• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Impact of workplace monitoring in India
 

Impact of workplace monitoring in India

on

  • 232 views

Research Methods,Micromanagement,Workplace Monitoring,Anova,Crosstab,

Research Methods,Micromanagement,Workplace Monitoring,Anova,Crosstab,

Statistics

Views

Total Views
232
Views on SlideShare
232
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Impact of workplace monitoring in India Impact of workplace monitoring in India Document Transcript

    • Workplace monitoring in India RM Project Under the guidance of Prof. C P Gupta 26NMP03 26NMP15 26NMP20 26NMP28 26NMP36 26NMP45 GROUP 8 Abhijeet Singh Tomar Argha Ray Bankim Sammadar Khushal Malik Pravin Sharma Sanjay Prasad Workplace monitoring of online and workplace activities is quite routine in firms in India. What is the impact on this on morale, productivity and loyalty of employees? 1|Page
    • Table of Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 3 2. Types of workplace monitoring .......................................................................................................... 3 3. Rationale behind monitoring .............................................................................................................. 3 3.1 Employer perspective ................................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Employee responses ..................................................................................................................... 3 4. Objectives of the study ...................................................................................................................... 4 5. Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 4 5.1 Hypothesis formulation .................................................................................................................... 4 6. Analysis ............................................................................................................................................... 5 6.1 Demographics of the survey respondents .................................................................................... 5 6.2 Work profile of the survey respondents ....................................................................................... 6 6.3 Types of monitoring used in the workplace ................................................................................. 7 6.4 Analysis by level of monitoring (ANOVA Test) .............................................................................. 7 6.4.1 Behaviour Index: .................................................................................................................... 7 6.4.2 Trust Index: ............................................................................................................................ 8 6.4.3 Efficiency Index: ................................................................................................................... 10 6.4.4 Commitment Index .............................................................................................................. 11 6.5 Impact on Age Groups ................................................................................................................ 12 6.5.1 Effect of different types of monitoring ................................................................................ 13 6.5.2 Do Men and Women see workplace monitoring differently? ............................................. 14 6.5.3 Impact of workplace monitoring on employee attrition. .................................................... 15 7. Reliability Analysis:............................................................................................................................ 16 7.1 Reliability Analysis for efficiency:................................................................................................ 16 7.2 Reliability Analysis for trust: ....................................................................................................... 17 7.3 Reliability Analysis for commitment: .......................................................................................... 17 7.4 Reliability Analysis for behaviour: ............................................................................................... 17 8. Limitations:........................................................................................................................................ 18 9. Conclusion: ........................................................................................................................................ 18 10. Appendix ......................................................................................................................................... 18 10.1 Appendix I: Interview Transcripts ............................................................................................. 18 10.2 Appendix II: Survey Questionnaire ............................................................................................ 21 11. Bibliography .................................................................................................................................... 27 2|Page
