Introduction
Over the last few years, electronic performance monitoring (EPM) systems have led to changes in workplace performance appraisal. Such are the highly developed technological tools that enable organizations to evaluate and supervise workers’ behavior, from task completion rates to patterns of behavior. The proponents argue that such technologies are useful for increasing productivity, improving operational efficiency, and also providing instant feedback to employees, leading to accountability and learning among institutions (Johnson et al., 2023). However, it is worth mentioning here that EPM has also been associated with reduced job satisfaction as well as lower employee well-being despite claims of increased work efficiency and transparency. These systems are believed by some people to be anti-loyalty since they are surveillance ones, which, therefore, results in a lack of autonomy characterized by high levels of stress (Ravid et al., 2019). Once again, the use of an EPM system at the workplace raises ethical dilemmas about data privacy, fairness in performance assessment, and creating anxiety through surveillance. Thus, this thesis discusses the effect of electronic performance monitoring on job performances within internal organizational environments by referring to different views represented by stakeholders with varied interests. In view of this assertion, this study seeks to carry out a subtle analysis of multi-level dynamics that concentrates on both positive and negative aspects regarding the implementation of EPMs using the empirical evidence provided herein (Ball, 2021). Consequently, this research aims at clarifying empirical findings, theoretical frameworks, and practical implications related to diverse contextualization’s surrounding the operation of an EPM system in contemporary organizations today.
Reviewing Relevant Research
An ExpressVPN report published in 2023 indicates that eighty percent of employers use electronic performance monitoring (EPM) systems to oversee their employees’ online activities (Kimberly Johnson, 2019). However, there have been concerns raised over this with regards to employee satisfaction. Some studies link high-pressure situations with EPMs, whereas others point out privacy invasion, including pay cuts due to those factors. These monitor other employees’ actions (Tomczak et al., 2018b). Such systems include wearables like Fitbits, mobile GPS tracking apps, blocking software for PCs and phones, and surveillance camera networks (Jones et al., 2017). In today’s modern workplace, every email sent, code written, phone call made, instant message sent, or mouse click creates a digital footprint, leading to the cheap generation of patterns of employee behavior (Jones et al., 2017). Businesses may use this information to make data-driven decisions that can help improve productivity rates while increasing creativity levels, thereby increasing overall efficiency.
A complete grasp of the effect of EPM literature on work performance is available. Many studies have been conducted to explain how employee behavior and outcomes are influenced by EPM systems. At the same time, the employee’s knowledge about required performance standards improves since the EPM systems make it visible, hence increasing efforts towards a goal and task engagement accordingly. In addition, feedback in real-time that is facilitated through these systems has empowered employees beyond recognition (Ball, 2021) as they monitor their progress continuously so that whenever necessary they can adjust any actions they take to enhance performance levels. However, this move towards EPM has its drawbacks, which put employee welfare and organizational dynamics at stake. This continuous monitoring associated with such a system breeds distrust and anxiety among staff, resulting in low morale at work coupled with reduced motivation (Ball, 2021). Furthermore, using performance metrics punitively instead of giving constructive feedback will lead to workers perceiving it as unfairness, so it may be considered managerial control.
According to this information, there may also be some unforeseen problems connected with implementing the program, like resistance from employees or gaming by management. According to Johnson (2023), the authentication process is likely to just highlight certain benchmarks of achievements against which employee performances might be assessed. For instance, some scholars argue that “they can even get involved in unethical practices just to achieve them, hence raising more questions when there is evaluation from either side regarding performance assessment. On the one hand, aspects of the digital economy, such as the implementation of EPMS, improve business efficiency and output productivity (Ball, 2021). However, this process disrupts teamwork within organizations’ communication networks. This moment could become a point when an employee stops treating colleagues as partners or teammates but rather rivals. All these factors naturally cause interpersonal conflicts and, consequently, non-cooperation, which no company wants while trying hard for maximum efficiency.
