Empowering employees: the other side of electronic performance monitoring

Purpose Advances in electronic performance monitoring (EPM) have raised employees’ concerns regarding the invasion of privacy and erosion of trust. On the other hand, EPM promises to improve performance and processes. This paper aims to focus on how the alignment of EPM design and organizational culture through effective organizational mechanisms can address privacy concerns, and, hence, positively affect employees’ perception toward technology. Design/methodology/approach Based on a theoretical lens extending two conceptual frameworks, a qualitative approach was used to analyze interview data collected from a comparative case study of two organizations in the USA and Qatar within the oil and gas sector. These two contexts were selected to emphasize the cross-cultural and organizational differences in employees’ acceptance of EPM. Findings The study revealed that national and corporate cultures affected employees’ perception and acceptance of monitoring in both countries. Because of diversity, though EPM was better accepted in Qatar, as they are an easy way to enforce standardization and to push employees to adapt to a dominating corporate culture. Conversely, in the USA where culture is more innovation-oriented, organizational mechanisms shifted the perceptions of EPM to being mean to obtain feedback rather than to impose standards. Research limitations/implications This qualitative study is based on a descriptive comparative case study of two organizations with two cultural contexts. The limited sample size and cross-sectional nature of data may need to be extended to a larger cultural scope that is observed over a longer period to safely generalize the findings. Practical implications Decision-makers in multinational corporations with different cultural backgrounds may benefit of this study’s outcomes, as it emphasizes the importance of the fit between EPM designs and the cultural settings. Furthermore, organizations aiming to conduct analytics on EPM data have to justify and prove its benefits to employees to facilitate acceptance. Social implications The study shows that employees in Qatar have a different cultural frame of reference in their perception of fairness and ethics than their counterparts in the USA because of changes in the meaning of social relations, personal goals and behavioral norms. Originality/value The originality of this study lays in its empirical validation of a composite framework examining both national and corporate cultures on employees’ reactions to EPM systems. It also proves the critical importance of organizational mechanisms to align the EPM design with the organization cultural settings.

[1]  Alan L. Wilkins,et al.  Efficient Cultures: Exploring the Relationship between Culture and Organizational Performance. , 1983 .

[2]  M J Smith,et al.  Stress, computer-based work monitoring and measurement systems: a conceptual overview. , 1992, Applied ergonomics.

[3]  Randall Y. Odom,et al.  Organizational Cultures, Commitment, Satisfaction, and Cohesion , 1990 .

[4]  Jeffrey M. Stanton,et al.  Reactions to Employee Performance Monitoring: Framework, Review, and Research Directions , 2000 .

[5]  Peter B. Smith,et al.  Values and Organizational Justice , 2004 .

[6]  Mathias Ekstedt,et al.  Information security knowledge sharing in organizations: Investigating the effect of behavioral information security governance and national culture , 2014, Comput. Secur..

[7]  Deborah L. Wells,et al.  Can Electronic Performance Monitoring Be Fair? Exploring Relationships Among Monitoring Characteristics, Perceived Fairness, and Job Performance , 2003 .

[8]  Steve G. Sutton,et al.  Potential Employees' Ethical Perceptions of Active Monitoring: The Dark Side of Data Analytics , 2017, J. Inf. Syst..

[9]  Dwight D. Frink,et al.  Emotional Intelligence as a Moderator of the Relationship between Conscientiousness and Performance , 2004 .

[10]  Kwok Kee Wei,et al.  Organizational culture and leadership in ERP implementation , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[11]  Samuel Greengard.  The algorithm that changed quantum machine learning , 2019, Commun. ACM.

[12]  Andy Charlwood,et al.  Why HR is set to fail the big data challenge , 2016 .

[13]  Robert M. Davison,et al.  Guest editorial cultural issues and it management: past and present , 2003 .

[14]  Kathrin M. Möslein,et al.  Electronic monitoring at work: The role of attitudes, functions, and perceived control for the acceptance of tracking technologies , 2019, Human Resource Management Journal.

[15]  J. Bosak,et al.  Performance management in context: formative cross-functional performance monitoring for improvement and the mediating role of relational coordination in hospitals , 2019 .

[16]  John W. Boudreau,et al.  An evidence-based review of HR Analytics , 2017 .

[17]  Sarah Underwood.  The fine line between coercion and care , 2019, Commun. ACM.

[18]  R. Westrum.  A typology of organisational cultures , 2004, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[19]  William H. Ross,et al.  The managerial decision to implement electronic surveillance at work: A research framework , 2005 .

[20]  Inju Yang.  Cross-cultural perceptions of clan control in Korean multinational companies: a conceptual investigation of employees' fairness monitoring based on cultural values , 2015 .

[21]  C. Morrill,et al.  Fairness Monitoring: Linking Managerial Controls and Fairness Judgments in Organizations , 2011 .

[22]  M. Shaffer,et al.  The dimensionality and determinants of pay satisfaction: a cross-cultural investigation of a group incentive plan , 2003 .

[23]  G. Alder.  Employee reactions to electronic performance monitoring: A consequence of organizational culture , 2001 .

[24]  S. Kraus,et al.  MULTI-CULTURAL TEAMS AS SOURCES FOR CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION: THE ROLE OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY ON TEAM PERFORMANCE , 2016 .

[25]  Herman Aguinis,et al.  Evidence-based recommendations for employee performance monitoring , 2017 .

[26]  G. Hofstede.  Identifying Organizational Subcultures: An Empirical Approach , 1998 .

[27]  R. A. Cooke,et al.  Behavioral Norms and Expectations , 1988 .

[28]  John R. Aiello,et al.  Acceptance of electronic monitoring and its consequences in different cultural contexts: A conceptual model , 2005 .

[29]  Suzanne Rivard,et al.  An Organizational Culture-Based Theory of Clinical Information Systems Implementation in Hospitals , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[30]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Review: A Review of Culture in Information Systems Research: Toward a Theory of Information Technology Culture Conflict , 2006, MIS Q..

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