Effects of electronic performance monitoring on personal control, task satisfaction, and task performance

Summary of Hypotheses The present study manipulated characteristics of anEPM system that have been the focus of recent legislativeand regulatory attempts. The experiment was designedto test effects of two related issues pertaining to controlin an EPM context. The first issue concerns the worker'sability to prevent or delay monitoring (called monitoringlockout). The second issue concerns whether the workeris made aware of monitoring specifically at each moment(called secrecy). The research measured effects of ma-nipulations of these characteristics on personal control,task satisfaction, and task performance of individualworkers. Personal control in this context is defined asworkers' sense of volitional control over aspects of perfor-mance such as work rate and speed-quality trade-off. Re-cords of workers' performance on a common office com-puter task served as objective measures of the quantityand quality of performance. In addition, workers pro-vided subjective reports of feelings of personal controland task satisfaction. Analyses of these measures wereconducted to test the following hypotheses:A worker's feelings of personal control will be affected bythe design of an electronic monitoring system. When theworker has methods to lock out (delay or prevent) perfor-mance monitoring, feelings of personal control will in-crease (cf. Aiello & Svec, 1993). (Hypothesis la)The worker's feelings of control will also be affected if thesystem informs the worker about the onset of monitoring(i.e., the secrecy factor). In accord with legislative and reg-ulatory activities, we propose that this knowledge of moni-toring will increase feelings of personal control. However,the directionality of this proposition is only equivocallysupported by research findings. Research on warning sig-nals (e.g., Averill, O'Brien, & DeWitt, 1977; Averill & Ro-senn, 1972) indicates that beneficial effects of such signalsdepend both on the nature of the threat and the availabilityof a coping response. (Hypothesis Ib)Task satisfaction will be positively related to feelings of per-sonal control (cf. Greenberger et al., 1989). Higher satis-

[1]  T. Kochan,et al.  COMPUTER-AIDED MONITORING: ITS INFLUENCE ON EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION AND TURNOVER , 1989 .

[2]  Randall B. Dunham,et al.  The impact of personal control on performance and satisfaction , 1989 .

[3]  M. J. Martinko,et al.  Learned Helplessness: An Alternative Explanation for Performance Deficits , 1982 .

[4]  Eugene F Stone.  Some Personality Correlates of Perceptions of and Reactions to Task Characteristics , 1977 .

[5]  Terri L. Griffith.  Monitoring and Performance: A Comparison of Computer and Supervisor Monitoring , 1993 .

[6]  R. Monty,et al.  Perceived control , 1980 .

[7]  D DiTecco,et al.  Operator stress and monitoring practices. , 1992, Applied ergonomics.

[8]  J. Averill,et al.  The influence of response effectiveness on the preference for warning and on psychophysiological stress reactions. , 1977, Journal of personality.

[9]  J. R. Aiello,et al.  Electronic performance monitoring and social context: impact on productivity and stress. , 1995, The Journal of applied psychology.

[10]  R. Decharms.  Personal causation : the internal affective determinants of behavior , 1968 .

[11]  J. R. Aiello,et al.  Computer Monitoring of Work Performance: Extending the Social Facilitation Framework to Electronic Presence1 , 1993 .

[12]  P Carayon,et al.  Employee stress and health complaints in jobs with and without electronic performance monitoring. , 1992, Applied ergonomics.

[13]  Richard A. Monty,et al.  Choice and perceived control , 1979 .

[14]  J. Averill,et al.  Vigilant and nonvigilant coping strategies and pscyhophysiological stress reactions during the anticipation of electric shock. , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  Edward L. Deci,et al.  Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior , 1975, Perspectives in Social Psychology.

[16]  A. Westin,et al.  Two key factors that belong in a macroergonomic analysis of electronic monitoring: Employee perceptions of fairness and the climate of organizational trust or distrust. , 1992, Applied ergonomics.

[17]  J. Averill.  Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress. , 1973 .

[18]  David B. Greenberger,et al.  Development and Application of a Model of Personal Control in Organizations , 1986 .