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:

Detect procurement fraud before losses escalate
Security Services & Risk Management News & Events Financial (Industry) Editor's Choice
Organisations need to move procurement fraud prevention closer to the point where suspicious activity occurs, rather than relying primarily on investigations after money has already been lost, according to SAS and FACTS Consulting.

Read more...
R45 billion private security sector’s growing liability gap
Security Services & Risk Management
Constitutional Court and appellate decisions shine a spotlight on the potentially massive civil liability that security companies could face for operational failures and, in certain circumstances, the conduct of employees – exposure often not covered by public liability insurance.

Read more...
AI fraud is outrunning banking defences
Security Services & Risk Management Financial (Industry)
South Africans are increasingly being targeted by AI-generated fraudsters who sound just like bank employees. However, many local banks are still struggling with legacy tech, slow change processes, and limited data visibility.

Read more...
AI assistants learn bad workplace habits
AI & Data Analytics Security Services & Risk Management
An employee under pressure at a logistics firm finds a productivity-boosting shortcut. Instead of manually parsing a 40-page supplier contract, they paste the confidential PDF into a public generative AI tool for a quick summary.

Read more...
Mining's critical controls are not the problem; execution is
Security Services & Risk Management Mining (Industry)
As Parliament considers amendments intended to strengthen managerial responsibility, employer accountability, enforcement and penalties under the Mine Health and Safety Act, Alvarez & Marsal warns that tougher rules must be matched by stronger execution at the rockface.

Read more...
Shadow AI: The next evolution of Shadow IT
AI & Data Analytics Security Services & Risk Management
Today, as AI gains traction in all aspects of life and business, African organisations face a new challenge, known as ‘Shadow AI’, where employees at all levels make use of AI without considering the potential impact.

Read more...
Free live travel risk map covering multiple countries
News & Events Security Services & Risk Management
Most widely cited travel risk maps are published once a year as static documents, but risk conditions do not follow a publishing calendar. The Sicuro map draws on official travel advisories from the ...

Read more...
Unrest readiness is built between crises, not during them
Technews Publishing Security Services & Risk Management
The 30 June marches passed largely peacefully, and that outcome was no accident. It was the result of preparation, and a level of cooperation between police, private security, communities and business that this country has not always managed.

Read more...
The line between locking residents out and restricting their access
News & Events Security Services & Risk Management Residential Estate (Industry)
A June 2026 High Court judgment has clarified one of the most contested issues in modern estate governance: when an HOA's digital access restrictions amount to unlawful self-help or spoliation, and when they do not.

Read more...
Modernise field communications with Push-to-Talk over Cellular
Products & Solutions Security Services & Risk Management
Sentiv is bringing Hytera’s Push-to-Talk over Cellular (PTToC) portfolio to organisations that need a more structured and controlled way to coordinate field teams, without extending a full private radio model to every team, site, or function.

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.