Privacyis an increasingly significant facet of ethical concern in modernorganizations (Martin, 2012). Some employers constantly feel the needto monitor their workers so as to prevent any shortcomings ormisconduct (Richards, 2012). The existence of technology additionallymakes it possible for an organization to monitor employee activitieseasily. This, in essence, means that an employer is capable oftracking the activities of his employees by tapping into theiremails, phone calls, and internet use, all this without the specificknowledge of those being observed (Stanko & Beckman, 2015).Monitoring raises an issue of ethics and the right to privacy henceevery employer through organizational leadership has the duty toprotect employees’ confidentiality and privacy. This reportdiscusses employee privacy at the workplace, outlining the generalethical arguments about it and the ethical responsibilities ofleaders in ensuring that there are no violations of rights during theprocess.
EthicalBasis for and Against
WhyPrivacy is Significant
Employeeprivacy needs to be upheld because it is morally right to do so(Drake, 2016). Employees need to feel comfortable and not violatedwhile working in any atmosphere. In cases where according to Martin(2012) the surveillance is incorporated in the job contract, and itis considered legal, it does not necessarily earn the right to bemorally correct. This is mainly because many of the subjects mightfeel that the procedure amounts to spying and is, therefore, wrong.In many ways, the process can only be rectified if the managerinvolved in the monitoring of employees takes into considerationseveral factors. One aspect is that everyone participating in the dayto day running of the organization is well aware that the saidsurveillance is taking place. Also, those involved should recognizethe implications of the process both in the short -term andlong-term.
Itcan also be stated that employee privacy also supports human dignity.Even in a situation where a member of staff is aware that there is amonitoring process put in place, there is the added possibility thathe or she will still not react positively to the idea of the privacyviolation, and may end up feeling that his/her self-respect is beingundermined. According to Sharif & Scandura (2014), this is mostlikely brought about by the fact that they will not have any controlover the process and will not be aware of what is taking place.Employees would, therefore, be in the dark concerning what is seenand its possible impact on their individual rating by managers. Theworkforce may probably interpret this as a form of management spyingon them, and this will by extension cause dissatisfaction coupledwith employee alienation from the employer. The outcome of this isthe likelihood of an adverse impact on employee productivity.Inherently the individual may divert from the objective of thebusiness which is the making profits. It is, therefore, beneficial ifleaders upheld employee privacy.
Privacyhas a role in ensuring greater productivity and protection of theworkers against unnecessary or demeaning personal exposure. Forexample, when an organization has adopted a monitoring orsurveillance system, moral issues can emerge and in the process, itmay bring about negative effects on employee performance. Martin(2012) suggests that this is because in instances employees end upfeeling that the employer does not actually trust them. In addition,the scrutiny of employees is likely to give rise to the disclosure ofpersonal information, which is unnecessary. An employer might end upknowing a number of personal details relating to employees’ forexample their sexual orientation, relationship issues, religion orstate of health. Such knowledge, therefore, brings about a dilemma inprivacy and even creates the risk of lawsuits concerningdiscrimination.
In the event that an organization chooses to violate the privacy ofits workforce, undesirable work attitudes and low morale is likely toarise. When workers are conscious that they are monitored, they mayexperience difficulty in committing themselves to their duties due toconstant observation. Organizational commitment may, therefore, beaffected due to the loss of morale. Additionally, distrust may alsoarise leading to increasing levels of frustration. Privacy is,therefore, significant in reducing the negative effects that areassociated with its violation (Martin, 2012). Confidentialityincreases self- confidence and moral among employees.
WhyPrivacy is Not Significant
Althoughprivacy is an important aspect to the employees, there are variouslegal and ethical arguments raised against it. One of these is thatit is legal and right to monitor one’s employees. It can beexplained then that, it is not wrong if one checks what theiremployees are doing during their work time frame, this while puttinginto consideration the fact that employers exchange money for workers‘time and services. Most importantly, there is no legal obligationespecially on the part of a private business aimed at upholdingprivacy. Both the Fourth and First Amendment of the U.S. Constitutionthrough the free-speech clause protect citizens against unreasonableseizures and searches. This, however, is only applicable ingovernment circles and leaves employers from the private sectoruncovered (Richards, 2012). It can, therefore, be argued that it isabsolutely fair for an employer to monitor his/her employees.
