Individual Privacy in the Working Place - Literature review Example

Individual Privacy in the Working Place [Student’s Name] [Institution Affiliation] Introduction In a workplace, employees have various responsibilities, which are aimed at fulfilling the organization objectives. These responsibilities are governed by certain moral or ethical principles (Boatright, 2011). The actions, opinions, and decisions make the general view of what is right and wrong. Ones judgment of the correct moral values governs his or her day-to-day activities. Through this decision, an organisation is affected in one way or other. Individual privacy in the working place is an issue that attracts much discussion. In some organisations, an employee is regarded as having no right to privacy at all (DesJardins, 2011). In this case, an employee is monitored all the day and in all stages of his work. Individual privacy is only allowed in reasonably acceptable circumstances. Other organization may allow complete privacy, though this is rare. In this essay, importance individual privacy will be discussed. Other views against individual privacy will as well be discussed. The relationship between privacy in organization and fundamental ethical theories will also be explored. Discussion Typically, workers ought to relinquish parts of their privacy while working. The extent of surrendering is the contentions issue. There is a great debate when it comes to individual privacy. Moral, legal, and ethical issues are consulted when determining the extent of monitoring of employees in the workplace (Laura, 2010). However, the process is fundamental in running an organization, physical stress, facial negative effects, or emotions can hinder it. Motivations, teamwork, and other relevant may be halted. In this regard, the link between monitoring and rights of privacy need much care. Individual privacy is not important than other considerations in the working place. Other considerations may be raised, but privacy is subject to discussion. Privacy is dominant when it comes to the working environment. For instance, accounting profession requires application of certain ethical standards (Jonathan, 2012). Application of required code of conduct fails to work, especially when individual willingness is not applied. Disciplined individuals who have adopted the required ethical standards, right education, and training deliver the best results. Acquiring the right code of conduct and behaviour makes an accountant responsible. Exercising professionalism and applying the necessary morals, act as self-policing (Trevino & Nelson, 2011). Self-policing on the other hand is the basis for better outcome and hence productivity. It can also be argued that such activities promote good public relations. This is because the service comes from the within and lack constant follow up. However, the process may not have favourable outcome if it is not followed by rewards. Such rewards include financial and other form of rewards. Monitoring of the learning process is as well required, especially in the initial stages (Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring, 2010). At such point, individual privacy may not be fully guaranteed because monitoring will be required. Individuals who cannot make decisions, especially in the early stages will have some of their privacy overlooked. Privacy can be regarded as the right or ability of an individual to manage the distribution of information regarding oneself (Trevino & Nelson, 2011). It thus follows that an individual has the right to make informed decisions. The decisions are concerned with dissemination of personal information and how correctly this process was done. For better outcome, privacy in the working place should be limited to some extent. Private information should be monitored including email screening. The exercise should also include website trafficking of resources and information. According to deontology theory of ethics, responsibilities and obligations are to be followed when examining an ethical dilemma (Boatright, 2011). Using this perspective, it is evident that one is supposed to pursue his or her responsibility to the other person. This is because by doing so, it is considered as being ethically right. This further implies that, the person upholding ethics or morals will be the one following the law and always honour the promise. The decision produced by this leader will be more dependable and reliable. Following up the required areas of an employee in the workplace as a means of upholding what is ethical and right. This means that privacy will be denied where the outcome of the act is believed to be wrong by the leader. However, what an individual regards as being morally right may not be right to another. By this consideration, universally accepted ethics may be consulted. In addition, laws of the land may be consulted to determine the right and wrong morals. According to this theory, the senior supervisor will be under obligation to protect junior employees in the workplace ((Ryann & Brendan, 2004). The level of protection may entail ensuring they do what is right and safe. It also involves ensuring they do what is useful to the organisation in general. Workplace confidentiality should be identified and upheld. Integrity is maintained by enacting the best policies and procedures ((Ryann & Brendan, 2004). Such enacted policies ensure the information is fully protected. Business records, client information, and other organization forecasts need not to be exposed. All these considerations are more critical than employee’s confidentiality. In this case, the