    • 1. Introduction A recent survey describes that more than 40 % of corporations monitor their employees in ways that could be called intrusive. Since the last decade there has been a huge shift in our GDP contributions. It came as a decline of the agricultural industry & a steep growth in the services industry. With the rise in services industry it was a huge boom in Information Technology. The growth in IT affected not only services but every other business as well. IT was the key thing and if one didn’t have a good IT infrastructure, the company lost its competitive position in the market. Huge corporations were drawn to India setting up bases throughout the country. It led to rise in IT parks and further boosted the service industry prospects. Competition became even stronger. To get a competitive advantage companies had to reform their internal and external process. One of the key things that refined internal processes was workplace monitoring techniques. IT Corporations came up with strict electronic surveillance methods as well as manual monitoring methods. 2. Types of workplace monitoring Electronic surveillance methods included video surveillance, email monitoring and techniques like blocking social websites. For some corporations there are audio monitors, monitoring of phone and maintenance of logs. Manual modes included increasing monitoring by the superiors. 3. Rationale behind monitoring 3.1 Employer perspective The main reasons to monitor the employees from the perspective of employers are  Safety and security for workers and customers  Knowledge management  To track the worker conduct in case of violation of human rights legislation  Information systems management 3.2 Employee responses Although corporations claim increased level of productivity due to adherence of company standard by employees post implementation of monitoring techniques; employees think otherwise. However corporations reasoning were that these techniques resulted in increasing levels of productivity as employees adhered to the company standards. However, the techniques too had a downside where the employees had increasing level of distrust with the organization. Workers at many workplaces have even resisted or expressed discontent about such work processes. It also resulted in employees getting restricted in their work environment. 3|Page
    • 4. Objectives of the study The overall objective of this case study is to analyse the impact of workplace monitoring on employee morale, employee behaviour, employee faith in employer and his commitment towards job. The report analyses both the sides of surveillance & comes to a conclusion. 5. Methodology The study exposes the facts based on survey method. The survey attempts to measure various responses and reactions of IT employees with respect to workplace monitoring. A rigorous analysis is performed on the collected responses by identifying a relationship between various parameters affecting employee performance and workplace monitoring. Sample Size Sample Type Sampling Unit Survey Method Type of Research Tools Used 147 Simple Random Sampling Employees of IT Organisation An online questionnaire was designed for the employees of IT organisation Empirical Research Microsoft Excel 2010, IBM SPSS 18.0 5.1 Hypothesis formulation The IT professional interviewed considered the following factors to be of great importance in their jobs –      Freedom in job Trust from employer Commitment Importance of data security Efficiency in work We have tried to identify some themes in the interviews [Appendix I] and have used these to formulate our hypotheses from employee point of view. a) b) c) d) Trust is not related to organizational monitoring. Commitment is not related to organizational monitoring. Efficiency is not related to organizational monitoring. Behaviour is not related to organizational monitoring. 4|Page
    • Trust Commitment Organizational Monitoring Efficiency Behaviour 6. Analysis 6.1 Demographics of the survey respondents We collected survey responses (Appendix II) from 147 professionals who are involved in IT related works in their respective organizations. Our survey respondents constituted 29.25 % female and 70.75% male. Majority of the respondents (~69%) are aged between 21-26 years. We collected survey responses from a broad range of companies which include Wipro, TCS, Samsung, Bank of America, Infosys, Flipkart, KPMG, HSBC, Microsoft, Cognizant, IBM, JSPL, Ericson, Birlasoft, Capgemini, Cognizant, L&T, Adobe etc. 5|Page