Nevertheless, it does not mean that there should be no conversation over banning without arguing about anything about EPM (Siegel et al., 2022c). Otherwise, the extent to which the EPM system is implemented in the organization will depend on the management within that organization. These are things such as impartiality, fairness, and auditability that have been well thought out when developing some of the systems; hence, these are benchmarks for others in their staff development.
Thus, there is a need for more research to be conducted regarding EPM systems so as to fully understand them as they evolve with respect to work performance or organizational dynamics. For example, this may include the culture of an organization, leadership styles used, and technology changes, among other factors affecting enterprise performance management (EPM) systems efficiency. An organization can maintain long-term success while at the same time retaining employee wellbeing and satisfaction by continuously refining its understanding of enterprise performance management (EPM) systems and their implications for business organizations. Employee Performance Management (EPM) systems are designed to efficiently monitor employee behavior and include monitoring of individual health, safety, productivity, and performance. This is the reason why employee development programs could be leveraged to apply the information collected in EPM for the purpose of improving employees’ work-life balance (Siegel et al., 2022). In effect, this allows workers to go through these platforms as they assess their productive acts (Tomczak et al., 2018b).
Employee performance management (EPM) systems have undergone major transformations as a result of hybrid and remote employment arrangements. Despite this fact, there are some employees who have had negative experiences with their execution, such as the perception of injustice, feelings of invasion of privacy, decreased job satisfaction, and stress on the fulfillment of tasks. One example of something that can have a significant negative impact on the mental health of employees is constant monitoring, which might include activities such as monitoring keystrokes, employing webcams, or monitoring inactive time (Terpsma, 2022). The study analyzed the responses of 762 individuals working in the telecommunications business. The survey results were divided into two categories: those who were interviewed electronically and those who were not tracked to any extent.
When compared with individuals who are never subjected to tracking throughout their lives, the findings suggested that tracked workers in EPM businesses feel significantly higher levels of stress than their counterparts who are not monitored. Therefore, if unpleasant events are experienced during the entire day, as was discovered in this research about digital monitoring, it leads to a reduction in stress, which can lead to decreased job satisfaction and decreased productivity (Giacosa et al., 2023). This was proven to be the case. However, the fact that a person’s computer is not being utilized at a certain time should not be mistaken with the fact that they are not actively engaged in their work (Terpsma, 2022). Terpsma (2022) has made the observation that there are a variety of factors that could be responsible for an employee’s apparent lack of activity. These explanations include taking legally mandated pauses in order to look at official reports or to converse on crucial phone calls, among other things. It was precisely Ryan Fuller, who had previously served as the Vice President of Workspace Intelligence at Microsoft, who stated that we are still determining what is important (Kantor et al., 2022). Employees are more likely to be motivated to do well when they are rewarded for their efforts simply because this increases their motivation. EPM, on the other hand, is unable to determine whether or not work is being done because this element may discourage individuals from exerting further effort.
The use of technology at workplaces is on the rise with its advent; hence, increasing numbers of companies adopt it in their offices. The aim behind top organizations’ embracing hybrid work models was to raise worker productivity. About 85 percent of employees are reported to have difficulties with productivity (G. Tong, 2023). Nevertheless, some firms may employ technology that watches over their workers. Although inappropriate monitoring can intrude on privacy, it can also help identify areas where staff need assistance. More and more organizations therefore use tracking devices that enable managers’ access to a wealth of data about the health and performance of employees working under them. The issue here is that sometimes voicemail messages and phone calls used in assessing progress at work through EPM become subjects for observations. There must be a balance between using technology to enhance efficiency and protecting labor rights at all costs.
