Is office surveillance demoralising?
May 19, 2011 4:15 PM Subscribe
I have just shelled out for a quite pricey IP camera for the office I remotely manage, but I'm having second thoughts installing it.
I run a small business, 3 staff, and I have moved away from the city and visit only once a fortnight or so.
I trust the staff, but it's the type of qualatative work where it is very hard to track the amount of time spent on each task, so I'm thinking of adopting some camera or tracking software.
Would it do more harm than good? I feel like I have a right to keep tabs, but also it seems quite disrespectful.
And I am wondering about the ethics of tracking keylogs or screen captures.
Any and all thoughts appreciated
Is there a problem you're trying to solve? Are things taking longer than they should? Do you suspect that they're lying to you? If there's no problem, then a 'solution' that only serves to guarantee that they know you're not on their side, but rather clearly against them, despite them not doing anything wrong would definitely be bad.
posted by brainmouse at 4:21 PM on May 19, 2011 [7 favorites]
posted by brainmouse at 4:21 PM on May 19, 2011 [7 favorites]
I think you can respectfully record when employees come and go from the building, or when their workstation is on but that's about it. Anything beyond that and I'd be second to quit (after dhalgren).
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:23 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:23 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
Remember what it was like when mom made you sit at the kitchen table and she watched you do your homework? Yeah, that sucked. This would be the same thing.
If you trust them, then trust them.
posted by jpeacock at 4:26 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
If you trust them, then trust them.
posted by jpeacock at 4:26 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
constantly watching the staff, or the feeling that is happening, will stifle creativity, risk taking, experimentation and those sorts of things that can make many companies great
posted by Salvatorparadise at 4:30 PM on May 19, 2011
posted by Salvatorparadise at 4:30 PM on May 19, 2011
Response by poster: I do trust the staff. But.... when I am in the office, productivity increases as there is less banter, heads down etc. I guess I am trying to replicate this effect in my absense.
Though having an employee quit wouldn't be good for productivity either.
posted by choppyes at 4:30 PM on May 19, 2011
Though having an employee quit wouldn't be good for productivity either.
posted by choppyes at 4:30 PM on May 19, 2011
oh - and "remotely manage" is a contradiction as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather identify the best management candidate in that office, and have them "manage manage" and then you just manage that person in your occasional (but regular) visits.
posted by Salvatorparadise at 4:31 PM on May 19, 2011 [9 favorites]
posted by Salvatorparadise at 4:31 PM on May 19, 2011 [9 favorites]
Management is about relationships. Technology can not be used in place of relationships. Technology can assist in maintaining relationships, but it can also mislead you into thinking you have a relationship when you do not.
posted by fief at 4:34 PM on May 19, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by fief at 4:34 PM on May 19, 2011 [3 favorites]
Your problem isn't your staff your problem is that you aren't there. Absentee managers/owners soon lose control of the product.
You know what the solution is, you need to be there..
posted by tomswift at 4:37 PM on May 19, 2011 [5 favorites]
You know what the solution is, you need to be there..
posted by tomswift at 4:37 PM on May 19, 2011 [5 favorites]
You know what the solution is, you need to be there...
Or, you need to pony up the salary for someone to do the complicated and thankless job of managing an office.
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:42 PM on May 19, 2011 [3 favorites]
Or, you need to pony up the salary for someone to do the complicated and thankless job of managing an office.
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:42 PM on May 19, 2011 [3 favorites]
Are you doing your one-on-ones with your staff? Giving feedback often? Do you allow your staff to teach classes to one another or join in an effort to keep quality up? What is your periodic employee training like?
These are things that should get you the opposite result of "security camera --> employee quitting."
posted by circular at 4:46 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
These are things that should get you the opposite result of "security camera --> employee quitting."
posted by circular at 4:46 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
How do you know that their productivity increases when you are there? What measurement says to you "my presence improved productivity"? Do they know that is expected of them for you to consider them "more productive" vs. "less productive"?