    • 6.2 Work profile of the survey respondents Majority of our survey respondents are involved in engineering/technology role (55.10%), which is basically a non-supervisor kind of a role. A total of 16.33% of the respondents are involved in supervisor and managerial roles, constituted by Managers/admins (12.93%) and HR (3.40%). Responses from persons with a bit different kinds of roles like Graphic designer, and sales were also collected as a part of this study. Role Percentage Engineering/Technology 55.10 % Manager/Administration 12.93 % Sales 11.56 % Finance 6.80 % HR 3.40 % Others (Graphic Designer / Clerical Job /Team 10.20 % lead/Project coordinator/CEO / etc.) 6|Page
    • 6.3 Types of monitoring used in the workplace 60.00% 50.00% 55.10% 48.98% 52.38% 48.30% 44.22% 44.90% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Security Camera Computer Monitoring Social Media Blocking Mobile Telephone Restriction Tapping Others Blocking of networking and social media sites, computer monitoring system and security cameras are the major technique of workplace monitoring as mentioned by the respondents. 6.4 Analysis by level of monitoring (ANOVA Test) To test the validity of our hypothesis we have conducted ANOVA test, where the independent variable was the level of monitoring in the organization, and the dependent variable was the responses obtained from the survey to the statements shown in the tables respective to each hypothesis. For performing ANNOVA an index was computed by adding up the values of that particular area. ‘Compute Variable’ function of SPSS was used to calculate these indexes. Indexes were calculated for Trust, Efficiency, Behaviour and Commitment. All these questions are on likert scale. 6.4.1 Behaviour Index: COMPUTE BEHAVIOUR_INDEX=q27_behaviour_3 + q18_behaviour_1. EXECUTE. The above response is the summation of the following question which was in likert scale: 1. I would behave differently when I know I am being monitored? 2. Workplace monitoring irritates you? 7|Page
    • Hypothesis Formulation: H0: The behavior of employees is independent of organizational monitoring. H1: The behavior of employees changes with organizational monitoring. Oneway ANNOVA Descriptives BEHAVIOUR_INDEX 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Std. N Very High Mean Std. Lower Upper Deviation Error Bound Bound Minimum Maximum 36 6.42 1.962 .327 5.75 7.08 2 10 High Monitoring 57 5.93 2.186 .290 5.35 6.51 2 10 Moderate 14 6.86 1.512 .404 5.98 7.73 4 9 Less Monitoring 28 5.61 1.912 .361 4.87 6.35 2 9 No Monitoring 12 7.17 2.552 .737 5.54 8.79 4 10 147 6.18 2.086 .172 5.84 6.52 2 10 Monitoring Monitoring Total ANOVA BEHAVIOUR_INDEX Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 32.873 4 8.218 Within Groups 602.529 142 635.401 1.937 Sig. 4.243 Total F .108 146 From the results obtained we can say that, Employee behaviour is not a function of Workplace monitoring. (As the sig. is >0.05). So, Hypothesis is accepted based on the result. 6.4.2 Trust Index: The above response is the summation of the following question which were in likert scale: 1. I have a strong sense of belonging to my organization? 2. I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own? 3. Workplace monitoring affects the level of trust between me and my employer. 4. Workplace monitoring helps my organisation to achieve long term goals. 5. My organization trusts my capabilities and has given me decision making rights? 6. Workplace monitoring is to meet service level agreement and not for direct employee or employee activity monitoring? 7. Monitoring the employees with or without their knowledge is a breach of trust? 8|Page
    • 8. To establish trust, company should tell the employees about all the ways in which they get monitored? 9. If organization completely stops workplace monitoring is it going to increase your trust for your organization? Hypothesis Formulation: H0: Employee trust is independent of organizational monitoring. H1: Employee trust is dependent on organizational monitoring. COMPUTE TRUST_INDEX=q9_trust_1 + q11_trust_2 + q12_trust_3 + q15_trust_4 + q17_trust_5 + q20_trust_6 + q21_trust_7 + q22_trust_8 + q23_trust_9. EXECUTE. Oneway Annova: Descriptives TRUST_INDEX 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Std. N Very High Mean Std. Lower Upper Deviation Error Bound Bound Minimum Maximum 36 24.31 5.350 .892 22.50 26.12 12 35 High Monitoring 57 25.02 5.933 .786 23.44 26.59 13 37 Moderate 14 28.43 2.954 .789 26.72 30.13 23 33 Less Monitoring 28 27.32 4.092 .773 25.73 28.91 19 36 No Monitoring 12 31.75 6.210 1.793 27.80 35.70 25 41 147 26.16 5.641 .465 25.24 27.08 12 41 Monitoring Monitoring Total ANOVA TRUST_INDEX Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 682.994 4 170.749 Within Groups 3962.407 142 4645.401 Sig. 27.904 Total F 6.119 146 From the results obtained we can say that, Employee trust is a function of Workplace monitoring. (As the sig. is <0.05). So, Hypothesis is rejected based on the result. 9|Page .000
