Ethical Perspective on Workplace Privacy - Essay Example

? Ethical Perspective on Workplace Privacy Ethical Perspective on Workplace Privacy Introduction The growing number of organizationsis deploying online surveillance systems to monitor their employees while they are working in the office. The ethical ramifications of this practice are an active cause of heated debate among management scholars. This paper will attempt to provide a logically sound argument based on various ethical, legal and organizational theories, which will negate the delusion of employee rights to privacy while performing their jobs. Along with these, some managerial implications will also be discussed. This paper begins with the basic argument that organizations are forced to deploy surveillance mechanisms in their workplaces because of unethical behavior of employees during work. However, personal confidentiality could be defined as a right of an individual to freely live his life without the interference from anyone else until he permits someone to do so (Bagdanskis & Sartatavicius, 2012). Organizations are bound to follow ethical code of conduct by the laws prevailing in the US. The basic purpose of this research is to decide whether these surveillance systems used by companies to monitor job activities of their staff are ethical or not. They do not appear to be as such from the first glance. However, final conclusion will be made after having analyzed available literature on ethical perspective of organizations’ employee surveillance systems. Fundamentally, organizations are paying their employees for the work they do, so they have every right to monitor them in the office because, while employees are working, they are considered as an intellectual property of the organization; therefore, organization possess every right to ensure that they are duly working on the tasks assigned to them. On the other hand, organizations must pay their employees on time, provide them friendly and healthy environment to work in and should take the responsibility of providing health insurance. Once an organization fulfills its side of the contract, then it wins the right to engage its employees within the boundaries of their job description. The above argument may appear to be vicious. However, scholars must attempt to understand the basic goal of the organization that is to maximize the shareholders’ return. In order to fulfill this promise, organization cannot allow its employees to waste organizational resources on wishful internet surfing, for instance. At the same time, this paper urges its readers not to take this literary effort as an attempt to issue a free license to organizations to violate human rights through enslaving the workers by intruding on their privacy. On the contrary, it is highlighting a basic right of organizations to direct the professional endeavors of their employees. According to Evens (2007), more than eighty percent of American organizations installed mechanisms to monitor employees’ activities, which include close circuit cameras and other similar devices. In reaction to this trend many of the scholars rose voices in order to eliminate this practice. But they are not willing to appreciate the positive impact of this practice on employees’ productivity. Additionally, employees are saved from old fashioned scolding from their bosses as due to technological interventions the latter can monitor the former ones remotely. At the same time, covert surveillance motivates empolyees to keep on working because of constant monitoring in their offices. However, nowadays polite management is a norm, but this humbleness thrives on the concept of paycut due to any professional deficiency on the behalf of employees. On the other hand, organizations are expected to communicate the workplace management rules in order to keep their employees well informed about the mechanism of control, which firms tend to deploy (Dillon, Hamilton, Thomas, & Usry, 2008). However, there is a statistically inverse relation between workplace surveillance and job performance measures (Smith & Tabak, 2009). But this observation ignores potential aggravation of negative work behavior in absence of these monitoring systems. Notably, the deployment of observation systems keeps employees alert, therefore, their job performance tends to be enhanced. As a result smoother organizational practices can be implemented as heightened technological execution helps employees to perform their tasks efficiently. At the same time, it is quite painful but at the same time important consideration that the primal objective of an organization is to make profit, so there is virtually no room for ethics whatsoever. As competition is increasing at an exponential rate globally and these ethical practices increase the cost of production for organizations in terms of higher pay levels and insurances, the organizations ought to provide lower compensations to survive in the market. In this way people at least keep on earning something. At the same time Lugaresi (2010) grants organizations legalized right to monitor employees’ activities on the internet in order to save organizational resources from wasting. This argument portrays a logical and realistic view of the problem at hand. The increasing threat of data theft forces organizations to tighten their security systems. Many of the competitors use unethical means to attain sensitive information of other organizations operating in the same market (Martucci & Oldvader, 2010). This citation also highlights the importance of data