If it's a valid measure have you ever considered talking to them like human beings and tell them what you have noticed regarding their productivity when you are present vs. not-present?
posted by dgeiser13 at 4:51 PM on May 19, 2011 [2 favorites]
If it's a valid measure have you ever considered talking to them like human beings and tell them what you have noticed regarding their productivity when you are present vs. not-present?
posted by dgeiser13 at 4:51 PM on May 19, 2011 [2 favorites]
I think a more better solution would be to implement tighter goals that replicate the efficiency seen while you are there. Everything is measurable.
The eye in the sky just adds to stress, when the employees equate it with "boss is constantly watching us." However, if you don't overtly use it, and just explain it away as security, I don't see it as becoming much of an issue.
What I mean is, watching the camera, seeing something bad, and calling and saying "hey, why did you do that??" That is going to lead to badness.
But casually using it as a stool-pigeon, whereby you make note of something you see, and then later "discover" it in person might be an effective way to use it.
posted by gjc at 4:54 PM on May 19, 2011
The eye in the sky just adds to stress, when the employees equate it with "boss is constantly watching us." However, if you don't overtly use it, and just explain it away as security, I don't see it as becoming much of an issue.
What I mean is, watching the camera, seeing something bad, and calling and saying "hey, why did you do that??" That is going to lead to badness.
But casually using it as a stool-pigeon, whereby you make note of something you see, and then later "discover" it in person might be an effective way to use it.
posted by gjc at 4:54 PM on May 19, 2011
Please treat your employees like the adults they are instead of spying on them. I would be absolutely revolted to find out that my employer was recording me as I am doing my damn job. And like dhalgren, I too would quit as soon as I found another job.
posted by crankylex at 4:57 PM on May 19, 2011
posted by crankylex at 4:57 PM on May 19, 2011
Have you talked to your employees about what you've observed? If so, what did they say?
posted by secret about box at 5:01 PM on May 19, 2011
posted by secret about box at 5:01 PM on May 19, 2011
Why don't you track numbers? if you "manage" the business, you already know what is happening. Is there a peak in efficacy when you're there? Or are you just getting in there way? Making them "perform" work.
posted by Max Power at 5:09 PM on May 19, 2011
posted by Max Power at 5:09 PM on May 19, 2011
How about opening a two-way communication channel (e.g. IRC) instead of a one-way channel (camera)? It might improve communication/morale rather than degrade it. (I've done a lot of remote work and small team management with a combo of short phone meetings and IRC.)
posted by instamatic at 5:20 PM on May 19, 2011
posted by instamatic at 5:20 PM on May 19, 2011
You have the right to do it, but as others have noted it's a question of what kind of work environment you want to build.
I do trust the staff. But.... when I am in the office, productivity increases as there is less banter, heads down etc. I guess I am trying to replicate this effect in my absense.
There are always ebbs and flows in office productivity depending on different factors. You mentioned that the work they do is "Qualitative," suggesting that they're not simple assembling widgets or spending recordable/loggable time on customer service calls.
Do you believe that the amount of work being done by your staff, as a whole, is not in keeping with the time that they apparently spend on it? Setting up a time logging system is probably a better move if you really want to make sure that work is being done in ways that works best. If you don't trust your employees to log time accurately, you've got other problems.
posted by verb at 5:22 PM on May 19, 2011
I do trust the staff. But.... when I am in the office, productivity increases as there is less banter, heads down etc. I guess I am trying to replicate this effect in my absense.
There are always ebbs and flows in office productivity depending on different factors. You mentioned that the work they do is "Qualitative," suggesting that they're not simple assembling widgets or spending recordable/loggable time on customer service calls.
Do you believe that the amount of work being done by your staff, as a whole, is not in keeping with the time that they apparently spend on it? Setting up a time logging system is probably a better move if you really want to make sure that work is being done in ways that works best. If you don't trust your employees to log time accurately, you've got other problems.
posted by verb at 5:22 PM on May 19, 2011
Disrespectful is an understatement. Are they low paid service staff handling cash? Then OK. Are they valued members of a team?