principle of beneficence requires that one should do good things more than evil things (Nord, 2006). A person gains some advantage when good things are done. To control the release of this information, some freedom of sharing or exposing confidential information should be restricted. Management should also strive to do more good because the society benefits by doing better things. All these considerations are more important than individual privacy. Restrictions of the amount of information that an employee should access or posses may promote confidentiality. In this case, the procession of company confidential information in private facilities needs to be monitored. Private computers and other facilities may be subjected to checks (Nord, 2006). On the other hand, such checks may consume time or require many procedures. Similarly, this may raise issues and negative effects. In the process of checking this information, other confidential information belonging to employees may be accessed, which is against their rights. The deontology theory of ethics requires the manager should adhere to his or her obligations to the employee (Peslak, 2005). This process does not require consent or permission of the employee. The content are not private, but are meant for all and specifically for the company. Such considerations are more important than privacy of the employee in the working place. Employees may pass immoral and irrelevant information to each other using mails. The company may not perform as per expectations because of time wasted in these activities. However, monitoring exercise should be conducted in such a way they cause minimal disturbances or discomforts to the employee. Proper guidance need to be imposed regarding monitoring activities (Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring, 2010). As well, alternative methods of interacting, sharing, and motivating employees should be introduced. Some of the information shared through emails are a form of interacting and stress reduction. Use of drugs and other harmful substances is an issue that sometimes falls under this subject. Drugs abuse is a social issue in the society. It consumes much of society recourses trying to control or even cure. Lack of immediate employment after leaving college is one of the causes of drug abuse. Many students also find it hard to cope with pre-employment test. Drug testing has therefore become a requirement. It is done before employment or during employment. The utilitarian ethical theory requires one to make decisions that provide the greatest reimbursement to the society. Benefits that the society obtains from the decision made is the most important aspects in this case. Drugs affect individual behaviour and therefore his way of interacting with others. This may as well affect his productivity. Drug testing may therefore improve the performance of the company (Peslak, 2005). Individual privacy in such matters may be denied. Consideration of company performance and employee safety is more important. Most employees are not concerned about privacy when it comes to drug matters. On the other hand, hiring mistakes may be done or failure to carry out the process in a reputable manner (Peslak, 2005). Effective laws on which drugs should be targeted should be enacted. If there are no reliable well-defined laws, the process may be biased. Such tests are also appropriate when carried out when disreputable individual are suspected. Privacy in such matters may be limited, but efficient procedures should be put in place. At some point, an employee may be consulted about employment references of an employee. The employee may be current of the former. Details may be required on employee conduct, skills, or performance. Such information is related to the employer directly (Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring, 2010). The information will be provided if it is fulfilling its employment commitments. Information call for by government agencies should be provided if it is in accordance with the laws. In addition, information demand by permit holder when investigating should be provided. Ethical rights are those privileges ratified by the society, prioritized and protected (Ryann & Brendan, 2004). It is thus ethical and universally accepted to provide such information so that these rights are upheld. Similarly, law requirements are fundamental in the society and govern its activities. This consideration goes beyond individual privacy and need to be adhered to as societal equipments. On the same issue, the rights of an individual should be respected in accordance with the law. Some of information will require consent from the party involved before they are disseminated. Additionally, personal matters that do not relate directly to the employer are not worthy dispersing without consent. Various governments have different laws enacted concerning privacy. Technological advancement and other changes led to the need for proper laws to contain vices. Privacy may be denied when the company maintains the system. In addition, the company may have legitimate reasons for surveillance or consent from the employee. This considerations warrant need for monitoring because they are in accordance with the laws. As such, the company manager can monitor or deny privacy on these grounds. Ethical principles require that the executed act must be fair and just to the parties involved (Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring, 2010). This theory supports the above decision. Supervisors, system administrators, and managers can have right of access to information. Privacy is not