    • 6.4.3 Efficiency Index: H0: Employee efficiency is independent of organizational monitoring. H1: Employee efficiency is dependent on organizational monitoring. COMPUTE EFFICINCY_INDEX = q29_efficiency_5 + q28_efficiency_4+ q19_efficiency_3+ q16_efficiency_2+ q13_efficiency_1. EXECUTE. The above response is the summation of the following question which were in likert scale: 1. I feel more comfortable in a work environment where no restrictions on using social networking and personal email sites? 2. Social networking** at work-hours helps me relieve stress and improve concentration? 3. I will be more productive if there is no workplace monitoring in my organization? 4. I will spend more time at desk if I can access site relevant to my interest? 5. I am more innovative in my work without workplace monitoring in my organization? Oneway Descriptives EFFICINCY_INDEX 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Std. N Very High Mean Std. Lower Upper Deviation Error Bound Bound Minimum Maximum 36 12.81 4.070 .678 11.43 14.18 6 23 High Monitoring 57 15.77 4.404 .583 14.60 16.94 5 25 Moderate 14 13.43 4.702 1.257 10.71 16.14 6 25 Less Monitoring 28 14.93 4.055 .766 13.36 16.50 6 21 No Monitoring 12 16.42 4.621 1.334 13.48 19.35 7 23 147 14.71 4.446 .367 13.99 15.44 5 25 Monitoring Monitoring Total ANOVA EFFICINCY_INDEX Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 254.124 4 63.531 Within Groups 2631.876 142 2886.000 3.428 Sig. 18.534 Total F .010 146 From the results obtained we can say that, Employee efficiency is a function of Workplace monitoring. (As the sig. is <0.05). So, Hypothesis is rejected based on the result. 10 | P a g e
    • 6.4.4 Commitment Index H0: Employee commitment is independent of organizational monitoring. H1: Employee commitment is dependent on organizational monitoring. COMPUTE COMMITMENT_INDEX=q14_commitment_3 + q10_commitment_2 + q8_commitment_1. EXECUTE. The above response is the summation of the following question which were in likert scale: 1. Knowledge of constant monitoring but with undisclosed monitoring methods will hamper my commitment for my organization? 2. It would be very hard for me to leave my organization right now, even if I wanted to? 3. I would be happy to spend rest of my career with this organization? Oneway Descriptives COMMITMENT_INDEX 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Std. N Very High Mean Std. Lower Upper Deviation Error Bound Bound Minimum Maximum 36 7.03 2.971 .495 6.02 8.03 3 13 High Monitoring 57 8.28 2.218 .294 7.69 8.87 3 13 Moderate 14 9.21 1.424 .381 8.39 10.04 7 12 Less Monitoring 28 10.11 2.061 .389 9.31 10.91 6 14 No Monitoring 12 12.58 1.379 .398 11.71 13.46 11 15 147 8.76 2.741 .226 8.32 9.21 3 15 Monitoring Monitoring Total ANOVA COMMITMENT_INDEX Sum of Squares df Mean Square Between Groups 350.233 4 87.558 Within Groups 746.433 142 146 Total 16.657 Sig. 5.257 1096.667 F .000 From the results obtained we can say that, Employee Commitment is a function of Workplace monitoring. (As the sig. is <0.05). So, Hypothesis is rejected based on the result. 11 | P a g e
    • 6.5 Impact on Age Groups For establishing a correlation between Workplace Monitoring and different age groups we have used Goodman and Kruskal Gamma Correlation Test. Hypothesis Formulation H0: There is no correlation between age of a person and level of monitoring. H1: There is a correlation between age of a person and level of monitoring. What is your age group? * What level of Workplace Monitoring do you experience in your organization? Crosstabulation Count What level of Workplace Monitoring do you experience in your organization? Very High group? Less No Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 0 3 0 0 0 3 30 49 12 6 4 101 6 5 2 0 0 13 0 0 0 22 8 30 36 less than 21 Moderate Monitoring What is your age High 57 14 28 12 147 Total years 21 to 26 years old 26 to 35 years old greater than 35 years Total Symmetric Measures Asymp. Std. Value Ordinal by Ordinal Gamma .657 Error a b Approx. T .083 6.054 Approx. Sig. .000 N of Valid Cases 147 a. Not assuming the null hypothesis. b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis. From the results obtained we can say that, Younger employees (Age<26) are more likely to affected by workplace monitoring while employees greater than 35 years old are less affected by work place monitoring. As the sig. is <0.05, So, Hypothesis is rejected based on the result. 12 | P a g e
    • Highlighted area in red indicates younger employees (age less than 26) feel there is high monitoring in there organisations while employees greater than 35 years are less concerned about monitoring. 6.5.1 Effect of different types of monitoring We have used Cochran Test to study the effects of different types of monitoring techniques used. Hypothesis Formulation H0: All respondents are equally exposed to different types of workplace monitoring. H1: All respondents are not equally exposed to different types of workplace monitoring. Descriptive Statistics N Mean Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum Security Camera monitoring 147 1.51 .502 1 2 Computer monitoring 147 1.45 .499 1 2 Blocking of social media 147 1.48 .501 1 2 Restriction on mobile 147 1.52 .501 1 2 Telephone tapping 147 1.56 .498 1 2 Other monitoring 147 1.55 .499 1 2 sites 13 | P a g e