Introduce IM, and use that - a far better method of keeping tabs on productivity. Also set milestones as in "can I see x report before lunchtime please?"
posted by the noob at 5:32 PM on May 19, 2011
Introduce IM, and use that - a far better method of keeping tabs on productivity. Also set milestones as in "can I see x report before lunchtime please?"
posted by the noob at 5:32 PM on May 19, 2011
Best answer: We are putting in cameras to monitor the public areas of the building I manage. We are being careful to not put cameras where people work. If your people produce more when you are there, it is short term thing. If you were there all the time, I can guarantee that production would eventually wane to where it is when you are not there.
If you need to monitor theft, that is a different matter. But Big Brother is an awful thing to implement. If you feel the need to manage the staff, either work it out so you are there all the time or hire a manager.
posted by fifilaru at 5:35 PM on May 19, 2011
If you need to monitor theft, that is a different matter. But Big Brother is an awful thing to implement. If you feel the need to manage the staff, either work it out so you are there all the time or hire a manager.
posted by fifilaru at 5:35 PM on May 19, 2011
Also: banter= healthy workplace. Not really something you'd want to discourage. Better banter than paranoia.
posted by instamatic at 5:40 PM on May 19, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by instamatic at 5:40 PM on May 19, 2011 [3 favorites]
Best answer: Don't you have a job to do? Monitoring your staff that way will eat up your time, quite apart from anything else.
I, personally, hate it when my boss can see my screen. I just can't focus when I have someone peering over my shoulder. Performance anxiety, basically - yes, I can perform on demand to give a talk or seminar or presentation, but doing it all the time? I'm not an actor for a good reason! Keystrokes? Ugh, I will never use a password I can remember again, because that might give them access to my private, nonwork data (no-one would ever use the same password for work systems as home systems). Same goes for screen captures.
I would hate to be treated as a child in my workplace. I would leave. I have left jobs that tried that.
My productivity at work tends to be better when my manager is available. At times I need guidance with setting priorities, and sometimes information that only my manager possesses - at those times, it has a serious impact on my productivity when I cannot access my manager in some form, be it face-to-face, IRC, email, or a phone call. I can go on to other tasks while waiting, of course, but there's a cost in terms of time and energy to switch that way. Being watched all the time, via camera or similar would not help this at all.
Consider communication, rather than surveillance.
posted by ysabet at 6:01 PM on May 19, 2011 [4 favorites]
I, personally, hate it when my boss can see my screen. I just can't focus when I have someone peering over my shoulder. Performance anxiety, basically - yes, I can perform on demand to give a talk or seminar or presentation, but doing it all the time? I'm not an actor for a good reason! Keystrokes? Ugh, I will never use a password I can remember again, because that might give them access to my private, nonwork data (no-one would ever use the same password for work systems as home systems). Same goes for screen captures.
I would hate to be treated as a child in my workplace. I would leave. I have left jobs that tried that.
My productivity at work tends to be better when my manager is available. At times I need guidance with setting priorities, and sometimes information that only my manager possesses - at those times, it has a serious impact on my productivity when I cannot access my manager in some form, be it face-to-face, IRC, email, or a phone call. I can go on to other tasks while waiting, of course, but there's a cost in terms of time and energy to switch that way. Being watched all the time, via camera or similar would not help this at all.
Consider communication, rather than surveillance.
posted by ysabet at 6:01 PM on May 19, 2011 [4 favorites]
Response by poster: It's not a tracking, comms or trust issue. I've always been a near total absentee boss, and there is a pool table in the office with no restrictions on use.
My theory is simply that employees work better when the boss is phsyically near by. This is not a radical theory to my mind.
But I understand now, that a camera is not any kind of solution to the problem.
posted by choppyes at 6:28 PM on May 19, 2011
My theory is simply that employees work better when the boss is phsyically near by. This is not a radical theory to my mind.
