Do Business Well

Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (1996) suggest that:

Each employer should provide and act on clear policies regarding the privacy implications of the computing resources used in the workplace. The policies should explicitly describe:

• Acceptable use of electronic mail and computer resources, including personal use;
• Practices that may be used to enforce these policies, such as the interception and reading of electronic mail or scanning of hard disks;
• Penalties for non-compliance with these policies.

Codes of conduct can be criticized on the grounds that they may be there only for public relations purposes and just add to bureaucracy, that they ignore context and that they deny individual responsibility and moral diversity. They do, however, have the advantage of offering some guidance in a chaotic Internet environment that so far lacks any common understanding of appropriate use.

Spence (2002) notes that a good code of conduct:

is negotiated with stakeholders and acceptable to them;

comprises clear and well-founded ethical rules;

is internally consistent and coherent with other policies and strategies;

should balance rights and duties and the interests of stakeholders;

allows for exceptions (and shows how to deal with them);

anticipates conflicts (and shows how to deal with them);

respects individual freedom;

would not be used to indoctrinate;

is easy and inexpensive to apply;

is part of a process with regular review.

Electronic monitoring

Those against electronic monitoring argue that:

It constitutes an invasion of privacy. Being paid by an organization does not mean that it owns you.

• Monitoring implies suspicion of misbehaviour. This undermines the trust, goodwill and loyalty of the employee.
• Monitoring results in the setting of unrealistic targets, because employees cannot keep up their fastest rate constantly. The result is increasing stress, absenteeism and, ultimately, employee turnover.
• In a climate of increasing empowerment, monitoring erodes independence of the individual to work in a way or at a time that is congenial.

Electronic monitoring is more suited to measuring quantitative factors than qualitative, hence it is more likely that the number of phone calls rather than the effort spent building relationships with potential clients will be measured.

Employers may defend the use of electronic monitoring in the workplace as follows:

• It is necessary for security — CCTV can protect against theft and violence.
• Employers pay employees to do a particular job. It could be argued that employers have a contractual right to check that employees are doing what they are paid to do.
• Monitoring of employees stops abuse of work time and increases productivity.
• Electronic monitoring is simply an electronic version of ‘managing by walking about’ that saves management time.
• Electronic means of measurement mean that performance appraisal of employees is backed up by precise statistics and is unbiased.
• Electronic monitoring provides data quickly and frequently.
• It ensures realistic targets are set.

It acts as a deterrent to stop inappropriate workplace behaviour, in the same way that a speed camera without a film can still influence motorists to keep to the legal speed limit.

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
Online Marketing Privacy Codes of conduct

• Are Personalization AND Privacy Really At Odds?'
• E-business Privacy Policies
• Electronic Money and Online Transactions
• Marketing planning stage: implementation through the marketing mix
• Legal Costs：How to Avoid a Heavy Bill
• Online Relationship Marketing
• Challenges of building online customer relationships
• Web Designing the Online Customer Data Model part 3
• The E-Wallet Wars
• Online Outsourcing versus Insourcing, online Business Solution

5 Comments »