security, which makes employees’ privacy appear somewhat insignificant. On the other hand, starting from the moment employee starts using organizational equipment in order to entertain himself the network gets overloaded (Snyder, 2010); thus, hindering other legitimate organizational proceedings. Meanwhile, employees lost their solitude because of their employment contract, which states that government preserves the legitimate right to observe their life covertly without any prior notification (Harding, 2010). It would be better for employees in private sector to consider themselves fortunate as they are only being observed eight hours a day. Another study on a similar topic notifies that networking sites played an overwhelmingly significant role in degrading the concept of privacy (Hearing & Ussery, 2012). Despite of legality of personal freedom and privacy in most of the countries, workers are not given this basic right because of the logical paradox of greater good. Logic dictates that the benefits of an organization certainly outweigh those of the individual (Bagdanskis & Sartatavicius, 2012). In the light of this argument, it is suggested to workers that they should understand the importance of organizational monitoring systems. However, if they want to get rid of these mechanisms, this paper recommends them to focus on their jobs during office timings to gain trust of their employers by productive perfomance, which will in turn eliminate these systems. It is also important to note that in Japanese organizational setup, these monitoring systems are virtually nonexistent because Japanese employees are highly rated on the scale of job commitment. Now this paper will focus on integrating various ethical theories of different social scientists in order to expain the modern practices of employee privacy management. The first theory, which will be described, is called Katian theory of ethics. According to the fundamental argument of this theory, humans are supposed to consider their jobs and work as worship. In this way, this theory focuses on the importance of ethical job performance (Bowen, 2004) under the premises of this argument, Katian theory however, negates any need for management control through technological interventions over employees. This theory is based on the need to develop employees with good character, who will not commit to any negative job practices. However, employees with stable character are practically fictional in the modern world of 21st century, where financial well being often out weighs good character. At the same time, people of present are ethical at one moment and unethical in another. There is nonconsistency in the behavior of people working for the organizations. Based on the above argument Katian theory is more than praiseworthy than applicable in the world of habitual decievers. The next theory, this paper will explain is Utilitarianism, which is based on the appreciation of human needs. It explains human behavior as something that is based on a hidden schema of fulfilling the needs and wants. Therefore, humans can take an unethical path in order to accomplish their goals (Posner, 1979). In the light of Utilitarianism theory, the most appropriate method for managing employees is to bless them with ample amonut of reward, so that they should not be attracted towards unethical attitudes in their pursuit of happiness. This approach is applied by various multinationals, which offer higher renumeration to local employees. But they maintain a strict system to monitor the activities of employees in the office. The last ethical approach that this paper will analyze is called egoism. According to this theory, humans are designed in such a way that, they always look to fulfill their self-interest. In simple words, they are selfish. In the luminosity of this approach, the only way to manage humans is to assist them in attaining their interests (May, 2011). However, the interests keep on varying person to person. Because of this divergence organizations should identify the nature of wants that each of their employees has, this way they could help their employees in attaining them. As a result, employees will transform into loyal ones, when their interests are being fulfilled. On the other hand, it does not mean that helping an employee acieving his or her dreams once, will convert him or her into an attached worker. The process of fulfilling employees’ wants is a continuous one. So organizations should work hard to keep their reward system relevant and meaningful with respect to the changing situation of employees’ life. Moreover, the practical application of egoism theory, is called pay for performance. Through applying this practice, organizations are compelling their employees, to vest their full potential, while attempting to achieve organizational goals. On the other hand, firms are compensating workers based on their performance as well. The above information depicted a symbiotic relationship amongst organizations and their employees. In the light of above literature, the implimentation of an integrated model of Utilitarianism and Egoism is highlighted. So it can be implied that leaving employees without the mechanism of surveillance will surely result in painful ramifications for the organizations. In order to motivate employees organizations should offer them good pay packages, along with this the organization reserve the right to keep on monitoring their job behaviors. Additionally, delegation of authority is a recognized practice in terms of boosting employee