offered if such considerations are put in place. However, the laws require that individual privacy be protected. Employers are likely to abuse privacy of employees for selfish reasons. These acts place privacy above other considerations. The confidentiality of individual information is paramount and technology should not negate rules. Laws need to be clear on the exact information to be monitored. The advancing technologies are major contributing factors and thus effective policies and procedures are required. Efficient modalities should be ensured whereas laws should evolve with changing technologies. Medical issues should also be considered when it comes to privacy in the workplace. Pre-employment interview may include asking questions on drug use. This is done if the potential employee is undergoing medication. According to the ethical casuist theory, comparison is made between existing ethical dilemma and other (Nord, 2006). The outcome of other decisions affects current decisions. Various ethical repercussions may be brought to attention to help identify the right information to request from potential employee. The information gathered can be important when it comes to assigning roles. Additionally, protective measures may be taken. For instance, if an employee is allergic to specific substances, he may be allocated other duties at safe places. However, privacy may be considered more when the process is not well monitored (Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring, 2010). The exposure of past treatment records and other health concerns exposes the employee. Poor legislation and inconsistencies brings about conflicts. Inadequate procedures and policies make it conflicting at some point and thus need much care. According to the ethical theory of utilitarianism, making a choice that provides benefits to the majority of people than one individual is considered to be ethically right (Schaefer, 2008).This therefore means that individual privacy will not be of great importance because it does not concede with the majority. If an organization is to allow much individual privacy, it may not be in a position to accomplish its goal. For instance, a company will encourage the employees to do their tasks in a team to advance the quality of the work done. This is achieved through combining different skills and knowledge from each employee. In fact, this can only be achieved if employees interact freely with each other. When each employee in a given working area is working privately on his or her own, it will be hard to achieve the quality of the work needed. However, it is not in all cases that teamwork yields positive results. In some cases, negative things such as delays, lack of cooperation and disagreements, can accompany teamwork. This is contrary to utilitarianism, which advocates a person to act for a common goal despite any constraints. In such cases, working individually will be preferable. In addition, the success of teamwork depends on full involvement of each member (Knights, 2006). In most cases, you will find that not all people are willing to participate fully. Unless, there is a very strong leader in the group who can encourage all the members to work towards one goal, the group will not be successful. Individual privacy in the workplace is not an important consideration because it can lead to unethical behaviours. Promoting individual privacy in a computerized organization may lead a company to incur high losses. Employees may engage in criminal activities, such as using the computer of the company for personal use. The employee may send or receive personal emails in expense of the company. This is because the person is not being monitored. To prevent these unethical behaviours, companies usually use computer-based monitoring programs such as CCTV. An office that allows individual privacy working areas may be costly to the company. For instance, a company may decide to create partitioned offices for each employee to enhance individual privacy. The aim of doing this may be to make each employee focused and separated from others. For those employees enjoying working alone in a calm environment may achieve high results. On the other hand, the employees may lack the opportunity to interact with one another hence diminishing the spirit of teamwork (Friedman, 2007). Creativity is achieved through the exchange of different ideas from different people. This is what determines whether the company has competitive advantage over the other companies or not. In addition, partitioned offices may not only imply high cost in construction work, but also in monitoring procedures. Modern offices are now designed in way they promote communal feeling rather than individual privacy (Lane, 2003). Therefore, ethical theory of utilitarianism applies in such situation, which supports achievement of utmost good for many people. According to the Kantianism ethical theory, universal moral laws should guide the actions of the people (Loch, 1998). This theory is further divided into two perspectives. The first perspective says that one should act in way that he or she does not use another person for his or her own benefit. The second perspective says that a person should act from a point of moral laws, which are common to all people. Companies usually monitor their employees’ performance to obtain high profits by avoiding unnecessary use of the company’s resources by the employees. This however violates the individual privacy laws of employees. In addition, it is contrary to the Kantianism ethical theory. According to Kant, no person is allowed to spy another person’s