But if properly applied, the advantages that may accrue from tracking technology must be taken into account. Tracking technologies can help identify a company’s strengths and weaknesses, provide managers with specific information about their team members, and thereby enable them to address harassment or poor service delivery to clients. This final advantage is important because, through effective use of this technology, companies that are trying to become competitive may do so in the best possible way. However, there are several challenges for employees undergoing such performance monitoring. In addition, employees are experiencing increased stress, lower pay, and concerns about their privacy. No evidence has been shown on how much automation systems interface with performance in workplaces since automation has become a major part in many fields.
Since research work has broadly been conducted on a few issues only, the results driven by this might not be agreed upon, thereby standing challenged due to its plurality concept; thus, it was done as a limited kind of study. To sum up, results from research carried out by people all over different locations (manufacturing plants, call centers, and offices) turned up more evidence than those obtained from call centers alone, like when they were participating in trials of that sort years ago. Similarly, other limitations made during previous studies have used inadequate methods relying heavily on self-reports combined with other cross-sectional design data rather than self-reports, and cross-sectional pattern reports were employed instead. As such, biases evolved, leading to inconsistencies within the validity of such studies (Siegel et al., 2022c). To add the questionnaire-based approach may invite biased responses where interviewees give socially appropriate answers or even don’t remember whether they know the EPM system but just want to make you happy by saying something nice.”
However, critics argue that the job performance relationship with EPM policies will remain unchanged until a “snapshot date has been taken.” Finally, very few cross-sectional inquiries examine how training schemes over time affect job tasks while the business goes through its cycles. A number of perspectives and contexts should be applied at the same time to investigate this interdisciplinary research. Consequently, this article fills the gaps in electronic monitoring of EPM, which has several issues. Additionally, this research is a blend of both subjective and objective methods for data collection. In order to support and validate survey findings, in-depth interviews are integrated with survey tools.
Research Questions
To guide empirical investigation, the following research questions are proposed:
- What is employees’ perception of the introduction of EPM systems at the workplace, and what determines their attitude towards it?
- What are the immediate and long-term effects of EPM systems on employee job performance that include productivity, job satisfaction, and well-being?
- How do contextual factors such as organizational culture, leadership style, and job characteristics moderate the relationship between EPM systems and job performance outcomes?
These research questions aim at capturing diverse aspects of complexity within the EPM systems-job performance nexus that involve personal psychological processes along with context-specific requirements. Thus, the present study attempts to address these questions so as to guide business practitioners on how to implement and manage an EPM system.
Method
Participants
The research will involve employees from various enterprises in different sectors. In order to ensure the variability of demographic characteristics as well as job titles held by the participants and the organization’s environments, the sample shall be diverse. The participants will be briefed on the nature of the study and given assurances on confidentiality and voluntarism.
Materials
Data will be collected using a combination of surveys and semi-structured interviews. For example, existing scales relating to systems such as EPMSs (which stands for electronic performance monitoring system) and JSS (job satisfaction scale), among others, will form the basis for developing a questionnaire with items addressing other components related to wellbeing, like the categorical mood scale (CMS). Furthermore, semi-structured interviews will provide deeper insight into the experiences that employees have had regarding EPMs and how they influence their job outcomes.
Procedure
Data collection would commence after securing ethical clearance from the institutional review board. Organizations wishing to participate shall be informed about survey distribution as well as arranging interviews. Consent forms that describe the study’s purpose, voluntary participation, and confidentiality will be issued to participants. Online surveys administered through secure platforms will collect quantitative data. Measures of EPM system usage, job performance, job satisfaction, and well-being were part of the anonymous surveys completed by individuals who took part in this research. Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted either in person or via video conferencing based on participant preferences.
Results and discussion
It is anticipated that the findings of this study will provide a comprehensive picture of the influence that EPM systems have on the well-being of employees and their performance on the job while they are at work. The purpose of quantitative studies is to investigate the ways in which various aspects of enterprise performance management (EPM) influence levels of professional satisfaction (job satisfaction) or levels of productivity (in terms of productivity), such as the frequency of monitoring or feedback systems. Therefore, qualitative data seek to improve these results by identifying constitutive aspects around them and taking into account human experiences, among other variables. This is done in order to enhance the results.