A study conducted by Clark and Roberts (2010) on the use of socialnetwork sites by employers discloses that the utilization of theinternet has considerably reduced the level of interaction amongstpeople, how they conduct business and how they look for jobs in thelabor market. Employers today use various social media sites toexamine the background information of job applications. The ethicalbehavior of the applicants is usually determined by the type of poststhey make on social media. Consequently, the Human ResourceDepartment makes the decision on whether to hire on the basis of theinformation displayed. A small number of employers have developedpolicies that govern how and when the online checks on employeecharacters should be used and how to ascertain that the informationseen is accurate. Clark and Roberts (2010) highlight that the socialmedia checks can be useful in determining the ethical behavior of theapplicants, nevertheless, employers should be guided on how to usethis sites ethically, professionally and in a manner that is sociallyresponsible. Also, the increasing use of social media checks hasbeen deemed useful in assisting employers to terminate employees thatare involved in dishonorable behavior. For instance, in the recentyears, the country has witnessed incidences of unethical social mediaposts by employees who later turned out to be dangerous to bothmembers of society and other staff members by committing seriouscrimes such as killing fellow employees, stealing, disclosingconfidential information about the organization and terrorist acts.Such defilements by employees demonstrate that upholding employeeprivacy is to some extent not significant to the organization in thelong run.
Privacymight be considered in some quarters to be a barrier to theachievement of the stakeholders’ stated objective of profitability.Monitoring of employees can, for instance, be useful in enhancing thequality of customer service and employee motivation through givingproper feedback. Electronic monitoring will enable the organizationin the generation of appropriate objectives and the keeping ofaccurate records of employee performance. In addition, there will bea top notch protection of business interests. Hence, this willprevent any incidents of theft while at the same time increasingsafety, productivity and controlling costs. Company secrets usuallyneed to be kept in safe custody while bearing in mind that there isthe possibility of very creative and crafty employees using workplaceresources to carry out unauthorized projects (Zhou & Piramuthu,2015). Monitoring, is therefore, a necessity since it has the abilityto protect the company from espionage, harm or theft. In addition, italso helps in affirming regulation compliance, minimizing thepossibility of workplace harassment and further securing evidence inthe case of any lawsuits or legal hurdles.
Theelimination of privacy is likely to bring about the attainment ofcompetitive advantage. When there is a monitoring procedure at theworkplace, there is usually objectivity hence a balanced approach toperformance evaluation while preventing` bias from managers duringthe review of employee productivity. Information drawn fromelectronic sources tends to be more accurate and uniform whenappraising past performance. In this case, it will be based only onthe quality and quantity of the worker’s task and not theloop-sided opinions of the manager. According to Bolderdijik et al.(2013), monitoring will also offer a good way of providingperformance feedback. Instead of just listening to a manager’sinstruction on how to perform a task, reviewing a past recordingwill, for instance, enable judgment of what one does as compared toestablished standards and rules. Monitoring can, therefore, be usedin showing the employees the changes that they need to make so as towork better. This is better appreciated by employees since it enablesthem to identify both their strengths and weaknesses. Thisinformation can be used to improve work methods. An employee can alsouse the information to make comparisons with different coworkers,leading to possible workforce efficiency and performance. Althoughthere is a need for privacy, there is currently a lot of concern asregards matters such as workplace violence, property, and identitytheft, illegal employee conduct, on the job injuries and accidents,pornography and unnecessarily lowered productivity. These make safetymore important than privacy in the long run.
It can, therefore, be argued that intruding on employee privacy is auseful approach aimed at deterring unethical behavior which mayimpact the organization negatively. Leaders or employers have anethical obligation to ascertain that employees do not act in a mannerthat misuses the resources of the organization. In most cases,unscrupulous employees spend most of their time using the internetand email services to send information that is not work oriented.Such acts indicate a misuse of organizational resources. Also,employees may also engage in activities that may infringe therelationship between the organization and its stakeholders. In orderto prevent such occurrence, privacy should not be upheld.
