Computerized performance monitoring systems: use and abuse

Abstract

An exploratory study of computerized performance monitoring and control systems reveals both positive and negative effects. R.esponses of 50 clerical workers from 2 organizations with computerized monitoring were compared to 94 individuals from 3 organizations in similar jobs without computerized monitoring. The results indicate that computerized monitoring is associated with perceived increases in office productivity, more accurate and complete assessment of workers' performance, and higher levels of organizational control. Respondents indicate that managers overemphasize the importance of quantity and underemphasize the importance of quality in evaluating employee performance. Workers perceive increased stress, lower levels of satisfaction, and a decrease in the quality of their relationships with peers and management as a consequence of computerized monitoring. The relevance of existing models of performance monitoring is examined in light of these findings.

Electronic Collaboration of Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS), Normative Funding (NF), and Organizational Performance Indicator Framework (OPIF) for Technological University of the Philippines

“…In addition, despite the importance to researchers, managers, and policy makers of how information technology (IT) contributes to organizational performance, there is uncertainty and debate about what we know and don't know (Melville, Kraemer, & Gurbaxani, 2004). As opined by Irving, Higgins, and Safayeni (1986), computerized monitoring is associated with perceived increases in office productivity, more accurate and complete assessment of workers' performance, and higher levels of organizational control.…”

Should Filtering Software be utilised in the Workplace? Australian Employees’ Attitudes towards Internet usage and Surveillance of the Internet in the Workplace.

“…Others have also argued that computer monitoring can have deleterious effects upon employees. For instance, Irving, Higgins and Safayeni (1986) found that monitored workers experienced greater stress, decreased satisfaction and a decline in the quality of relationships with other staff compared to nonmonitored workers. In respect to monitoring being used to measure performance levels, Aiello (1993) found that 25% of directory assistance operators attempted to cheat the system by disconnecting customers in order to be able to reach their goal, and in turn were rewarded by their supervisor for their shorter than average call record.…”

Information technology and transitions in the public service: A comparison of scandinavia and the united states

“…The speed-up has occurred because the technology allows individuals to work faster, shortens the cycles for processes such as billing, paying and collecting, and records information in real-time, as events and actions occur, and thereby creates an expectation for fast response. An important effect of this speed-up is a general increase in time pressures felt by all types and levels of workers (Danziger & Kraemer 1986, Irving et al 1986, Jackson 1987, Kraemer & Danziger 1990). …”

“…First, computing provides a higher level of organizational control and greater capacity for judging performance via computerized monitoring systems built into the operating systems of government. And this capacity for work monitoring via the computer is now a reality for professionals as it has been for clerical/administrative workers (Bjørn- Andersen et al 1986, Irving et al 1986.…”