You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    Always under the scrutiny at work. Is it good or counter-productive

    Today's professional sectors are highly competitive to thrive in a fast-changing world. The working class is caught in a sea of changes. Whether we work behind the computer in an office, handle the sales of cars or work in a supermarket or sit at the end of a telephone answering customer service call, the change (scrutiny) has reached to all levels.

    Our work, behaviour is monitored, recorded, reported, analysed, re-analysed leading to promotions or terminations. We have to get customer feedback, colleague feedback, supervisor feedback and meet the targets and deadlines given. Our reporting time is monitored, our breaks are monitored our internet activity is monitored, the time spent in cafes and lounges at the workplace is monitored.

    It's like Big brother watching us at work. Do you think it's good or are we going overbroad.
  • #611676

    It's an idea with a great amount of advantages but few inconveniences to the organisation.
    It needn't be told how much we all fear supervision and surveillance. So putting workers on surveillance might actually increase their vigilance and productivity.
    While the workers might think that this system is hindering their creativity and privacy.
    Employees are judged on everyday basis in systems like these. They're given grades regarding their performance.
    The sum of these grades can easily summarize the employee's career.
    So it isadvantageous to both the employee and employer.


    The stronger a light shines the darker are the shadows around it.

  • #611680
    There are two schools of thoughts are there in this respect. Give targets, give the budget and explain the time limits. Then let him plan his work, and execute the work. Let him update the progress periodically. Here this is like hire and fire. Perform or perish. No supervision directly. When are you coming to duty and when are you going back home, nobody is bothered. Another school has a supervisor, monitor on daily basis, and help him to complete the work. In case of any problem advise him. The first type is very good for a performer. The second one is good for a non-performer. If any problem comes, report to the boss. Your job is over. You are safe.
    Supervision and grading at every level and guiding every moment is not at all required for a performer. For him, this will be a hindrance, It may be counterproductive for him. The other one is good for the nonperformer.but counterproductive for the organisation.

    drrao
    always confident


  • Sign In to post your comments