The ramifications for theory and practice are examined, with a particular emphasis on the theoretical contributions and practical consequences of the findings for the management policies and practices of organizations. In addition, the limits of the research, which may include sample characteristics, measurement issues, and potential biases, will be acknowledged, and ideas for additional research in the field will be provided. The purpose of this study is to develop our understanding of the complex patterns that are behind the usage of EPM systems to improve job performance. This will be accomplished through an in-depth examination of the numerous effects that these systems bring about in terms of guiding evidence-based decision-making in organizations.
Conclusion
The paper indicates a positive correlation between EPM systems and the organizational context, indicating an advanced attachment to and elaboration on company performance. EPM (electronic performance monitoring) is a tool of evaluation that covers both anticipated and unwanted ramifications at the top level. However, the benefits of improved productivity and continuous feedback can be regarded as overcoming shortcomings such as job wellness and job satisfaction. The situation at hand, with variations in contextual factors such as organizational culture and leaders’ behavior, makes it hard to pinpoint the direct influences of the EPM methods. It is very essential for people and businesses to get clear pictures of the consequences of this system because the picture produced may not be very accurate.
From now on, the only answer to the question “Who will prevail?” will be “Those who manage to combine the best of tracking technology and safeguarding employees’ rights at any price.” Government approaches should be an incredibly powerful tool in preventing the employment performance management system (EPM) from imposing constraints on information security and treating equity. Such activity will not only increase the company’s working efficiency but also allow employees to be completely fulfilled with their own performance. To add, merely the inquiries on the diverse facts that are related to the work performance are not done yet. As a next step, researchers will perform a study focused on getting more insight into qualitative and quantitative research approaches. More delving into the effects of employing the EPM systems and the consequences of altering these systems will help in making the right decision, which will not only take care of productivity but will also be a reinforcement strategy that brings out the satisfaction of the employees at the same time.
References
Ball, K. (2021). Electronic monitoring and surveillance in the workplace. European Commission Joint Research Centre.
Giacosa, E., Alam, G. M., Culasso, F., & Crocco, E. (2023). Stress-inducing or performance-enhancing? Safety measure or cause of mistrust? The paradox of digital surveillance in the workplace. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 8(2), 100357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100357
Johnson, S. (2023, April 10). Advantages and disadvantages of monitoring employees. Business.com. Advantages and Disadvantages of Monitoring Employees (business.com)
Jones, S. R., et al. (2018). Real-time performance feedback and engagement: The mediating role of psychological empowerment. Human Performance, 31(3), 175–191.
Kantor, J., Sundaram, A., Aufrichtig, A., & Taylor, R. (2022, August 15). The Rise of the Worker Productivity Score. The New York Times Workplace Productivity: Are You Being Tracked? – The New York Times (nytimes.com)
Ravid, D. M., Tomczak, D. L., White, J. C., & Behrend, T. S. (2019). EPM 20/20: A Review, Framework, and Research Agenda for Electronic Performance Monitoring. Journal of Management, 46(1), 100–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319869435
Siegel, R., König, C. J., & Lazar, V. (2022c). The impact of electronic monitoring on employees’ job satisfaction, stress, performance, and counterproductive work behavior: A metaanalysis. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 8, 100227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100227
Tomczak, D. L., Lanzo, L. A., & Aguinis, H. (2018b). Evidence-based recommendations for employee performance monitoring. Business Horizons, 61(2), 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.11.006
Tong, G. (2023, April 26). Employee surveillance is on the rise — and that could backfire on employers. CNBC Employee surveillance is on the rise. That could backfire on employers (cnbc.com)
Tong, G. C. (2023, April 24). Employee surveillance is on the rise — and that could backfire on employers. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/24/employee-surveillance-is-on-therise-that-could-backfire-on-employers.html#: ~:text=A%20report%20from%20ExpressVPN%20found
write