action in order to gain his or her own benefits (Nord, 2006). Furthermore, organizations necessitate performing background checks so they can achieve high quality human capitals. Such human capitals include skills, abilities and knowledge of individuals for the company to operate effectively and efficiently (DesJardins, 2011). Therefore, management usually conducts these background checks to ensure the procedures of recruiting employees are perfectly done. Moreover, most people when applying for jobs they do not write true resumes or curriculum vitae. This may lead the company to employing unqualified people for the job. In all these cases, the company uses the background checks to obtain high fruitful employees for its benefit and not for the employees. Therefore, according to Kantianism theory, background checks are not ethical on the side of the employees. This is because they exploit their privacy for the benefit of the company. Social contract theory affirms that actions taken are good in condition that they are in accordance with moral rules of which their results will benefit the majority (DesJardins, 2011). Monitoring individual privacy by the company is recommended because it results to successful operations. When a company successfully performs its operation, it earns high profits. These high profits will benefits both the company and the employees. Employees may benefit through timely payments, increased salaries and other bonuses. Therefore, employees are required to offer some of their privacy to the company for the benefit of the whole organization. This theory supports exposure of individual privacy for the common goal (Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring, 2010). It is therefore, ethical to monitor employee’s performance. Conclusion Employees in the workplace show readiness to surrender part their privacy. The will is driven by their desire for working in a secure environment. As well, many employers show willingness to safeguard their employee’s information. By doing this, discretion, integrity and confidentiality will be encouraged. However, it is important that companies come up with comprehensive and clear policies. These policies are likely to define what is regarded as organization property. When policies and procedure are clearly defined, privacy linked law suits can be prevented. Security of company assets and expensive legal liability can be prevented. Employee performance and productivity are likely to be enhanced. At the same time, policies made should take into consideration the rights of employees and employers. Compliance should be enforced and consequences defined. Policies should also acknowledge and signed by employees and their employers. Employers need to share out copies of privacy procedures annually. Amendments are better when highlighted, so that employees can easily notice them. Similarly, workers should recognize and understand the importance of private policies. By doing this, the policies will cease from hurting them but instead will protect them. During employment, employees have the right to know and accept the policies. There is also the need for the employer to monitor the activities of employees. This is vital for a company’s development. As well, right policy and practice should be followed. Laws should also define privacy and give clear guidelines. No procedure can be done in a vacuum. They should be done within the right ethical standards. For a better society, morals are fundamental and necessary. Although ethics and moral are individualized, certain principles apply across the board. References American Management Association. (2005.) 2005 Electronic Monitoring and Surveillance Survey, New York Boatright, J. R. (2011). Ethics and the conduct of business (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Chao, H. (1999). Privacy Issues in Internet Surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 7, 421. DesJardins, J. (2011). An introduction to business ethics (4th ed). New York: McGraw Hill. Friedman, B. (2007). “Workplace Privacy: Employee Relations and Legal Implications of Monitoring Employee E-mail Use,” Employee Response Right Journal. Jonathan, L. (2012). Regulations on the Individual Right to Privacy in the Workplace. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/regulations-individual-right-privacy-workplace-25892.html Knights, D. (2006). Leadership, Ethics and the Responsibility to the Other. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 125-137, Lane, F. (2003). The naked employee: how technology is compromising workplace privacy. New York: AMACON. Laura P. (2010). Technology and Ethics: Privacy in the Workplace. Retrieved from http://www.nd.edu/~rbarger/privacyintheworkplace.html Nord, G. (2006). E-Monitoring in the Workplace: Privacy, Legislation, and Surveillance Software. Communications of the ACM, 49, 8. Peslak, A. (2005). An Ethical Exploration of Privacy and Radio Frequency Identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 59, 327-345, Ryann, M., & Brendan, K. (2004). Workplace privacy: the social, technical, and ethical ramifications. Retrieved from file:///J:/Ethica%20Publishing%20Inc%20%20Book%20Contents.htm Schaefer, B. P. (2008). Shareholders and social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(2), 297-312. Trevino, L.K., & Nelson, K.A. (2011). Managing business ethics: straight talk about how to do it right. (5th ed.) New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring. (2010). Privacy Rights Clearinghouse Empowering Consumers. Retrieved from http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs7-work.htm Read More