Whilethere are clear reasons why privacy needs to be upheld. It is worthappreciating that while at work, the personal and business lives ofemployees usually get into contact with their work performance. Agood example of this is a situation in which a lady working in anoffice will not cease to forget the responsibility she has over asick child that she has left in hospital, although she is at work.Any measure that seeks to monitor such an employee will, therefore,be viewed as intrusive. There is also the additional risk that theemployer can abuse the monitoring process. A clear manifestation ofthis is an example in which video monitoring of employees might maketheir supervision tranquil and even applicable without being detectedby the subject. However, there are ethical questions regarding howthe information got ends up being used. This also puts intoconsideration the people who will have access to it. With the ease ofcollecting the said information, it can be easily applied negativelyagainst an employee. For instance, it can be used in retaliatory ordiscriminatory ways (Lowe et al., 2015). In many cases, nothing wouldstop the information acquired from being used to harass either unionorganizers or whistleblowers. Information which would otherwise beconsidered personal might end up being shared by other possibleemployers and to some extent co-workers.
Thelaw grants employees rights as citizens. The primary legal source ofmonitoring restriction is the Electronic Communications Privacy Act(1986). The ECPA at first seems to be against intentionalinterception of employee wire, electronic and oral communication. Ithowever significantly includes exceptions. The first is the businesspurpose exceptionin which the employer can monitor communication as long as there is ajustification that arises due to a legitimate business reason. Thesecond basis is the consentexception,in this case, an employer can monitor communication as long as theemployee agrees. Common Law protections are usually founded on legalprecedent made from past rulings, which have in many instancespenalized the revealing of information by employers to other peoplewho supposedly have good intentions. Provisions for employee privacyare different, depending on states. Federal and state laws do notcreate or protect privacy zones within their workplaces (Burshnic,2012).Thereis, therefore, no real legal limitation on employee monitoring henceprivacy violation is permitted. As a result, employees can bemonitored as they continue executing their day to day activities.
EthicalImplications of Potential Threats
Everymeasure aimed at monitoring employees brings with it considerableethical challenges. Employee monitoring involves watching and keepingtrack of employee actions as they go about their business, all thiswhile they use the employer’s property or equipment (Stanko &Beckman, 2015). Although the monitoring of employees is a growingnecessity, it is also a controversial matter brought about by thecomplexity involved in its implementation. According to Drake (2016),monitoring could bring about feelings of loss of privacy. Forexample, pre-employment psychological testing comes with ethicalissues. The construction of tests has in due course tended to be morespecialized, with techniques also becoming more defining. However,there are ethical issues related to the invasion of privacy thatoccur. The issue of failure to maintain confidentiality and how wellthe test results are communicated, especially with the risk of thembeing either inadequate or eventually misused are some of the notablechallenges. It would be unethical to apply the results of testswithout considering the possible danger of the information ending upin the wrong hands and maliciously used. There should beclarification on the hazards and provision of assurances based on howtheir outcome will be used, how confidentiality will be ensured andwho will exclusively see or access the results.
Surveillanceat work raises ethical challenges. The issues surrounding employeeprivacy include the extent to which management can spy on, listen toconversations and search or test employees. There is the possibilitythat most employees will be part of the process either due to afeeling of coercion, or just because the rest of the staff are up toit. Theissue of whether employees are entitled to privacy as a right istherefore mostly an ethical one. According to Richards(2012),a number of ethical considerations may encourage a decision toproceed with the process. They include the stopping of company policyviolations or prevention of leakage of highly sensitive information.There is also the need to come up with comprehensive guidelines aimedat dealing with the challenge of ensuring employee privacy, even assurveillance is done. Monitoringsoftware may be put in place without the worker’s consent. If thishappens, however, and the process has not been indicated in the jobcontract, he/she might have the moral right to seek legal redressagainst the employer.
Everyemployer has a legal right to keep track of the mailing activities ofemployees who use company mobile devices or computers. However, thiswill require a careful balancing act to be put in place betweenbusiness interests and privacy expectations of the workers.Organizations usually have guidelines that specify the activitiesthat employees can engage in while using workplace computers. Theregulations also indicate the prohibitions which the workforce mustfollow. Some apply filtering and other technologies to avoid eitheraccidental or deliberate transmission of illicit, sensitive or wrongdocuments and materials by using email. However, whether a companyshould monitor a personal email account on the basis that it is aworkplace machine poses an ethical dilemma. This is because legally,an employer can search through private messages if there is proof ofbreach of workplace laws or rules. Personal use of company emailfacilities is acceptable, provided that it is not against a clearlyset policy. In such a case, good judgment can be applied in decidingwhen it is ethically proper. Use of the internet and email duringworking hours has a negative effect on productivity and thereforeprofitability. According to Chu et al. (2015), misuse of suchfacilities can also expose the company to breaches of data securityand even legal liabilities. It is not uncommon therefore for anemployer to be confronted with charges of discrimination, copyrightinfringement, sexual harassment or defamation due to wrong use ofcomputer communications.
