Remote control

Businesses have been on a steep learning curve since the start of the pandemic, reshaping staffing structures based around remote and hybrid working. Martin Allen-Smith assesses how employers are measuring, and even monitoring, productivity in the new normal

The Covid pandemic shifted global working patterns more drastically and rapidly than perhaps any other single event in modern history, as lockdowns forced businesses to find new ways to operate and, for many of them, that included a switch to remote working on a previously unimaginable scale.

As the pandemic flood waters subsided, employers were left with some big decisions to make in how best to manage a staged return to office working, and it is a scenario that, for many, has led to widespread, long-term adoption of remote or hybrid working arrangements.

There is a case to make for workers being more productive when operating remotely, away from some of the time-sapping distractions and unnecessary meetings in the workplace. And for many firms, the shift to working remotely has generally been a positive development – even a huge success – both for staff and employers.

Numerous studies suggest that people are both more productive and happier when working from home – and this is a not a new phenomenon. In a paper produced almost a decade ago at Stanford University, researchers noted a dramatic increase in productivity amongst home workers. Conducted over nine months amongst 16,000 call centre employees, the study found that home working led to a 13 per cent performance increase, of which about nine per cent was from working more minutes per shift (fewer breaks and sick days) and four per cent from more calls per minute (attributed to a quieter working environment).

The same level of success with WFH has not been achieved by all firms or staff, however, with some struggling with the requisite self motivation, discipline or commitment.
According to a US study by Pew Research, of the 60 per cent of staff who say that their job can be done from home, about 71 per cent are working from home all or most of the time. For many companies, that is a large number of people who are not only working outside of the office, but might also be using their own devices, working odd hours and having fewer important meetings with managers.

To assess the productivity of staff falling into this latter category, a number of organisations are turning to monitoring tools to measure activity. In fact, about 68 per cent of organisations with 500 or more employees have implemented employee monitoring, and many smaller companies are joining them.

The concept of adding monitoring to ‘track’ employee behaviour is widespread, but it can become a bigger issue when organisations do not implement the right process.

David Morrow, CMO at employee monitoring specialist Veriato, says that to keep the majority of productive workers engaged while managing issues, companies must do what they can to reduce blind spots and get ahead of problems, while improving communication and support.

“Too few organisations clearly communicate their need to use monitoring software. Similarly, few companies explain that software needs to be in place if people continue to work remotely in order to keep employees and companies safe. What’s more, many people are looking at productivity metrics and other insights as a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ kind of reporting. Instead, insights can be used to learn about issues before they become bigger, and can be a catalyst for positive improvement,” he explains. “Disgruntled employees can be talked to and coached before they cause a problem, and data can be secured before it is compromised.

Giving people respect while at the same time increasing visibility is the right approach to enable long-term, safe, remote work, in Morrow’s view.

Privacy and trust

Research carried out at the end of 2022 by The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development and HR software firm HiBob found that more than half of bosses (55 per cent) agree with collecting information on regular home workers, including the amount of time spent on laptops each day and email sending behaviours to identify risk of burnout. However, only 28 per cent of leaders say their organisations are using software to monitor the productivity of home workers. Where workplace monitoring is in place, the CIPD and HiBob urge employers to consider its purpose, and to be clear to staff about what is being monitored, and why.

The survey of over 2,000 bosses found that although 39 per cent do not feel any measures to collect information on regular home workers are acceptable, 55 per cent agree with at least one measure, which may include tracking the amount of time spent on billable tasks for clients (24 per cent); observing email sending behaviours, but not content, to identify if an employee is at risk of burnout (24 per cent); recording how much time employees use their work laptop each day (22 per cent); and sending automatic alerts to managers if employees work outside normal working hours (18 per cent).

Hayfa Mohdzaini, senior research adviser at the CIPD, says that, depending on the context, collecting information on home workers can be a positive thing, supporting employee performance and well-being, by identifying signs of excessive workloads and burnout. Indeed, in certain roles and industries, it can be necessary for reasons of safety or billable hours. However, when used without a clear reason it will likely be treated with suspicion by employees.

“We recommend that employers be transparent about what they’re monitoring and why, consulting with staff to make sure these measures are necessary and relevant to their role. Employers need to demonstrate how any monitoring software used can benefit employees, while also respecting their privacy and encouraging a culture of trust,” Mohdzaini says.

Employee monitoring software is a booming market and the number and type of tools available is growing. Among other things, software can continuously monitor employees’ digital activity, log keystrokes, take screenshots or, most commonly, track web browsing and application use.

Ronni Zehavi, CEO of HiBob, believes that the way a business decides to measure performance, growth or company success is a reflection of its culture. “Progressive businesses understand that a healthy culture based on transparency, communication and flexibility drives sustainable growth and positive business outcomes,” he explains. “It’s understandable for businesses to want to gain insight into what their staff spends time on or how long [a task] takes them to do, but collecting more information than is needed to fulfil any audit purpose could undermine trust and impact the relationship between staff and employers, irrevocably damaging employee engagement.”

So what are the options facing employers looking to tread carefully along the tightrope between maintaining diligent control while treating employees with trust and respect – and how can they avoid falling foul of some of the potential legal and ethical pitfalls? Veriato’s Morrow says: “‘Surveillance’ type software has been called into question, and rightly so. Companies should not use any kind of monitoring in a way that is an invasion of privacy or that goes against employee protections. A more passive type of monitoring software is widespread, and offers a somewhat limited ability to understand employee activity.

“The best approach – and a growing technology category – is workforce behaviour monitoring, which provides more action-oriented insights that can actually improve the work environment and create positive communication between employers and their workforce. Businesses are able to understand baseline employee behaviours and get flags when activity deviates from the norm. Natural language processing can detect changes in tone, and algorithms can detect potential problems before it’s too late, all while respecting privacy and laws.”

Implementing workforce behaviour analytics, he says, will help ensure that risks are countered, without overstepping the mark in the treatment of staff. “Companies should bypass anything oriented towards surveillance and focus instead on analytics that can be used to support productivity and spot issues at the same time,” he explains. “The most important element of workforce behaviour analytics is to get ahead of threats while improving the remote work environment. Perhaps an organisation gets a flag that someone becomes less productive, or starts accessing sensitive data more frequently. More than anything, companies need a communication and mitigation plan for these early signs. If an issue can be resolved before it becomes a threat then it is a win-win.”



This article was published in the Q2 2023 issue of CIR Magazine.

Download PDF

Contact the editor