Quick takeaways from this article
- Employees resist time tracking because employers use policies that make it look like micromanagement or surveillance
- These policies include rules that dictate when and how team members work, harsh punitive measures that disregard dynamic work conditions, and manual time entries
- The use of time tracking tools that take screenshots, log keystrokes and mouse inputs, or collect other sensitive personal data, such as webcam feed, can also compel workers to push back against time tracking
- When workers push back, the time-tracking data will not reflect real work situations, companies will experience high turnover, workplace trust will diminish, and productivity will reduce
- Employers can eliminate the resistance by involving workers in the decision-making process, providing access to the time-tracking data, encouraging autonomy, and using a time-tracking solution that respects privacy
Time tracking is one of the most battled workplace policies. That’s because employees, for various reasons, see it as micromanagement, surveillance, or both. Those reasons include enforcement policies that reduce autonomy, management’s lack of transparency and communication, the extra scut work of computing work hours manually, and tools that collect sensitive information.
These misgivings about time tracking lead workers to resist the measure when introduced. And the resistance takes many forms.
If employees think the clock determines their performance levels, they will focus on gaming the system to look busy. They will also spend considerable work hours protecting private data because they believe they are being monitored.
Put together, these work behaviors reduce engagement and productivity, damage workplace trust, and compromise the time-tracking data.
This article covers the reasons workers push back against time tracking and how ethical and trust-based tracking policies can clear that resistance.
What Are the Reasons for Employee Resistance Towards Time Tracking?
Employees don’t resist time tracking because they just hate change. Past work experience, employer body language, communication (or the lack of it), or enforcement policies can trigger resistance.
The following are the reasons employees often oppose time tracking.
It seems like more unnecessary work
Some time trackers require a lot of manual input, such as starting and stopping the clock, entering client, project, or task details before starting a work session, or entering those details whenever one switches to a different, unrelated task.
Workers may see these activities as a waste of work hours, which could lead to reduced incentive to track those hours, at least in a way that produces the data employers intend to collect.
Fear of micromanagement and reduced autonomy
If time-tracking is being introduced to a workforce, especially a remote one, that has long enjoyed the flexibility of choosing its work routines, employees may feel like those freedoms are being threatened.
Their suspicions will only grow if the tracking policy dictates strict work windows and forces every team member to track their work hours, without exception, using the computer-based time tracker.
According to research, when change undermines an employee’s sense of freedom, they react negatively, and work engagement begins to plummet.
Fear of surveillance
Time trackers that take screenshots, log keystrokes, track locations, or monitor input data, such as webcam or audio feed, don’t sit well with employees. Even the idea of a standalone tracker running in the background and sending idle time notifications can be tough to accept.
Also read: Does Time Tracking Software Take Screenshots?
As a result, employees may choose to engage in time-wasting behavior, such as censoring screen activity or calls, to protect their personal data.
The stress of always looking over their shoulders this way, which the APA reports that 56% of employees experience, can also affect productivity and engagement.
Lack of transparency
Team members will be skeptical of any policy they weren’t consulted on, especially if it concerns an application that collects data, whether invasive or not. When organizations roll out tools this way, with little to no prior explanation or notice, people will naturally assume the worst and take measures to protect themselves.
And even after the tool is rolled out, restricting access to the time-tracking data will deepen that distrust.
Questionable benefits
A time-tracking policy that does not offer clear benefits to workers is a tough sell. And most time trackers sound that way without clear communication from employers. If employees have to wonder how the tracker helps them, there’s less incentive to get behind it and more reasons to focus on plausible negatives.
Unfair work recognition
If workers think that, or employees state that, time trackers are the only source of data for performance reviews, employees will feel like their work is not being judged fairly. Introducing this type of policy also diminishes workplace trust because it looks like employers need more justification for paying workers their current rates.
That kind of policy will push employees to manipulate their numbers, at least the ones the time tracker can see, which will lead to bad data.
It feels like a punitive measure
Unreasonable disciplinary actions for policy violations, especially without an important work context, can make workers feel like they’re being unduly punished.
Workers will also start seeing the tool as a weapon instead of a feedback tool, as promised by employers. The result is that workers will set their minds on leaving, and the company’s turnover rate will continue to climb.
How to Get the Resistance Out of the Way with Transparent and Ethical Time Tracking
Getting employees to organically support time tracking is the best way to eliminate resistance. And to do that, employers need to secure their trust and give them reasons to support the measure.
These steps will help.
Involve employees in the decision-making process
Employees will support whatever they contribute to. Research from CIPD suggests that giving employees a voice and showing that their input matters will increase job satisfaction. Gallup’s study also found that employees are 4.2 times more likely to agree they trust leadership when managers are always willing to listen.
To involve workers, companies can notify them about the time tracking deliberations, what management intends to achieve with time tracking (both for the company and employees), and ask for suggestions.
