Electronic performance monitoring (EPM) refers to the use of technological means to observe, record, and analyze information that directly or indirectly relates to job performance. The last comprehensive review of the EPM literature was published in 2000. Since 2000, dramatic advances in information technologies have created an environment in which organizations are able to monitor employees to a greater extent and with greater intensity than was previously possible. Moreover, since that time, considerable research has been devoted to understanding the effects of EPM on individual performance and attitudes. Contradictory findings in the EPM literature exist, suggesting that EPM is a multidimensional phenomenon and one for which contextual and psychological variables are pertinent. Thus, we propose a theory-based typology of EPM characteristics and use this typology as a framework to review the EPM literature and identify an agenda for future research and practice.

The rapid pace at which technology changes creates a challenge for I-O psychologists, who often conduct hypothetico-deductive research. In this article, we examine technology research in the I-O psychology community by asking three questions: “Why should I-O psychologists study new technologies?,” “How timely is I-O psychologists’ technology research?,” and “How can I-O psychologists produce timelier technology research?” Using archival data from 23 years of SIOP conferences and a historical timeline of technology innovations, we find that I-O psychologists study technology milestones an average of 6.10 years after they first enter widespread awareness and adoption. We discuss the implications of this lag and conclude by urging I-O psychologists to study technology with an eye toward action, exploration, collaboration, dissemination, and creation.

Electronic performance monitoring (EPM), or the use of technological means to observe, record, and analyze information that directly or indirectly relates to employee job performance, is a now ubiquitous work practice. We conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of the effects of EPM on workers (K = 94 independent samples, N = 23,461), while taking into account the characteristics of the monitoring. Results provide no evidence that EPM improves worker performance. Moreover, findings indicate that the presence of EPM increases worker stress and strain, regardless of the characteristics of monitoring. Findings also demonstrate that organizations that monitor more transparently and less invasively can expect more positive attitudes from workers. Overall, results highlight that even as advances in technology make possible a variety of ways to monitor workers, organizations must continue to consider the psychological component of work.

The rapid pace at which technology changes creates a challenge for industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologists, who often conduct hypothetico-deductive research. In this article, we examine technology research in the I-O psychology community by asking three questions: Why should I-O psychologists study new technologies? How timely is I-O psychologists’ technology research? How can I-O psychologists produce timelier technology research? Using archival data from 23 years of SIOP conferences and a historical timeline of technology innovations, we find that I-O psychologists study technology milestones an average of 6.10 years after they first enter widespread awareness and adoption. We discuss the implications of this lag and conclude by urging I-O psychologists to study technology with an eye toward action, exploration, collaboration, dissemination, and creation.

No abstract