    • Cochran Test Frequencies Value 1 2 Security Camera monitoring 72 75 Computer monitoring 81 66 Blocking of social media sites 77 70 Restriction on mobile 71 76 Telephone tapping 65 82 Other monitoring 66 81 Test Statistics N 147 Cochran's Q 5.304 df a 5 Asymp. Sig. .380 a. 2 is treated as a success. Hypothesis accepted. Employees are exposed equally to all types of workplace monitoring. From the results obtained we can say that, employees are affected equally by all the workplace monitoring techniques. As the sig. is >0.05, So, Hypothesis is accepted and employees are affected equally by different type of workplace monitoring techniques. 6.5.2 Do Men and Women see workplace monitoring differently? We have used Mann-Whitney Test to identify whether perception to monitoring is same across the gender divide. Hypothesis Formulation H0: Male and female have similar perception of workplace monitoring. H1: Male and females have different perception of workplace monitoring. Mann-Whitney Test Ranks Gender What level of Workplace Male Monitoring do you experience Female in your organization? Total 14 | P a g e N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks 104 73.92 7688.00 43 74.19 3190.00 147
    • a Test Statistics What level of Workplace Monitoring do you experience in your organization? Mann-Whitney U 2228.000 Wilcoxon W 7688.000 Z -.036 Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .972 a. Grouping Variable: Gender As the sig. is >0.05, So, Hypothesis is accepted From the above analysis we can conclude that Workplace monitoring affects male and female equally and they have similar attitude towards workplace monitoring. 6.5.3 Impact of workplace monitoring on employee attrition. We have used Kruskal-Wallis Test to identify the impacts of workplace monitoring on employee attrition. Hypothesis Formulation H0: Workplace monitoring has no effect on employee attrition. H1: Workplace monitoring affects employee attrition. Descriptive Statistics N What level of Workplace Monitoring Mean Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum 147 2.48 1.273 1 5 147 3.18 1.766 1 5 do you experience in your organization? Are you likely to leave your organisation because of work place monitoring? Kruskal-Wallis Test Ranks Are you likely to leave your organisation because of work place monitoring? What level of Workplace 51 55.52 Cant Say 32 68.97 No 64 91.24 dimension1 Total 15 | P a g e Mean Rank Yes Monitoring do you experience in your organization? N 147
    • a,b Test Statistics What level of Workplace Monitoring do you experience in your organization? Chi-square 22.366 df 2 Asymp. Sig. .000 a. Kruskal Wallis Test b. Grouping Variable: Are you likely to leave your organisation because of work place monitoring? As the sig. <0.05 we can reject the hypothesis and conclude that employee decision to stay in an organisation depends on the level of monitoring he/she is subjected to. 7. Reliability Analysis: A reliability analysis is performed on the various facets of employee attributes like trust, efficincy etc. Cronbach's Alpha is used to test the reliability of these facets. 7.1 Reliability Analysis for efficiency: RELIABILITY /VARIABLES=q28_efficiency_4 q29_efficiency_5 q19_efficiency_3 q16_efficiency_2 q13_efficiency_1 /SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL /MODEL=ALPHA /STATISTICS=DESCRIPTIVE SCALE CORR /SUMMARY=TOTAL. Reliability Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid % 147 0 Total .0 147 a Excluded 100.0 100.0 a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .709 N of Items .707 Reliability analysis suggests that Efficiency responses are reliable with 70.9% of accuracy. 16 | P a g e 5
    • 7.2 Reliability Analysis for trust: Case Processing Summary N Cases % Valid 147 0 Total .0 147 a Excluded 100.0 100.0 a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .664 N of Items .670 10 Reliability analysis suggests that responses for trust are reliable with 66.4% of accuracy. 7.3 Reliability Analysis for commitment: Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid % 147 Total .0 147 Excluded 100.0 0 a 100.0 a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .641 N of Items .641 4 Reliability analysis suggests that responses for commitment are reliable with 64.1% of accuracy. 7.4 Reliability Analysis for behaviour: Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid a Excluded Total a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha .603 % 147 0 147 100.0 .0 100.0 Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items .621 Reliability analysis suggests that responses for Employee Behaviour are reliable with 60.3% of accuracy. 17 | P a g e 3