To make the exercise effective, not just for the sake of making employees more receptive, organizations can ask for input about specific decisions, from which time tracker to use to what they think about each policy line.
Explain every detail of the policy
Regardless of how far the process has already gone, companies can reverse or prevent the resistance by providing clear explanations about the time-tracking policy.
Explaining involves telling and showing workers:
- What the time tracker does and the type of data it will collect or generate
- The existing workplace problems that the policy and data will address
- The new benefits that the collected or generated data, alongside policy rules, will help the workforce and the company achieve
- Which time tracker, if the communication is coming before rollout, the company intends to roll out
- The proposed rollout timeline and why it is structured that way
However, the explanation should not be one-way. When managers articulate everything behind the policy, they should encourage feedback and questions to clarify and address any confusion and concerns.
And according to a study of 503 workers, organizational trust increases when employers genuinely work on employee feedback.
Provide access to the data
Showing employees the type of data that the time tracker will collect or generate can improve things, but giving them access, at least to their own data, will solidify the trust. It helps to use time trackers that provide this type of access, especially in the same format that employers see it.
One example is Traqq. The employee and employer dashboard UIs are identical and contain the same data. Team members can also delete data in some cases.
Use time trackers that respect privacy
Using time trackers that do not take screenshots, track locations, log keystrokes, or collect any other personal data can address concerns about monitoring and privacy violations.
Organizations can encourage employees to do their own research by having them read the time tracker’s product features and official documentation to confirm the tool’s privacy focus. They can also show workers demos of a regular supervisor’s dashboard to show the kind of data the tracker collects.
Encourage employee autonomy
Maintaining work routines that improve productivity and keep workers comfortable, as long as they do not harm the company’s finances or product quality, is a sound policy that prevents resistance.
Companies can implement procedures to ensure off-device work activities appear in time-tracking data or performance reviews.
For example, if an employee needs to take a product apart to assist a customer, they can report how long it took, with evidence, so supervisors can include it in the worker’s report, provided the tracker has that feature.
Additionally, organizations can avoid setting unfair work hour restrictions without violating labor laws. For example, only recognizing work hours between 8 and 6 p.m. when some remote workers are more comfortable working between 6 and 10 p.m. can rub them the wrong way.
Ethical Tracking and Transparency Can Earn Employee Trust
Resistance will fade when workers can see the good side of time tracking. But moving their perspectives requires honest communication, collaboration, fair enforcement policies, and privacy assurances.
The time tracker a company uses is the cornerstone of this strategy. Using a tool, such as Traqq, that lacks any monitoring features, from screenshots to location trackers, aligns best with a privacy-focused policy.
FAQs
Why do employees resist time tracking?
Employees push back against time tracking when they believe their employers’ policies amount to micromanagement, surveillance, unfair performance assessments, and fault-finding. Time-tracking policies seem that way when employers use tools that can take screenshots and collect other personal data, do not clearly communicate the reasons for time tracking, block access to the time-tracking data, and impose strict work measures that reduce autonomy.
What happens when workers resist time tracking?
Employees will find ways to manipulate the time tracker to look busy if organizations only use time-tracking data to assess performance. If the tracker collects personal information, workers will refocus their energy and time on guarding sensitive data. These reactions, and others, depending on the situation, can lead to reduced data accuracy and productivity.
Team members will also no longer trust or feel safe in their workplaces. And that kind of mental distress reduces engagement.
What does the resistance cost companies?
Resisting time tracking takes a toll on productivity, data accuracy, innovation, competence, and work engagement. And these are all cost-driving issues. Employee disengagement, for example, increases turnover, which in turn leads to high costs in replacing departed workers.
The inaccurate time-tracking data, a direct result of employee resistance, can also lead to costly business mistakes. For instance, creating project forecasts and budgets based on manipulated numbers means those projects will almost certainly overbudget or be behind schedule.
What is ethical time tracking?
Ethical time-tracking is the practice of tracking work hours without imposing policies that erode autonomy or collecting sensitive personal information through screenshots or related methods. Employees will get access to their data, have freedom to choose work hours, especially in remote workplaces, and contribute to decision-making processes.
How does ethical time tracking fix time tracking resistance?
Workers will become more receptive to time tracking when employers include them during deliberations, provide access to time-tracking data, ensure a fair level of freedom, and avoid trackers that collect sensitive data.
Ethical time-tracking policies also remove the need to waste time on manipulating time-tracking systems or censoring screen activity.
Can time tracking truly benefit employees?
Yes. Time-tracking data can help workplaces detect and reduce burnout, balance workloads more fairly, eliminate payroll issues, and give workers the recognition they deserve.
How does the choice of a time tracker affect employee resistance?
Telling workers that their data is safe and using a time tracker that collects screenshots or records webcam feed can lead to trust issues. But using one that does not collect private information and gives workers access to their data builds that trust since they can verify management’s claims.