But I understand now, that a camera is not any kind of solution to the problem.
posted by choppyes at 6:28 PM on May 19, 2011
Have you considered having daily teleconferencing meetings when you are away from the office? I would suspect that will be much more effective than making your employees feel spied on. It[s also entirely possible they're more productive when you're in the office because you're there to answer questions, assist in employee workload etc . . . Even if its only minor things, it probably makes a difference. I have a boss that works from home one day a week and I *could* call her anytime, but rarely do on the day she's away from the office.
I worked at a place once that started putting cameras to watch its employees. In once extreme case, the office manager called an employee to critique the amount of time she took to shred papers.
Watching people quit as more cameras were added was quite the enjoyable experience. Not that I was there much longer, I was driven away from there by other forces before the cameras got to my office area.
But yeah, camera spying on employees, bad.
posted by [insert clever name here] at 6:44 PM on May 19, 2011
I worked at a place once that started putting cameras to watch its employees. In once extreme case, the office manager called an employee to critique the amount of time she took to shred papers.
Watching people quit as more cameras were added was quite the enjoyable experience. Not that I was there much longer, I was driven away from there by other forces before the cameras got to my office area.
But yeah, camera spying on employees, bad.
posted by [insert clever name here] at 6:44 PM on May 19, 2011
If you don't trust your employees, then you need to be there. If you trust them, you don't need to spy on them.
If you want to be more of a 'presence' in the office, what about a two-way option? Set up a daily team meeting via Webcam. 5-10 minutes a day would be a reasonable investment in keeping them reminded of who the boss is and a chance for you to gauge moral etc. Then, make yourself available via e-mail or IM so they know they can get guidance if/when they need it.
posted by dg at 7:41 PM on May 19, 2011
If you want to be more of a 'presence' in the office, what about a two-way option? Set up a daily team meeting via Webcam. 5-10 minutes a day would be a reasonable investment in keeping them reminded of who the boss is and a chance for you to gauge moral etc. Then, make yourself available via e-mail or IM so they know they can get guidance if/when they need it.
posted by dg at 7:41 PM on May 19, 2011
How would you feel if they bought a camera and used it to monitor you?
No, seriously. This is one of those problems that can be solved by thinking of yourself as a person, and the other people involved as people, rather than thinking of yourself as an employer and them as employees.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 7:47 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
No, seriously. This is one of those problems that can be solved by thinking of yourself as a person, and the other people involved as people, rather than thinking of yourself as an employer and them as employees.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 7:47 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
Do you have another job? I see that you moved to another city, but why?
What I'm getting at is this whole "productivity increases when I'm around thing..." and the "once a fortnight part..." What's your job? If you being there increases productivity, I'd suggest making your presence a part of your job.
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 7:51 PM on May 19, 2011
What I'm getting at is this whole "productivity increases when I'm around thing..." and the "once a fortnight part..." What's your job? If you being there increases productivity, I'd suggest making your presence a part of your job.
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 7:51 PM on May 19, 2011
Ask yourself one question: what matters most, work hours or work output? Right. I knew you would say, "Both."
If your people are getting the work done (meaning on time, proper quality, etc.) then congratulations on having a mature, professional staff. Leave them the hell alone.
If they are not, don't be fooled by the appearance of productivity. People learn to keep their heads down to avoid the "lash".
If your employees are getting the work done without your physical presense then your organization just might be a good fit for a Results Only Work Environment. If you can stand to let go enough.
posted by trinity8-director at 9:39 PM on May 19, 2011
If your people are getting the work done (meaning on time, proper quality, etc.) then congratulations on having a mature, professional staff. Leave them the hell alone.
If they are not, don't be fooled by the appearance of productivity. People learn to keep their heads down to avoid the "lash".