Martinand Freeman (2003) argue that it is imperative for leaders toacknowledge that too much surveillance at the workplace and constantuse of email- monitoring has the implication of making it difficultto prosecute transgressions. Furthermore, it does not put to an endthe negative behavior which may have been adopted by the workforce.When an employer, for instance, monitors the emails of his employees,his or her objective is to ensure that they do not send unwantedinformation. Also, the monitoring may be aimed at knowing employeeconversations. It is also apparent that even though the manager hasidentified wrongful behavior, surveillance will not necessarily stopit. The manager can reprimand the employees, yet it does notguarantee a change of character. It can, therefore, be stated thatthe ethical implication of potential threats to employee privacy suchas surveillance at work, and e-mail monitoring, does not result in achange in behavior. More often, employees that are disloyal arecapable of sending emails detailing confidential organizationaldocuments and secrets to a business rival or a wider audience. Inmost cases, breaches in security are caused by well-informed insidersas opposed to casual hackers outside the organization (Martin andFreeman, 2003).
TheEthical Responsibility of Leaders
Leadershave the responsibility of creating policies and ensuring thatframeworks of interaction with employees support their right toprivacy. They have the role of ensuring that the organization createspolicies that will facilitate safe workplaces for all employees, andalso the collection and maintenance of sensitive and privateinformation relating to them. They should also come up with effectivemeasures aimed at protection of business assets. These processes willneed to be guided by both common sense and legitimate businessinterest. Leaders will, therefore, need to facilitate the practice ofefficient and reasonable measures that will protect each employeewhile cutting risks of employer liability (Voegtlin et al., 2012).
Moussa,(2015) articulates that when developing monitoring policies, leadersshould effectively communicate the requirements of the monitoringprogram to the workforce. If the company, for instance, settles onmonitoring through the use of telecommunication equipment, theworkforce should be lucidly informed. Moussa, (2015) further proposesthat from a legal and moral viewpoint, in order to avoid lawsuits,there is a need to not only inform the employees about thecomposition of the policy but also, it is essential for them to signa consent form. This will prevent scenarios in which employees’later claim that they did not agree with the terms of the policy.
Leadersmust ensure a strategic fit between measures that may compromiseprivacy and organizational goals (Bello, 2012). In this regard, theleadership should take a primary role in development and applicationof monitoring systems as a way of dealing with challenges such assecurity breaches, theft or other kinds of misconduct. A leader willneed to ascertain that any surveillance approach is tailored to meetthe organization’s needs. This, in essence, means that the measuresput in place can be given appropriate business justification withevery employee understanding that he or she will not be entitled toprivacy while using systems and equipment that belongs to theemployer. The systems include telephones, computers or internetconnections.
Leadersmust facilitate an organizational culture that supports both privacyand transparency. They should help build a robust and healthy companyculture. For example, implementation of such a culture will need toensure the promotion of performance focus, innovation, honesty,accountability, and agility. It is notable that although monitoringhas the ability to boost a firm’s ability to work flexibly,excessive employee surveillance can compromise their feeling ofcollaboration, personal accountability and honesty at work. Theleader should, therefore, enhance a trust culture in all operations.According to Vaccaro et al. (2012), this may be achieved by havingclarified objectives relating to the monitoring and data collectionapproach. This is likely to assist leaders to identify and get rid ofadditional data collection channels in the organization. Having aclear metrics will probably make it possible for the management toensure that all information gathered is applied in the correctfunctions. A leader should also create and communicate the reason formonitoring, as this will help to ensure that members trust theemployer even as they provide information.