productivity. Because through this method organization increases employee participation in the decision making process; therefore, they consider themselves as an important and active part of the organizational setup, and work with full potential towards making organizational goals a reality. Conclusion This paper focused on analyzing the phenomenon of employee surveillance in the light of ethics. During the process it integrated various ethical behavior theories and found egoism as the most appropriate one to explain current management practices prevailing in the global business. On the other hand, it is important to note that organizations are paying their employees, in order to, achieve some intended goals through them. People working for an organization are the most important asset therefore, firms cannot afford their distraction from their purpose by allowing them to surf the internet wastefully, which will in turn cause their productivity to drop. At the same time, employees are considered as intellectual property of the organization and this consideration allows organization to monitor and direct its employees during organizational working hours. However, in public police department, employees remain under constant surveillance throughout their service tenure. This research urged to employees from private division, to consider them providential because, they at least have their family life intact for the better part of the day. The managerial tendency of surveillance is also beneficial for the employees because, it gives them the excellent opportunity to focus on their jobs (Ciocchetti, 2001). Thus, they can gather up essential experience, which will facilitate them in excelling in their respective fields. This surveillance system is a consequence of the past mistakes committed by employees. In parallel, it is amazing to note that Japanese market does not use employee surveillance mechanisms, because Japanese employees are well devoted towards their jobs, thus do not indulge into negative job behaviors at large. Perhaps, employees from rest of the world should study those in Japan, in order to learn job commitment. On the other hand, when employee commitment will increase, then the managerial dependency on these systems will decrease because, management will start trusting the employees in terms of effective job performance. At the same time, it is the due responsibility of management to offer friendly and healthy work environment to the employees, so that they can take pleasure while working. In this regard, the best example to follow is Dell, where flexible office timing, fully operational parks, swimming pools are present, with the sole purpose of providing recreation to the employees. The demand of privacy, while working appears absurd because, an individual is supposed to fulfill his or her professional obligations in the office. Normally, all of the employees in various departments are working to achieve some common goals therefore, why do employees ask for privacy? The answer to the above question lies in analyzing behavior of employees, when these systems were not emplaced. At that time, employees found to be indulging in browsing adult, social and other multimedia sites, while sitting in the office (Mello, 2012). This trend led management towards installing surveillance devices in order to restrain their employees from wasting valuable organizational resources in the name of their personal endeavors. Based on the above argument, this paper considers employee surveillance systems as ethical because they are emplaced in order to prevent unethical activities at workplace. References Bagdanskis, T., & Sartatavicius, P. (2012). Workplace privacy: Different views and arising issues. Juriprudence 19(2), 697-713. Bowen, S. (2004). Expansion of ethics as the tenth generic principle of public relations axcellence: A Kantian theory and model for managing ethical issues. Journal of Public Relations Research 16(1), 65-92. Ciocchetti, C. (2001). Monitoring employees’ e-mail: Efficient workplaces vs. employees’ privacy. Duke Law and Technological Review . Dillon, T., Hamilton, H., Thomas, D., & Usry, M. (2008). The importance of communicating workplace privacy policies. Employ Respons Rights 20, 119-139. Evens, L. (2007). Monitoring technology in the American workplace: Would adopting English privacy standards better balance employee privacy and productivity? California Law Review 5 (1115), 1115-1149. Harding, J. (2010). Conning the IADC newsletters. Newsletters, pp. 112-115. Hearing, G., & Ussery, B. (2012). The times they are a changin’: The impact of technology and social media on the public workplace, Part II. The Florida Bar Journal, pp. 20-24. Lugaresi, N. (2010). Electronic privacy in the workplace: Transparency and responsibility. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology 24(2), pp. 163-173. Martucci, W., & Oldvader, J. (2010). Workplace privacy and data security. Employment Relations Today . May, J. (2011). Egoism, empathy, self–other merging. The Southern Journal of Philosophy 49, pp. 25-39. Mello, J. (2012). Social Media, Employee Privacy and Concerted Activity: Brave New World or Big Brother? Labor Law Journal, pp. 165-173. Posner, R. (1979). Utiltarianism, Economics and Legal Theory. The Journal of Legal Studies 103, pp. 103-140. Smith, W., & Tabak, F. (2009). Monitoring Employee E-mails: Is There Any Room for Privacy? Academy of Management Perspectives, pp. 33-48. Snyder, J. (2010). E-mail Privacy in the Workplace. Journal of Business Communication 47(3), pp. 266-294. Read More