    • 8. Limitations: Few limitations of this study are listed below:    This study is conducted on a very small sample. If large number of respondents have been considered the results might have differed. Only one individual was interviewed for each industry type. Responses were collected only through online survey. 9. Conclusion: Initially when we started writing this paper based on initial few direct interviews it came out that the individual employees does not give that much importance to workplace monitoring. But after the end of research, it has been found that monitoring does affect the employee’s productivity, efficiency and reduces his/her commitment and trust towards organisation. We have also found out that while on a sub-ordinate level the employees feel that giving them access to the social networking sites will increase their efficiency and concentration. Many of the responses are dependent on the level and type of monitoring used by the organization. So, based on the findings it can be concluded that while workplace monitoring takes a hit at employees trust and commitment for the organization on an individual level. Employees may find it harsh enough to leave the organization for the breach of privacy at workplace due to monitoring. 10. Appendix 10.1 Appendix I: Interview Transcripts Interview Transcript I Name: Abhijeet Kulkarni Company: Adobe Sector: Product Based Company Work Ex: 7 Year Designation: Team Lead Q. Are you aware about any workplace monitoring of online and workplace activities at Adobe? A. Adobe has a very open culture and there is no monitoring at all of any kind whether it is related to workplace or online activity. 18 | P a g e
    • Q. What impact will it have if such policy is imposed? A. Trust will be lost. The environment will like a School where you had to explain what you are doing and why you are doing. Personal life will be impacted as well as I won’t be able to take my private and personal email at workplace; this in turn may reduce my efficiency and commitment as well. Q. But many people might misuse such facility; they can share Adobe client/user data with external world? A. I agree there is always a security threat and it is forcing many companies to take stringent action including blocking of websites and 24*7 monitoring. But my opinion is, instead of monitoring there should be enough awareness on what we should do and what we shouldn’t do. Let me give my example. When I joined Convergys, my first organization, I downloaded 500GB data in 6 months. One day unknowingly I started 5-6 thread of download simultaneously and the entire organization suffered bandwidth issue. So I think there should be IT policies that specifies the “Do(s) and Don’t(s)”. Q. Your final call on monitoring? A. There should not be monitoring as it may create loss of trust, and it can also reduce productivity. Freedom should be given to the employees with some sense of responsibility. Interview Transcript II Name: Sonal Singh Company: Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. Sector: Services Work Ex: 9 Months Designation: Assistant Software Engineer Q. Are you aware about any workplace monitoring of online and workplace activities at TCS? A. Yes, most of the activities get monitored. If my action is found against TCS restriction policy it may result in my termination. Q. Do they track you through a camera? A. Yes. The camera is just to monitor the activity of associates and other people. Q. Site restriction? A. All social and email sites are open, but adult sites are blocked. Q. Email monitoring? A. Yes they have email monitoring in place. We are not supposed to share programming codes and project information outside of team/LOB. 19 | P a g e
    • Q. What if there is 24*7 monitoring of online activity and all social networking sites are blocked? A. Freedom will be lost. A small brake from work increases efficiency. So, with 24*7 monitoring I may start taking longer brakes. I may also feel less committed to the organization. Interview Transcript III Name: Prasad Kalele Company: Infosys India Pvt Ltd. Work Ex: 8 years Sector: Services Q. Are you aware about any workplace monitoring of online and workplace activities at Infosys? A. Yes there are security camera installed in most of the Offshore Development Centre (ODC); they are mainly for security and monitoring workplace activity. Our workstations are also under IT surveillance to make sure activities are as per Infosys IT guidelines. Q. Are social networking and email sites accessible? A. No. all such sites are blocked because of data security. Q. Should they be blocked? A. Yes, they should be blocked as there are many associates who are just college pass outs. They may spend majority of their time on social networking sites which may hamper the competitive business position of Infosys. It may decrease efficiency; hence quality of work may also get reduced. Q. Don’t you think the social networking sites can improve your social life? A. I don’t think website like Facebook can increase my social life here in Infosys. We have more than 1.5 Lakhs employees and I can chat & talk with them on my organization network any time I want. And I will be happier to go on someone’s desk and talk to them to strengthen my social life. I will be happier to play TT instead play on FB to refresh my mood. Q. If your organization would have allowed all websites without monitoring, would that improve your commitment or loyalty? A. Commitment doesn’t come from what kind of monitoring company provides, but it comes from what quality work you are doing and whether the work is aligned with your long term personal and professional goal. 20 | P a g e
