Cited by 13Work-Family Balance ChallengesCyberloafing and Workplace BehaviorAccounting and Organizational Management

The Effect of Computer Monitoring on Employees’ Productivity in Telecommuting Arrangements

Open access
Ko, Yea Hee, Baek, In Gyun·2024·Management Science

Abstract

When employees work from home, organizations have traditionally placed a stronger reliance on output-based controls because of the inability to physically observe its employees. Because of recent advances in technology, however, many organizations now use input-based controls. One such input-based control is computer monitoring, which records the number of hours spent working and leaves out any time in which an employee does not perform work activities. On the one hand, computer monitoring may provide productivity-enhancing benefits by reducing the likelihood of employees experiencing self-control problems, such as procrastination. On the other hand, computer monitoring may motivate reduced effort by decreasing employees’ autonomy, which a prior study finds is an important mediator of the relation between telecommuting and productivity. We take advantage of a field-research setting in which the organization adopts computer monitoring for its telecommuting employees. We find that computer monitoring leads to a 7.1% productivity increase for telecommuting employees. We also find that computer monitoring reduces employees’ procrastination tendencies. In addition, we find that low performers’ productivity increases more following the introduction of computer monitoring. Finally, we find evidence that telecommuters’ departure rates increase significantly following computer monitoring. Our results suggest that technology can play a significant role in expanding organizations’ management control choices when achieving controls in telecommuting arrangements. This paper was accepted by Suraj Srinivasan, accounting. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.00588 .

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mnsc.2022.00588

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Authors
Ko, Y. H., & Baek, I. G.
Affiliations
  • Binghamton University (US)
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
Corresponding author
Baek, In Gyun
Venue
Management Science
Published
2024-03-26
ISSN
  • 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5501
OpenAlex
W4393200038
Cited by
13
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4
FWCI
9.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Management Science (publishedVersion)
  • Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge (InK) (Singapore Management University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Cyberloafing and Workplace Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Accounting and Organizational Management
Keywords
computer monitoring, remote work, labor productivity, output-based control, self-control, procrastination, employee autonomy, working from home, management control, low achievers

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