IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v35y2024i3p1175-1194.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impacts of Internet Monitoring on Employees’ Cyberloafing and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Longitudinal Field Quasi-Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Hemin Jiang

    (International Institute of Finance, School of Management, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230052, China)

  • Mikko Siponen

    (Information Systems, Statistics, and Management Science, Culverhouse College of Business, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487)

  • Zhenhui (Jack) Jiang

    (HKU Business School, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong)

  • Aggeliki Tsohou

    (Department of Informatics, Ionian University, Corfu 491 00, Greece)

Abstract

Many organizations have adopted internet monitoring to regulate employees’ cyberloafing behavior. Although one might intuitively assume that internet monitoring can be effective in reducing cyberloafing, there is a lack of research examining why the effect can occur and whether it can be sustained. Furthermore, little research has investigated whether internet monitoring can concurrently induce any side effects in employee behavior. In this paper, we conducted a longitudinal field quasi-experiment to examine the impacts of internet monitoring on employees’ cyberloafing and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Our results show that internet monitoring did reduce employees’ cyberloafing by augmenting employees’ perceived sanction concerns and information privacy concerns related to cyberloafing. The results also show that internet monitoring could produce the side effect of reducing employees’ OCB. Interestingly, when examining the longitudinal effects of internet monitoring four months after its implementation, we found that the effect of internet monitoring on cyberloafing was not sustained, but the effect on OCB toward organizations still persisted. Our study advances the literature on deterrence theory by empirically investigating both the intended and side effects of deterrence and how the effects change over time. It also has important broader implications for practitioners who design and implement information systems to regulate employee noncompliance behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Hemin Jiang & Mikko Siponen & Zhenhui (Jack) Jiang & Aggeliki Tsohou, 2024. "The Impacts of Internet Monitoring on Employees’ Cyberloafing and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Longitudinal Field Quasi-Experiment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 1175-1194, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:35:y:2024:i:3:p:1175-1194
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2020.0216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2020.0216
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2020.0216?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maurice E. Schweitzer & Teck-Hua Ho & Xing Zhang, 2018. "How Monitoring Influences Trust: A Tale of Two Faces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 253-270, January.
    2. Dickinson, David & Villeval, Marie-Claire, 2008. "Does monitoring decrease work effort?: The complementarity between agency and crowding-out theories," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 56-76, May.
    3. Kurt T. Dirks & Donald L. Ferrin, 2001. "The Role of Trust in Organizational Settings," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 450-467, August.
    4. Bradley R. Staats & Hengchen Dai & David Hofmann & Katherine L. Milkman, 2017. "Motivating Process Compliance Through Individual Electronic Monitoring: An Empirical Examination of Hand Hygiene in Healthcare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1563-1585, May.
    5. Jack Shih-Chieh Hsu & Sheng-Pao Shih & Yu Wen Hung & Paul Benjamin Lowry, 2015. "The Role of Extra-Role Behaviors and Social Controls in Information Security Policy Effectiveness," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 282-300, June.
    6. Louise Tourigny & Jian Han & Vishwanath V. Baba & Polly Pan, 2019. "Ethical Leadership and Corporate Social Responsibility in China: A Multilevel Study of Their Effects on Trust and Organizational Citizenship Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 427-440, August.
    7. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & James Agarwal, 2004. "Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 336-355, December.
    8. Sumantra Sarkar & Anthony Vance & Balasubramaniam Ramesh & Menelaos Demestihas & Daniel Thomas Wu, 2020. "The Influence of Professional Subculture on Information Security Policy Violations: A Field Study in a Healthcare Context," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1240-1259, December.
    9. Dickinson, David & Villeval, Marie-Claire, 2008. "Does monitoring decrease work effort?: The complementarity between agency and crowding-out theories," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 56-76, May.
    10. John D'Arcy & Anat Hovav & Dennis Galletta, 2009. "User Awareness of Security Countermeasures and Its Impact on Information Systems Misuse: A Deterrence Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 79-98, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrej Angelovski & Daniela Cagno & Daniela Grieco & Werner Güth, 2019. "Trusting versus monitoring: an experiment of endogenous institutional choices," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 329-355, December.
    2. Ro’i Zultan & Eldar Dadon, 2023. "Missing the forest for the trees: when monitoring quantitative measures distorts task prioritization," Working Papers 2319, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    3. Linardi, Sera & McConnell, Margaret A., 2011. "No excuses for good behavior: Volunteering and the social environment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(5), pages 445-454.
    4. Ivan Hilliard, 2013. "Responsible Management, Incentive Systems, and Productivity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 365-377, December.
    5. Lambsdorff, Johann Graf & Grubiak, Kevin & Werner, Katharina, 2023. "Intrinsic Motivation vs. Corruption? Experimental Evidence on the Performance of Officials," MPRA Paper 118153, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Andrei Bremzen & Elena Khokhlova & Anton Suvorov & Jeroen van de Ven, 2015. "Bad News: An Experimental Study on the Informational Effects Of Rewards," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(1), pages 55-70, March.
    7. Christophe Lemiére & Gaute Torsvik & Ottar Mæstad & Christopher H. Herbst & Kenneth L. Leonard, 2013. "Evaluating the Impact of Results-Based Financing on Health Worker Performance: Theory, Tools and Variables to Inform an Impact Evaluation," Health, Nutrition and Population (HNP) Discussion Paper Series 98269, The World Bank.
    8. von Siemens, Ferdinand A., 2013. "Intention-based reciprocity and the hidden costs of control," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 55-65.
    9. David Masclet & Charles N. Noussair & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2013. "Threat And Punishment In Public Good Experiments," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(2), pages 1421-1441, April.
    10. Åshild A. Johnsen & Ola Kvaløy, 2014. "Does Instrumental Reciprocity Crowd out Prosocial Behavior?," CESifo Working Paper Series 5078, CESifo.
    11. Kumju Hwang & Hyemi Um, 2021. "Social Controls and Bonds of Public Information Consumer on Sustainable Utilization and Provision for Computing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, May.
    12. Goeschl, Timo & Jarke, Johannes, 2014. "Trust, but verify? When trustworthiness is observable only through (costly) monitoring," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 20, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.
    13. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán-González, 2011. "Don't Ask Me If You Will Not Listen: The Dilemma of Participative Decision Making," Working Papers 11-04, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    14. Michèle Belot & Marina Schröder, 2016. "The Spillover Effects of Monitoring: A Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 37-45, January.
    15. Masella, Paolo & Meier, Stephan & Zahn, Philipp, 2014. "Incentives and group identity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 12-25.
    16. De Chiara, Alessandro & Engl, Florian & Herz, Holger & Manna, Ester, 2022. "Control Aversion in Hierarchies," FSES Working Papers 527, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    17. SeEun Jung & Radu Vranceanu, 2017. "Gender Interaction in Teams: Experimental Evidence on Performance and Punishment Behavior," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 33, pages 95-126.
    18. Fabio Galeotti & Valeria Maggian & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Fraud Deterrence Institutions Reduce Intrinsic Honesty," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(638), pages 2508-2528.
    19. Bruno Maria Parigi & Loriana Pelizzon & Ernst-Ludwig von Thadden, 2013. "Stock Market Returns, Corporate Governance and Capital Market Equilibrium," CESifo Working Paper Series 4496, CESifo.
    20. Giuseppe Danese & Luigi Mittone, 2015. "Trust and trustworthiness in experimental organizations," CEEL Working Papers 1501, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:35:y:2024:i:3:p:1175-1194. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.