3 ms·

No offense to those who think that being watched while you work is a good thing, but it does surprise me how this topic has popped up multiple times in the past

No offense to those who think that being watched while you work is a good thing, but it does surprise me how this topic has popped up multiple times in the past few weeks and how many HN'ers are on board with having someone(even their boss) watch them as they work. I'll let my manager watch me as my work if I got paid in proportion to the amount of supposedly increased output. Oh, what's that you say pointy-haired boss? I won't be paid more for letting you spy on me? Oh, okay, FU then. I wouldn't even give an at's rass about "productivity" if it only serves the employer. Valuing productivity for its own sake doesn't seem like a healthy perspective to me. In a way, I'm speaking from experience. I had a boss at one point that we all had to "watch out for" because he'd visit all the engineers every hour or so, look over our shoulders, and ask us for an update on what we were doing. We got a lot done, yet we were all underpaid and our work wasn't particularly valuable. I'm sure he got to go to his bosses and assure them of their ROI. (EDIT: lol, now I'm remembering how this same company wanted us to do standups, which gradually devolved into status updates for management)

maze-le 8y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if the stress that this kind of surveillance is inducing leads to lower productivity and less succesful projects overall -- a constant "North Korea" in your head might cause more depression, more overthinking and less creativity for finding solutions in the long term.
- ravenstine 8y ago
  For a period of time, we had a handful of brilliant engineers. I can't really say that I was one of them back then, but I can tell brilliance when I see it. All three of them ended up leaving within two months of each other, and one of them whom I knew personally told me they left because of that sort of micromanagement. That person works for Apple now, so it's for the best anyway. But once the people with experience and talent left the oppressive environment, that left the more junior engineers who couldn't realistically pick up the slack. I think you're right not only in that it will eventually become counterproductive, but it will also cause a company to simply lose its best employees.
TheTrotters 8y ago
What you describe is different that the topic that came up on HN recently. In that case the author decided that he wants to have someone monitor him. That’s completely different than having a manager constantly look over your shoulder.
- ravenstine 8y ago
  The intended outcome, whether it be that of the watcher or the watchee, is fundamentally the same. What I'm commenting on is, whether one willingly consents to constant monitoring or not, it's counterproductive and unhealthy in the long-term. At the time I worked for that company I described earlier, it wasn't as if I didn't go along with the micromanaging for a significant period of time under the assumption that it was both normal and necessary. Like I suggested, my ego fed off the basis that I was working hard and contributing something, so having my productivity closely watched played into that. Over the course of a year, I realized what a sham it all was. Let's say it had been entirely my will, and that I hired someone to watch me work remotely, like that other article that came up on HN; I still maintain that it's not only going to lead to burnout and disappointment in the long-term, but normalizing these sorts of productivity-hacks can lead to expectations that I don't think everybody should be subjected to. Both these articles are about two sides of the same coin; the idea of using close monitoring to maximize performance is supposedly being repopularized. I don't support it no matter who is making the choice. Forgive me if I'm conflating ideas, but I don't see it that way.
thatoneuser 8y ago
Yep my last job my manager moved his desk to right behind mine like a month in. He wasn't slick about monitoring me either. Took a serious emotional tole on me and made every day agonizing. If you want to micromnanage like that then just be a damn engineer and do the work yourself.
philpem 8y ago
Metrics are only worthwhile if they're accurate and measure what needs to be measured! The last place I worked went as far as putting badge entry/exit readers on the toilets -- the stats were aggregated by person and anyone significantly above the mean would get a demand to explain. Their other crowning glory was putting a graph of "list of reasons for sick-days". With the exact reasons reported on the return-to-work form. They updated it weekly, so you could pretty much figure out which long-term health issues related to whom. Employee reps raised it as a serious issue, HR defended it as "a very useful tool", and the entire group of employee reps resigned on the spot. This kind of micromanagement only leads to two things: useless KPIs and resignations.

maze-le 8y ago

I wouldn't be surprised if the stress that this kind of surveillance is inducing leads to lower productivity and less succesful projects overall -- a constant "North Korea" in your head might cause more depression, more overthinking and less creativity for finding solutions in the long term.

ravenstine 8y ago
For a period of time, we had a handful of brilliant engineers. I can't really say that I was one of them back then, but I can tell brilliance when I see it. All three of them ended up leaving within two months of each other, and one of them whom I knew personally told me they left because of that sort of micromanagement. That person works for Apple now, so it's for the best anyway. But once the people with experience and talent left the oppressive environment, that left the more junior engineers who couldn't realistically pick up the slack. I think you're right not only in that it will eventually become counterproductive, but it will also cause a company to simply lose its best employees.

TheTrotters 8y ago

What you describe is different that the topic that came up on HN recently. In that case the author decided that he wants to have someone monitor him. That’s completely different than having a manager constantly look over your shoulder.

ravenstine 8y ago
The intended outcome, whether it be that of the watcher or the watchee, is fundamentally the same. What I'm commenting on is, whether one willingly consents to constant monitoring or not, it's counterproductive and unhealthy in the long-term. At the time I worked for that company I described earlier, it wasn't as if I didn't go along with the micromanaging for a significant period of time under the assumption that it was both normal and necessary. Like I suggested, my ego fed off the basis that I was working hard and contributing something, so having my productivity closely watched played into that. Over the course of a year, I realized what a sham it all was. Let's say it had been entirely my will, and that I hired someone to watch me work remotely, like that other article that came up on HN; I still maintain that it's not only going to lead to burnout and disappointment in the long-term, but normalizing these sorts of productivity-hacks can lead to expectations that I don't think everybody should be subjected to. Both these articles are about two sides of the same coin; the idea of using close monitoring to maximize performance is supposedly being repopularized. I don't support it no matter who is making the choice. Forgive me if I'm conflating ideas, but I don't see it that way.

thatoneuser 8y ago

Yep my last job my manager moved his desk to right behind mine like a month in. He wasn't slick about monitoring me either. Took a serious emotional tole on me and made every day agonizing. If you want to micromnanage like that then just be a damn engineer and do the work yourself.

philpem 8y ago

Metrics are only worthwhile if they're accurate and measure what needs to be measured! The last place I worked went as far as putting badge entry/exit readers on the toilets -- the stats were aggregated by person and anyone significantly above the mean would get a demand to explain. Their other crowning glory was putting a graph of "list of reasons for sick-days". With the exact reasons reported on the return-to-work form. They updated it weekly, so you could pretty much figure out which long-term health issues related to whom. Employee reps raised it as a serious issue, HR defended it as "a very useful tool", and the entire group of employee reps resigned on the spot. This kind of micromanagement only leads to two things: useless KPIs and resignations.