Can you monitor employees without losing their trust?

Issue 9 2020 Security Services & Risk Management, Training & Education

Given no decent alternatives due to widespread lockdowns, companies of many shapes and sizes spent weeks in early 2020 figuring out the awkward transition from old-fashioned office life to the fragmented remote-working model. This new way of doing things has advantages (such as no need to rent office space) and disadvantages (such as tougher communication).

From the perspective of business owners, one of the biggest concerns is ensuring productivity at a distance, and it further incentivizes them to find ways to monitor their employees. Notably, the kind of monitoring needed for remote working is relatively blunt: when you’re overseeing a team in an office, you can monitor fairly lightly through simple observation. At a distance, things are much trickier — you can’t manage what you can’t see.

Knowing that, should you still make an effort to monitor your employees? People don’t much like being observed, regardless of the manner in which it’s done: it can lead them to believe that you don’t trust them, which will inevitably damage their trust in you. Can you manage oversight without turning people against you?

Carefully balancing active and passive monitoring

Active monitoring is the kind most likely to annoy people. It involves reaching out to check work, holding catch-up meetings and tasking your employees with explaining what they’ve been doing. There’s an implicit level of suspicion on display during this process. If you keep asking someone to show that they’ve been getting things done, it suggests that you doubt their value.

Passive monitoring, though, is something you can implement at great scale. Online businesses of all kinds have digital analytics, showing which sites and pages are getting the most visits and conversions. Fleets have telematics for vehicle tracking, automatically gathering performance data to show which drivers are excelling. Service companies have queued customer surveys, inviting broad commentary on the experiences provided.

Passive monitoring is safe because it’s unobtrusive (hovering in the background, essentially), but it lacks context. Active monitoring has broader scope and can be more specific, but it takes time and shows distrust. The smart move is to find a balance between these two approaches.

In turbulent times, employees need reassurances

It’s tough for even the best employees to be highly confident about their career prospects at the moment. When COVID-19 hit businesses, plenty of people lost their jobs not because they’d underperformed but because their roles were no longer necessary. What if something like that happens again? And if you start monitoring people closely, they’ll likely fear being let go.

Due to this, you should seek to reassure your employees that your efforts to monitor them aren’t indications that you’re considering firing them. Explain that you’ll have a set process for proceeding when someone isn’t getting the results they need to produce, giving them a reasonable opportunity to improve and keep their job. Further chances shouldn’t be unlimited, obviously, but you should be generous — after all, you hired them for a reason.

If someone knows that you’re checking up on them because you want the business to succeed (and not because you’re ready and willing to let them go), they’ll be far more cooperative. You also need to ensure that you’re giving them what they need to thrive, of course. Do you have training courses in play? Does every worker have all the equipment they need? If you’ve yet to check that you’ve covered all the bases, being critical about productivity won’t come across well.

Why assessments needs to be collaborative

In the end, the real key to monitoring employees without losing their trust is making the monitoring a collaborative effort. Instead of being about you being critical of their efforts, it’s about the entire company being critical of everyone’s efforts — including yours. Are you performing well as a manager? How are your actions being monitored?

If you allow your workers to take part in assessing their performances and subject yourself to the monitoring and review processes, you’ll show that you’re not picking on them. You’re all working together to improve results, and no one needs to be blatantly singled out.




Share this article:
Share via emailShare via LinkedInPrint this page



Further reading:

“This Is Theft!” SASA slams Mafoko Security
News & Events Security Services & Risk Management Associations
The Security Association of South Africa (SASA) has issued a stark warning that the long-running Mafoko Security Patrols scandal is no longer an isolated case of employer misconduct, but evidence of a systemic failure in South Africa’s regulatory and governance structures.

Read more...
Making a mesh for security
Information Security Security Services & Risk Management
Credential-based attacks have reached epidemic levels. For African CISOs in particular, the message is clear: identity is now the perimeter, and defences must reflect that reality with coherence and context.

Read more...
Privacy by design or by accident
Security Services & Risk Management Infrastructure
Africa’s data future depends on getting it right at the start. If privacy controls do not withstand real-world conditions, such as unstable power, fragile last-mile connectivity, shared devices, and decentralised branch environments, then privacy exists only on paper.

Read more...
From friction to trust
Information Security Security Services & Risk Management Financial (Industry)
Historically, fraud prevention has been viewed as a trade-off between robust security and a seamless customer journey, with security often prevailing. However, this can impair business functionality or complicate the customer journey with multiple logins and authentication steps.

Read more...
Security ready to move out of the basement
AI & Data Analytics Security Services & Risk Management
Panaseer believes that in 2026, a board member at a major corporation will lose their job amid rising breaches and legal scrutiny, as organisations recognise that cyber risk is a business risk that CISOs cannot shoulder alone.

Read more...
Cyber remains top business risk, but AI fastest riser at #2
News & Events Security Services & Risk Management
The Allianz Risk Barometer 2026 ranks cybersecurity, especially ransomware attacks, as the #1 risk, while AI is the biggest riser and jumps from #10 to #2, highlighting the emerging risks for companies in almost all industry sectors.

Read more...
OT calculator to align cyber investments with business goals
Industrial (Industry) Information Security Security Services & Risk Management
The OT Calculator has been developed specifically for industrial organisations to assess the potential costs of insufficient operational technology (OT) security. By offering detailed financial forecasts, the calculator empowers senior management to make well-informed decisions.

Read more...
From digital transformation to digital sovereignty
Security Services & Risk Management IoT & Automation
As cyberthreats grow, data regulations tighten, and AI becomes central to economic competitiveness, countries are recognising the need to control and protect their own digital assets.

Read more...
The age of Lean 4.0: Orchestrating intelligence and efficiency
Security Services & Risk Management
The convergence of Lean principles and AI (what we now call Lean 4.0) is no longer a theoretical exercise; it is the defining operational paradigm for survival and growth in a complex, data-intensive economy.

Read more...
Risks of open-source intelligence escalating in crime
Security Services & Risk Management Residential Estate (Industry) Smart Home Automation
CMS estimates that open-source intelligence has played a role in 20 - 30% of robberies over the past 12 months. In cybercrime, global research consistently shows that many offences rely on some form of open-source data exploitation.

Read more...










While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein, the publisher and its agents cannot be held responsible for any errors contained, or any loss incurred as a result. Articles published do not necessarily reflect the views of the publishers. The editor reserves the right to alter or cut copy. Articles submitted are deemed to have been cleared for publication. Advertisements and company contact details are published as provided by the advertiser. Technews Publishing (Pty) Ltd cannot be held responsible for the accuracy or veracity of supplied material.




© Technews Publishing (Pty) Ltd. | All Rights Reserved.