Leadershave the responsibility of guaranteeing a collaborative effort aimedtowards supporting employee privacy. With the availability oftechnology that enables close monitoring of employees, leaders mustwork together with managers and supervisors to ensure that thepractice does not end up invading employees’ personal spaces in thelong run. According to Caldwell et al. (2012), the leader should comeup with good internal frameworks that will ensure that monitoringprocesses are productive. This is because the invasion of employeeprivacy results in greater vulnerability and dissatisfaction on thepart of the employee, and in the process a decrease inturnover. Additionally, the leader will need to identify andacquire measures needed to boost data security. With more businessprocesses being carried out online, there is a growing risk ofinformation leakage. According to Marston et al. (2011), cloudcomputing systems are in this instance currently popular since theyoffer almost instant access to such data. As a result, there is anincreased rise in the inappropriate use of the information gathered. A leader, therefore, has to strengthen the monitoring procedures byacquiring and implementing effective data protection whilestreamlining organizational processes so as to get rid of possiblenegative factors that could lead to data leakage.
Thefocus of monitoring should be on protecting the privacy concerns ofemployees. (Moussa,2015). Safeguarding the privacy issues of the workforce requiresadherence to several ethical procedures. This includes ensuring thatno monitoring is conducted in private areas of the organization suchas locker rooms, restrooms, and lounges. Leaders should alsoascertain that offshore monitoring is forbidden. They should alsogive the workforce an opportunity to access the gathered information.Employees should also be provided with information regarding thedevices that are used in the process. When conducting surveillance,for instance, using cameras, employees should be aware that the saiddevices exist in their work environment. It is also imperative forleaders to gather information that is relevant for the purpose ofdecision making. Justification of monitoring should not only be basedon ideas of improving productivity but rather, they should be gearedat coming up with fair verdicts concerning the conduct of theworkforce (Moussa, 2015).
Itis the ethical responsibility of leaders to use the most suitabletechnology for the monitoring process. Consequently, it is necessaryto conduct a survey that provides insight on the most productiveapproach. A study conducted Holland (2012) for the Harvard BusinessReview surprisingly disclosed that most workers are less concernedabout the issue of monitoring. When questioned whether it was properfor the employer to survey the websites they visited, 78% stated thatit was. Most of the employees were comfortable with internetmonitoring such as the blocking and filtering of unwarranted internetsites, as opposed to other methods of monitoring like video camerasurveillance and the recording of telephone conversations. Figure 1.0demonstrates the findings. According to Holland (2012) employees arenot against monitoring. However, they usually contend approaches thatgravely violate their privacy. From the results of the study, it canbe argued that leaders have the ethical responsibility to use amonitoring method that does not adversely affect the privacy of theworkforce. For instance, the recording of a telephone call is withouta doubt a serious violation of the privacy rights of the employees.
EmployeeSupport of Monitoring Technology
Source: Harvard Business Review (2012)
Overall,a leader must be seen to be sensitive to the needs of the employees.If this is not looked into there is the risk of compensation claims,stress-related sicknesses, absenteeism and decreased labor turnover.Job dissatisfaction and stress are likely to come about whenemployees believe they have minimal control over what they are doingand if there is the feeling of mistrust while they are carrying outtheir job. Working under constant observation might lead tounnecessary worry which may, in turn, result in more stressfulsituations. Apart from the minimization of security and legal risks,monitoring provides employers with considerable cost cuttingopportunities. Honest companies can for instance experience greaterefficiency while actively reducing downtime. Monitoring will,therefore, need to be carried out in the most anonymous of situationsas possible. A leader should ensure that the data collected isreflective of reality. If this happens, employees will prove to bemore honest while at the same time provide their impartial views. Inthe long-run, ethical issues related to privacy will be minimized, asthe feedback will not necessarily need identification. Anonymity willencourage the provision of freedom.
Theincreasing need to gather management data and to deal with negativebehavior at the workplace has made monitoring of employees a commonoccurrence. The availability of technology c developed with the soleaim of assisting in this has made it even easier. However, thisraises ethical issues since the question of invasion of employeeprivacy often arises. Privacy is important since it upholds theindividual dignity and supports employee productivity. However, italso is not considered a legal obligation for the employer because itlimits performance and may affect the competitive advantage of theorganization. Although everyone is entitled to some privacy,employees in private firms are not well covered. Monitoring istherefore considered wrong in as far as the information is handledwrongly or shared inappropriately. The main ethical issues raised inall surveillance procedures are linked to the violation of employeeprivacy and where such privacy is granted exposure of the company .torisks associated with inappropriate behavior on the employee’spart.
