CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 44Ethics in Business and EducationAI and HR TechnologiesEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Potential Employees' Ethical Perceptions of Active Monitoring: The Dark Side of Data Analytics

Open access
Holt, Matthew, Lang, Bradley, Sutton, Steve G.·2017·Journal of Information Systems
DOI 10.2308/isys-51580
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

ABSTRACT Employees are increasingly monitored through integrated, data analytic-driven continuous (i.e., active) monitoring systems that analyze a wealth of data concerning their behaviors and actions. While use of these active monitoring systems has been advocated for improved performance measurement, increased productivity, and reduced costs, discussion has generally ignored the ethical implications of such monitoring as well as the impact on employees' morale and views of the organization. This study investigates these issues through application of contractarian ethics in the experimental examination of employees' beliefs and intentions based on organizational monitoring practices. In the first experiment, the level of monitoring and pay are varied to understand potential employees' perspectives on organizational ethics, willingness to accept a job with an organization, and their likely job satisfaction. While pay may sway willingness to accept a job and even the level of satisfaction, pay does not affect potential employees' ethical perceptions of the organization. Under high monitoring situations, potential employees consistently rate the ethics of the organization as poor. In a second experiment, four justifications that the literature suggests employers may provide for using employee monitoring are found to have no effect on employees' views about the organization in a high monitoring environment. Data Availability: Please contact the authors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2308/isys-51580

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the same experiment, higher pay significantly increased the likelihood of job acceptance, but it only marginally increased perceived job satisfaction.

    “While higher pay significantly increased the likelihood of job acceptance, it only marginally increased perceived job satisfaction.”

    From The ethics of people analytics: risks, opportunities and recommendations (2022) · cites this paper as Holt et al., 2017*

  • An academic experiment revealed that the prospect of active monitoring reduced potential employees' impressions of an organization's ethics as well as the likelihood of job acceptance and job satisfaction.

    “One academic experiment revealed that the prospect of active monitoring reduced potential employees' impressions of an organization's ethics as well as the likelihood of job acceptance and job satisfaction (Holt et al., 2017*).”

    From The ethics of people analytics: risks, opportunities and recommendations (2022) · cites this paper as Holt et al., 2017*

  • In the same experiment, none of the potential justifications given by an employer for monitoring changed participants' perspectives on its ethicality or their willingness to work at such a company.

    “The same experiment also revealed that none of the potential justifications given by an employer for monitoring changed participants' perspectives on its ethicality or their willingness to work at such a company (Holt et al., 2017*).”

    From The ethics of people analytics: risks, opportunities and recommendations (2022) · cites this paper as Holt et al., 2017*

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Holt, M., Lang, B., & Sutton, S. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Central Florida (US)
  • Mississippi State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Information Systems
Publisher
American Accounting Association
Published
2016-09-01
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
107-124
ISSN
  • 0888-7985 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-7959
DOI
10.2308/isys-51580
OpenAlex
W2519752026
Cited by
44
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2
FWCI
6.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Information Systems (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › AI and HR Technologies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
employee monitoring, active monitoring, data analytics, ethical perception, organizational ethics, job acceptance, job satisfaction, wages, employee morale, 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