If your employees are getting the work done without your physical presense then your organization just might be a good fit for a Results Only Work Environment. If you can stand to let go enough.
posted by trinity8-director at 9:39 PM on May 19, 2011
Are they getting their work done? If they are, why do you care how long their butts are physically in their office chairs? You should care about the results, not about people going through the motions of "working."
posted by Jacqueline at 10:27 PM on May 19, 2011
posted by Jacqueline at 10:27 PM on May 19, 2011
My theory is simply that employees work better when the boss is physically near by.
Why do you believe that? I have years of experience slacking off, and let me tell you, I could do it whether you were nearby or not.
The only thing that you can really measure effectively is work output. And if you're getting the desired output, then that's all that matters.
posted by me & my monkey at 11:27 PM on May 19, 2011
Why do you believe that? I have years of experience slacking off, and let me tell you, I could do it whether you were nearby or not.
The only thing that you can really measure effectively is work output. And if you're getting the desired output, then that's all that matters.
posted by me & my monkey at 11:27 PM on May 19, 2011
I find a good compromise is to set up Skype to my desktop at the office, set up so that it auto answers when called remotely. The web cam just looks out over my desk in the office, and doesn't directly see any of the staff. The microphone can pick up general conversations, and people can call out to ask a question. I generally run it with my end muted, until someone wants to ask something.
If they want to ask a question or discuss something, they can walk over to my desk just like they would normally, and they'll see the video of me working away at my desk remotely. If I've stepped away to get a coffee or have lunch, then they can see that my chair is empty. If I'm there, then we can have a conversation over Skype.
Being connected over audio isn't as intrusive as having a video camera watching from on high. And having my video and audio being sent makes it a more equitable relationship.
posted by sandycooper at 12:52 AM on May 20, 2011 [2 favorites]
If they want to ask a question or discuss something, they can walk over to my desk just like they would normally, and they'll see the video of me working away at my desk remotely. If I've stepped away to get a coffee or have lunch, then they can see that my chair is empty. If I'm there, then we can have a conversation over Skype.
Being connected over audio isn't as intrusive as having a video camera watching from on high. And having my video and audio being sent makes it a more equitable relationship.
posted by sandycooper at 12:52 AM on May 20, 2011 [2 favorites]
story about camera use: Camera was put in break room. You can no longer find anyone in the break room, they found a spare table that had been stored in an alcove to gather at. Cameras are disruptive technology. As an employer you want as little disruption as possible.
posted by ptm at 7:46 AM on May 20, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by ptm at 7:46 AM on May 20, 2011 [1 favorite]
"Is office surveillance demoralising?"
Yes. I agree with ptm, camera is a disruptive technology, it can sow a sense of mistrust and resentment among your employees.
If productivity is a problem, then I'd explore effective management techniques. However, at the end of day we're all human, there's only so much productivity you can squeeze out of us. Productivity tends to drop off after a certain point. Even if a person keeps his/her head down at the desk for 8 hours straight, after 4th or 5th hour that person becomes quite inefficient.
Have you considered Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) with clearly defined goals? Here is a good primer on this idea.
posted by pakoothefakoo at 8:08 AM on May 20, 2011 [1 favorite]
Yes. I agree with ptm, camera is a disruptive technology, it can sow a sense of mistrust and resentment among your employees.
If productivity is a problem, then I'd explore effective management techniques. However, at the end of day we're all human, there's only so much productivity you can squeeze out of us. Productivity tends to drop off after a certain point. Even if a person keeps his/her head down at the desk for 8 hours straight, after 4th or 5th hour that person becomes quite inefficient.
Have you considered Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) with clearly defined goals? Here is a good primer on this idea.
posted by pakoothefakoo at 8:08 AM on May 20, 2011 [1 favorite]
*clearly defined AND measurable goals
posted by pakoothefakoo at 8:09 AM on May 20, 2011
posted by pakoothefakoo at 8:09 AM on May 20, 2011
Related: When nothing else works, try this via Kottke.org
posted by blueberry at 8:36 AM on May 21, 2011
posted by blueberry at 8:36 AM on May 21, 2011
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by dhalgren at 4:21 PM on May 19, 2011 [23 favorites]