    • 10.2 Appendix II: Survey Questionnaire Welcome, thank you for participating in our survey. We are a student group from MDI Gurgaon and this survey is a part of our academic project. The results of this survey are strictly for academic purpose and the results won't be shared in any case. Please fill the survey. Thanking you again. *Required  * What is your age group? <21 21-26 27-35 >35 * Gender Male Female * Company Name * Which department do you work in? Admin Finance Sales HR Engineering/Technology Other (Please Specify): * How long are you working in the current organization ? 0-1years 1-2years 3-5years >5 years 21 | P a g e
    • * What level of Workplace Monitoring** do you experience in your organization?* **Monitoring Indicates restriction on website usage, activity monitoring on your work station and physical monitoring by surveillance systems etc. No Monitoring Less Monitoring Moderate Monitoring High Monitoring Very High Monitored * What kinds of monitoring are you exposed to?*(You may tick more than one choice) Security cameras Computer monitoring systems Blocking of social networking and blogging sites Restriction on mobile phone usage. Telephone tapping devices Other (Please Specify): * I would be happy to spend rest of my career with this organization? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * I have a strong sense of belonging to my organization? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * It would be very hard for me to leave my organization right now, even if I wanted to? 22 | P a g e
    • Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * Workplace monitoring affects the level of trust between me and my employer. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * I feel more comfortable in a work environment where no restrictions on using social networking and personal email sites? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * Knowledge of constant monitoring but with undisclosed monitoring methods will hamper my commitment for my organization? Strongly Disagree Disagree 23 | P a g e
    • Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * Workplace monitoring helps my organisation to achieve long term goals. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 16* Social networking** at work-hours helps me relieve stress and improve concentration? **Social networking means using website like Facebook, twitter, personal email etc. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * My organization trusts my capabilities and has given me decision making rights? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * I would behave differently when I know I am being monitored? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 24 | P a g e
    • * I will be more productive if there is no workplace monitoring in my organization? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * Workplace monitoring is to meet service level agreement and not for direct employee or employee activity monitoring? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * Monitoring the employees with or without their knowledge is a breach of trust? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * To establish trust, company should tell the employees about all the ways in which they get monitored? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * If organization completely stops workplace monitoring is it going to increase your trust for your organization? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral 25 | P a g e
    • Agree Strongly Agree * Are you likely to leave your organisation because of work place monitoring? Yes No Can’t say * Would you recommend this organisation for your friends/relatives etc. ? Yes No * Have you recently visited any doctor for stress related issues? Yes No * Workplace monitoring irritates you? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * I will spend more time at desk if I can access site relevant to my interest? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree * I am more innovative in my work without workplace monitoring in my organization? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 26 | P a g e
    • 11. Bibliography 1. Trust and monitoring in the workplace. Weckert, J. s.l. : Technology and Society, 2000. University as a Bridge from Technology to Society. IEEE International Symposium on, 2000. ISTAS.2000.915635. 2. Avner Levin, Mary Foster, Tony Hernandez, Mary Jo Nicholson. Office of the privacy commissioner of Canada. [Online] 30 10 2012. [Cited: 23 03 2013.] http://www.priv.gc.ca/resource/cp/2005-2006/p_200506_03_e.asp. 3. Electronic workplace monitoring: what employees think. Effy Oz, Richard Glass, Robert Behling. 1999, Omega, Int. J. Mgmt Sci., Vol. 27, pp. 167-177. 27 | P a g e