3 ms·
if it's transparent and includes everyone including whoever is in charge it creates objective data to judge performance by. Just like pay transparency if it's u
by Barrin92 4y ago
if it's transparent and includes everyone including whoever is in charge it creates objective data to judge performance by. Just like pay transparency if it's universal it's a good way to make compensation more meritocratic. Catching slackers isn't a bad thing, Only doing it in one direction is.
- 1123581321 4y agoMakes sense--thank you.
- yamtaddle 4y agoThese kinds of things rarely include the people in charge—maybe middle-managers, sometimes, but not the actual big shots. See also: - Open office plans, except the bosses get offices (there are exceptions, as with any of these other points, but that's the norm) - Drug testing. - Anti-moonlighting rules or other onerous contractural restrictions or claims on time off (these kinds of things apply to higher-ups more often than the other two, but it's still common for them to be universal for the "peons" while the C-suite is allowed to have their hands in several pies at once) In general, being less-surveilled and less-restricted at work (and off work) is a perk of higher-status positions in a company. It's a social class thing, essentially. This tendency predates computerized surveillance.
- pixelfarmer 4y ago"objective data to judge performance by" ... thanks for the laugh!