The Impact of Electronic Surveillance and Workplace Empowerment on Work Attitudes and Behaviour.

Transcription

1 The Impact of Electronic Surveillance and Workplace Empowerment on Work Attitudes and Behaviour. Jackie Wellen, Angela Martin & Dallas Hanson School of Management, The University of Tasmania.

2 Electronic monitoring and surveillance in the workplace Increased prevalence of electronic performance monitoring and control systems (EPMCS Alge, 2001) Use of technology to collect, store, analyse, and report the actions or performance of individuals or groups on the job (Picard, 1994; Stanton, 2000a; 2000b) video and audio observation of employees, automated tracking of work times, the use of cards and beepers to monitor location, network based methods to monitor internet usage, read s, and check computer files. as many as 80% of American orgs use some type of EPMCS (American Management Association, 2001).

3 Employee responses to EPMCS High levels of EPMCS linked with greater levels of stress, less favourable work attitudes, and poorer social interaction (Aiello & Kolb, 1995). EPMCS creates a sense of low control over the work environment (Ambrose & Alder, 2000). Job Demand Control model of strain (Karasek, 1979) Opportunity to participate in the design and implementation of EPMCSs linked to employee perceptions of fairness (Stanton, 2002). Perceived control mediated the relationship between perceived monitoring and work strain in call centre (Varca, 2006).

4 Aims of the present study building on Varca s (2006) study: Examine whether work control might attenuate the negative effects of high levels of EPMCSs in a range of occupational settings. Examine a broader range of work outcomes, including employees attitudes towards workplace surveillance and negative work behaviours. Hypotheses: High levels of perceived electronic work surveillance will be associated with less favourable attitudes towards surveillance and more negative work behaviour. The proposed negative effects of level of work surveillance on work outcomes should be less marked for those high in work empowerment than those low in work empowerment.

5 Model tested Empowerment an employee s cognitive appraisal of the attributes that contribute to a sense of job control (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990) Level of surveillance Work attitudes and behaviours Employee perceptions of extent to which their work is under surveillance Attitudes toward surveillance & extent of negative work behaviours (retaliation and work arounds)

6 Method: Procedure & Participants Community mail survey The Australian Work and Life Survey social, financial, work and lifestyle issues citizens randomly selected from a 2 million person data base response rate of 16.7% Respondents were employed during the past 12 months (n= 535) 41.6% Males / 56.4% females 19 to 84 years mean 49.7 years. 78% completed Year 12 of high school or higher 58% metropolitan / 32% small city or town / 8% rural area.

7 Method: Measures Perceived Level of Surveillance at Work 4 items developed for use in the study 1, not at all to 7, very much so To what extent are you monitored at work indirectly by video, α =.83 Empowerment Spreitzer s (1995) measure 6 items (2 sub scales) 1, strongly disagree to 7, strongly agree I have a great deal of control over what happens in my organisation FA showed 1 factor; α =.92.

8 Method: Measures Negative Attitudes Towards Workplace Surveillance 4 items developed for use in the study 1, strongly disagree to 7, strongly agree surveillance in the workplace is an invasion of employee s privacy α =.86 Negative Work Behaviour The extent to which they engaged in counterproductive work behaviours 3 items (Spector et al, 2006) 1, not at all to 7, very much so 1) hindering or undermining a manager, 2) finding fault with the organisation, and 3) working at less than full effort. Not scaled single item indicators

9 Data Analysis Hierarchical multiple regression analyses for each of the dependant variables Main effects for perceived surveillance and workplace empowerment Step 1, followed by the interaction between these variables at Step 2. Significant interactions were further probed using simple slope analysis.

10 Results: Negative Attitudes Towards Workplace Surveillance Main effects levels of surveillance and work empowerment Interaction effects those low in workplace empowerment held more negative attitudes towards surveillance when they perceived that levels of surveillance in their workplace were high compared with when levels of surveillance at work were perceived to be low. For those high in workplace empowerment, attitudes towards workplace surveillance did not vary as a function of level of surveillance.

11 Results: Negative Work Behaviour Undermining a manager Main effects Those who perceived higher levels of surveillance in the workplace reported engaging in more negative work behaviour directed at undermining the manager. Interaction effect Among those who viewed themselves as minimally empowered in their work, behaviour directed at undermining the manager was higher when levels of work surveillance were perceived to be high compared with when levels of surveillance were low. The level of undermining behaviour reported by high empowerment individuals was not affected by perceived levels of surveillance

12 Results: Negative Work Behaviour Criticism of the organisation Main effect - Those who perceived higher levels of surveillance in the workplace reported engaging in more criticism of the organisation Interaction effect levels of surveillance at work had an impact on expressed criticism of the organisation for those low in empowerment but not for those high in empowerment for those low in empowerment, criticism of the organisation was more pronounced when levels of surveillance were perceived to be high than when surveillance levels were low.

13 Results: Negative Work Behaviour Working at reduced effort Main effects Those who perceived higher levels of surveillance in the workplace more likely to working at reduced effort. Interaction effect revealed an effect for perceived work surveillance for low empowerment individuals but not for those high in empowerment low empowerment individuals reported working at a reduced level of effort more when surveillance levels at work were perceived to be high than when they were viewed as low.

14 Summary and Implications Hypotheses supported Employees reporting higher levels of surveillance more likely to report negative attitudes toward surveillance and higher levels of negative work behaviour. Managers need to be aware of the impact of surveillance on employees attitudes and behaviours Impact of perceived level of surveillance was more marked for those who viewed themselves as less empowered in their work. a sense of empowerment over one s work may provide some protection against the negative influence of high levels of electronic surveillance. support for the notion that high levels of electronic surveillance in the workplace can have a negative impact on work outcomes

15 Implications, limitations, future research Major implications in circumstances where exposure to high levels of electronic surveillance is unavoidable (e.g., call centers and high security work environments such as banks), building a sense of empowerment over one s work may increase resilience against the negative effects of high monitoring. Major limitations social desirability and self report surveys, use of single item DVs, sampling response bias and common method variance. Future research explore alternative methodologies and measures to confirm these findings.