference
here. With the advent of ‘big data’ and
the continued development of smart
connected devices in the workplace,
organisations have enhanced visibility of
their people, performance, assets and
locations at the click of a button.
Ultimately this is a learning
mechanism. Some will call it Big Brother
but for me it’s simply a reflection of
technological development – as long as it
is used within reason. Employers have a
legitimate interest in ensuring that
employees are working efficiently, and
today’s technologies enable employers to
do this more effectively, more accurately
and without any grey areas.
Bryce Davies,
general manager
UK, Workforce
Forcing HR software on a
workforce, especially
technology that is seen to
be ‘spying’ on them, causes huge damage
to corporate reputation. Now staff have
more access to the media, carefully
managing tech rollouts has to be considered
from a reputational perspective.
The way we work and engage in a
workplace is changing at a rapid pace.
Companies that remain fixated on
outdated methods of working, while
forcing people to comply with such an
approach, will continue to struggle to
maintain happy teams. Organisations
that introduce technology that helps
employees, makes their working lives
easier and more efficient, while providing
There’s a huge difference
between someone being
intrinsically motivated to improve
their productivity and someone
having it forced upon them by
their employer
Forbes, 21 February
Tracking software is
increasingly being used
in UK workplaces but
remains controversial
The Independent, 20 February
managers insight into where change
might be needed are on the right track.
HR software should be introduced to
provide support for employees and for
positive reasons, not as a disciplinary
tool. By introducing software for the
wrong reasons companies are not going
to get buy-in from employees and
therefore are unlikely to get an accurate
picture of workforce performance.
Toni Vitale, partner
and head of
data protection,
JMW Solicitors
It is not unusual for
mobile tech to generate
significant personal data on employees,
including location, hours worked,
communications, activity levels and even
sleep quality. This data collection is often
not obvious to staff.
As agile working blurs the boundaries
between work and home, mobile tech
may also record data on employees’
domestic lives. Given the privacy issues
involved, employers need to consider laws
on data protection, including the General
Data Protection Regulation and the Data
Protection Act 2018.
Employers must have a valid lawful
basis to process personal data from
mobile tech. Only the minimum amount
of data necessary to achieve the relevant
purpose can be collected. Lawful reasons
include the performance of a contract with
the individual, compliance with a legal
obligation, and the legitimate interests of
the employer (or third party). HR
10 HR April 2020 hrmagazine.co.uk
/hrmagazine.co.uk