Trouble with big brother: Counterproductive consequences of electronic monitoring through the erosion of leader‐member social exchange
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Changing workplace dynamics have led employers to increasingly adopt electronic monitoring technologies so supervisors can observe and ensure employee compliance and productivity—outcomes the monitoring literature has long supported. Yet, employee productivity depends on strong leader–member social exchange, and the relational consequences of electronic monitoring for supervisor and employee are not well understood. To help resolve this tension within the monitoring literature and add understanding in regard to the effects of electronic monitoring on employee productivity, we use social exchange theory to examine the implications of electronic monitoring for the supervisor–employee exchange relationship. We theorize that electronic monitoring facilitates (rather than inhibits) production deviance and inhibits (rather than facilitates) task performance by undermining the exchange of social benefits and, consequently, eroding leader–member social exchange. Yet, we also hypothesize that supervisors who give performance monitoring data back to employees in a developmental way (i.e., developmental feedback) compensate for the loss of certain social benefits, and, thereby, buffer the negative relational consequences of electronic monitoring. Across an experimental online study and a field study, we find converging support for our predictions and rule out alternative explanations. This research provides timely insights into how to effectively use electronic monitoring without promoting unintended consequences.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194 · see citing works
Identifying careless responses in survey data.
Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0028085 · Cited by 3,865 · see citing works
A Critical Review and Best‐Practice Recommendations for Control Variable Usage
Bernerth, J. B., & Aguinis, H. (2016) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/peps.12103 · Cited by 1,731 · see citing works
Missing Data: Five Practical Guidelines
Newman, D. A. (2014) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428114548590 · Cited by 1,411 · see citing works
Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) and Performance: A Meta‐Analytic Review
Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O. (2016) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/peps.12100 · Cited by 809 · see citing works
Stanton, J. M., & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (1996) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.738 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Too many sheep in the flock? Span of control attenuates the influence of ethical leadership
Thiel, C. E., Hardy, J. H., Peterson, D. R., Welsh, D. T., & Bonner, J. M. (2018) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/apl0000338 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Nian, P., Liu, M., Pei, J., & Liu, S. (2026) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2026.116176
- Authors
- Thiel, C. E., McClean, S., Harvey, J., & Prince, N.
- Affiliations
- University of Wyoming (US)
- University of Oklahoma (US)
- Utah Valley University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Thiel, Chase E.
- Venue
- Journal of Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-09-19
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1320-1339
- ISSN
- 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1379
- OpenAlex
- W4386845385
- Cited by
- 41
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 23.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Organizational Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Demography › Cyberloafing and Workplace Behavior
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Employee Performance and Management
- Keywords
- electronic monitoring, leader-member exchange, social exchange theory, supervisor-employee relationship, labor productivity, production deviance, task performance, developmental feedback, workplace surveillance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review