Aleader, therefore, has the ethical responsibility of ensuring thatthis does not happen, through implementing the following suggestions:
Focus on Technology. Employers should continue monitoring employees, for the sake of better management. However, they will need to ensure that the targets are made aware of it. They should for instance, request for the signing of a prior consent for the monitoring of communication. This is justifiable because the company has a legitimate need to ensure that whatever the workers are doing is not inappropriate or unnecessarily diverting their productivity during working hours. As noted earlier, the application of the most appropriate technologies in the process should also be ensured. For instance, a leader can choose to use the best computer software for monitoring computer networks, computers and mobile devices at the workplace. In order to minimize tension that can emerge from the monitoring process, the time spent on the procedure and revealing personal information, it would be best if the organization opts for a technology which will alert the administration only of potential problems. Hence, the machinery used will enable the leader to focus on important issues and not irrelevant personal issues. Preventive measures should also be prioritized. For example, instead of having surveillance on employees who could be watching pornography during working hours, the company should look for a blocking software that disables access to such material.
Having Clearer Guidelines. A leader should provide employee handbooks, which explains the policies and rules with regard to privacy clearly. This should cover guidelines on the use of phone conversations, voice-mail, email, social media and the internet in general. It should also reveal all the company’s drug-testing, surveillance and monitoring strategies that are in place, and seek the employees’ consent so as to avoid misunderstandings. If there is misunderstanding or non-acceptance of employee monitoring, there is a likely negative effect on morale. Employers, therefore, need to articulate why they have to do it in the context of business interest, and this should be communicated to the employees so that they also appreciate the need and the benefits of such measures for both them and their employer. For instance, monitoring can quickly help in protecting employees from the theft of their identities. The human resource function and legal professionals will have to be included early enough so that policies do not end up lowering morale or causing confusion among the employees.
Defining the Parameters of Monitoring: It is also essential for leaders to identify the parameters of monitoring employee activities if they have the desire to maintain their privacy. This can be undertaken by implementing fairness and ensuring that the set guidelines can promote the good of both the employees and the organization. When defining the parameters of monitoring, certain key issues must be considered. This includes the type of data to be scrutinized, the manner in which the information is inspected, the impact and the objective of the information. Leaders should also put into consideration that conflict frequently emerges when monitoring is undertaken beyond ethical standards and what is deliberated as sensible. Defining the parameters of surveillance should ensure that precaution is taken to promote the social good of both the employee and the society.
Proper Implementation of Guidelines. In order to ensure that ethical compliance is maintained, leadership will ,therefore, have to guarantee the following:
The identification of clear rules relating to behavior at work. The rules will have to be written down and shared in the form of a handbook which will enable employees and the employers to be clear about what they are supposed to do while at work and what to expect from one another
There should be appropriate communication to all employees. Management should fully disclose all the monitoring-related equipment being used so that no one will claim to have been unaware that they were under surveillance
There should be the maximization of ethical standards. All the monitoring procedures will need to have morality as a key objective while acknowledging that employees will not entirely discard privacy while working
Privacy-related decisions should be made as participatory as possible. When employees are fully involved, there is a greater likelihood of developing guidelines that are more acceptable and therefore useful.
Leaders should develop a monitoring system that is in line with culture, structure and environmental technology (Smith and Tabak, 2009). For instance, in the context of an organizational culture that is clan oriented and has adopted an organic structure, the manager should use cost-effective approaches such the use of informal methods of monitoring such as group dynamics, trust, and social pressure as opposed to electronic monitoring approaches such as the tracking of emails. In addition, the organization can minimize costs by pursuing methods that are aimed at promoting ethical behavior among the workforce such as training that is conducted by less invasive approaches to monitoring. A leader can also use hotlines as a method that does not annex employee privacy.
Application of an Ethical Framework for Leaders
The continuous advancement in technology introduces numerous ethicaldrawbacks for employers in their endeavor to embrace new approachesto monitoring. This is based on the fact that their actions mayresult in the violation of employee privacy which eventuallyculminates to the adverse effects that are associated with the lackof privacy. Blanchard, (2016) argues that some degree of autonomy issignificant in order to create an employment relationship that isethical. The reverence for privacy indicates that the leaderacknowledges that the staff in the organization are people, asopposed to resources used in the process of production. In addition,the leader should accept that the workforce is ‘’thinking actors‘’ with emotions, choices and personal thoughts that should bekept as confidential as possible.
