Where is the line between proper monitoring and privacy? Ask Johnny
Johnny C. Taylor Jr. tackles your workplace questions each week for USA TODAY. Taylor is president and CEO of SHRM, the world's largest trade association of human resources professionals, and author of “Reset: A Leader’s Guide to Work in an Age of Upheaval.”
Have a question? Submit it here.
Question: My employer recently started using monitoring software to track employee computer activity, and it makes me uncomfortable because it feels like a violation of privacy. Where is the line between legitimate monitoring and employee privacy? – Leila
Answer: The short answer is employers generally have the right to monitor activity on company-owned devices and networks, but how they do it matters. The line between legitimate oversight and intrusion usually comes down to transparency, purpose, and proportionality.
In most workplaces, employees should have limited expectations of privacy when using company equipment. If you’re working on an employer-owned laptop or network, monitoring is typically permissible, especially when it’s disclosed. Organizations have legitimate reasons for doing it. They’re responsible for protecting proprietary information, preventing cybersecurity breaches, maintaining productivity, and meeting regulatory obligations. From that perspective, some level of monitoring is part of responsible management.
That said, the why and how behind monitoring matter a great deal. There’s a clear difference between safeguarding systems and surveilling people. Monitoring network activity to prevent data leaks or cyberattacks is very different from intrusive practices such as activating webcams without clear consent, tracking employees outside of working hours, or capturing personal communications unrelated to work. Oversight tied directly to legitimate business needs is one thing; excessive or punitive surveillance is another.
Transparency is where many organizations get this wrong. Employees should know what’s being monitored, how the data will be used, and who has access to it. Surprises erode trust quickly. Clear policies and open communication, on the other hand, help employees understand the purpose and limits of monitoring, even if they’re not thrilled about it.
It’s also important to recognize that monitoring practices often reflect an organization’s broader culture. Some companies operate from a high-trust philosophy and use minimal safeguards focused primarily on security. Others rely more heavily on metrics and oversight. Neither approach is inherently right or wrong, but they can create very different workplace experiences.
If this change makes you uncomfortable, start by reviewing your company’s policy and asking thoughtful questions about scope and purpose. Seek clarity before assuming the worst. At the same time, pay attention to the bigger picture. If the level of monitoring feels inconsistent with the trust and autonomy you expect at work, that’s useful information about whether the organization is the right long-term fit for you.
Done well, workplace monitoring protects the organization and its people. Done poorly, it damages trust. The difference isn’t the technology; it’s how responsibly and transparently leaders choose to use it.
The views and opinions expressed in this column are the author's and do not necessarily reflect those of USA TODAY.