Blanchard,(2016) proposes a framework that promotes the ethical responsibilityof leaders in creating a balance between organizational interests inmonitoring employee activities with their desires to maintain theirprivacy. The framework seeks to mitigate the risks that arise whenmonitoring employees and how to incorporate technology while at thesame time meeting the privacy needs of the workforce. Table 1.0 showsthe ethical Framework.
Does the use of the selected technology fit the wider mission and vision
The technology should meet the needs of the organization and the employees
Which areas of the objectives and strategies will the selected technology back
The technology should promote employee engagement
What processes and boundaries will be put in place to guarantee that
all information gathered is used correctly?
Transparency in the process should be guaranteed.
A survey should be conducted to get the feelings and thoughts of the employees
How will the employee information be stored and protected
Information can be collected using a separate server.
The data collected is to be protected at all times
Deleting of data should be done annually.
Bello,S. (2012). Impact of Ethical Leadership on Employee Job Performance.International Journal of Business and Social Science.3(11): 228-237
Bolderdijik,J, Steg, J and Postmes, T. (2013). Fostering Support for Work FloorEnergy Conservation Policies: Accounting for Privacy Concerns.Journalof Organizational Behavior,34 (2), 195-210
Burshnic,R. (2012). Applying the Stored Communications Act to the CivilDiscovery of Social Networking Sites. Washingtonand Lee Law Review,69 (2), 1259
Blanchard,O. (2016). In Light of New Technologies: An Ethicaland Strategic Framework. CornellHR Review.10(2016): p 1-5.
Caldwell,C., Dixon, R and Floyd, L. (2012). Transformative Leadership:Achieving Unparalleled Excellence.Journal of Business Ethics,109 (2), 175-187.
Clark,L and Roberts, S. (2010). Employer`s Use of Social Networking Sites:A Socially Irresponsible Practice. Journalof Business Ethics. 95(4), p1-15.
Chu,A., Chau, P and So, M. (2015). Explaining the Misuse of InformationSystems Resources in the Workplace: A Dual-Process Approach. Journalof Business Ethics,131 (1), 209-225
Drake,J. (2016). Asking for Facebook Logins: An Egoist Case for Privacy.Journalof Business Ethics,139 (3), 429-441.
Holland,P. (2012). This is Your Wakeup Call on . Harvard Business Review.27(2012): p1-2.
Lowe,J, Kelly, R and Samuels. J. (2015). An Examination of FinancialSub-Certification and Timing of Fraud Discovery on EmployeeWhistle-blowing Reporting. Journalof Business Ethics,131 (4), 757-772.
Martin,K. (2012). Diminished or Just Different? A Factorial Vignette Studyof Privacy as a Social Contract. Journalof Business Ethics,111 (4), 519-539.
Martin,K and Freeman, E. (2003). Some Problems with Employee Monitoring.Journal of Business Ethics 43: 353–361, 2003.
Marston,S., Li, Z., Bandyopadhyay, S., Zhang, J and Ghalsasi, A. (2011).Cloud computing – The Business Perspective. DecisionSupport Systems,51 (1), 176-189
Moussa,M, (2015). Monitoring Employee Behavior Through the Use ofTechnology and Issues of in America. ManagementScience. 5(2):1-9.
Richards,N. (2012). Dangers of Surveillance, TheHarvard Law Review,126 (7), 1934
Sharif,M and Scandura, T. (2014). Do Perceptions of Ethical Conduct MatterDuring Organizational Change? Journalof Business Ethics,124 (2), 185-196
Stanko,T. and Beckman, C. (2015). Watching You Watching Me: BoundaryControl and Capturing Attention in the Context of UbiquitousTechnology Use. Academyof Management Journal,58 (3), 712-738.
Smith,W and Tabak, F. (2009). Monitoring Employee E-mails: Is There AnyRoom
forPrivacy? Academyof Management Perspectives.4(5): p33-40.
Vaccaro,I, Jansen, J, Van Den Bosch and Frans, A. (2012). ManagementInnovation and Leadership: The Moderating Role of OrganizationalSize. Journalof Management Studies,49 (1), 28-51
Voegtlin,C, Patzer, M and Scherer, A. (2012). Responsible Leadership in GlobalBusiness: A New Approach to Leadership and Its Multi-Level Outcomes.Journalof Business Ethics, 105 (1), 1-16
Zhou,W and Piramuthu, S. (2015). Information Relevance Model of CustomizedPrivacy for IoT. Journalof Business Ethics,131 (1), 19-30