IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v33y2022i2p541-570.html

Uncovering the Mitigating Psychological Response to Monitoring Technologies: Police Body Cameras Not Only Constrain but Also Depolarize

Author

Listed:
  • Shefali V. Patil

    (McCombs School of Business, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78705)

  • Ethan S. Bernstein

    (Organizational Behavior Unit, Harvard Business School, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

Abstract

Despite organizational psychologists’ long-standing caution against monitoring (citing its reduction in employee autonomy and thus effectiveness), many organizations continue to use it, often with no detriment to performance and with strong support, not protest, from employees. We argue that a critical step to resolving this anomaly is revisiting researchers’ fundamental assumptions about access to gathered data. Whereas previous research assumes that access resides nearly exclusively with supervisors and other evaluators, technological advances have enabled employee access. We hypothesize that with employee access, the psychological effects of monitoring may be far more complex than previously acknowledged. Whereas multiparty access may still decrease employee autonomy, it may also trigger an important psychological benefit: alleviating employees’ perceptions of polarization —the increasing social and ideological divergence between themselves and their evaluators. Access gives employees unprecedented opportunities to use the “objective” footage to show others their perspective, address evaluators’ erroneous assumptions and stereotypes, and otherwise defuse ideological tensions. Lower perceived polarization, in turn, attenuates the negative effects that low autonomy would otherwise have on employee effectiveness. We find support for these hypotheses across three field studies conducted in the law enforcement context, which has been a trailblazer in using technological advances to grant broad access to multiple parties, including employees. Overall, our studies shed light on the conflicting (and ultimately more innocuous) impact of monitoring and encourage scholars to break from prior approaches to account for its increasing egalitarianism.

Suggested Citation

  • Shefali V. Patil & Ethan S. Bernstein, 2022. "Uncovering the Mitigating Psychological Response to Monitoring Technologies: Police Body Cameras Not Only Constrain but Also Depolarize," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 541-570, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:33:y:2022:i:2:p:541-570
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2021.1452
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1452
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2021.1452?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. Nicholas Wilson & Michael J. Peel, 1991. "The Impact on Absenteeism and Quits of Profit-Sharing and other Forms of Employee Participation," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 44(3), pages 454-468, April.
    2. Tetlock, Philip E. & Vieider, Ferdinand M. & Patil, Shefali V. & Grant, Adam M., 2013. "Accountability and ideology: When left looks right and right looks left," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 22-35.
    3. Knight, Kathleen, 2006. "Transformations of the Concept of Ideology in the Twentieth Century," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(4), pages 619-626, November.
    4. Steven Blader & Claudine Gartenberg & Andrea Prat, 2020. "The Contingent Effect of Management Practices," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(2), pages 721-749.
    5. Taylor, Frederick Winslow, 1911. "The Principles of Scientific Management," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number taylor1911.
    6. Pyrooz, David C. & Decker, Scott H. & Wolfe, Scott E. & Shjarback, John A., 2016. "Was there a Ferguson Effect on crime rates in large U.S. cities?," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-8.
    7. Fiona Lee & Amy C. Edmondson & Stefan Thomke & Monica Worline, 2004. "The Mixed Effects of Inconsistency on Experimentation in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 310-326, June.
    8. Esteban, Joan & Ray, Debraj, 1994. "On the Measurement of Polarization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 819-851, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ethan Bernstein & Shelley Xin Li, 2026. "The Performance Effects of Giving Front-Line Employees Direct Access to Performance Data and Thereby Limiting the Supervisor’s Feedback-Intermediation Role: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(2), pages 805-835, February.

    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. Welton Chang & Pavel Atanasov & Shefali Patil & Barbara A. Mellers & Philip E. Tetlock, 2017. "Accountability and adaptive performance under uncertainty: A long-term view," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(6), pages 610-626, November.
    2. Wei Shi & Brian L. Connelly & Jeremy D. Mackey & Abhinav Gupta, 2019. "Placing their bets: The influence of strategic investment on CEO pay‐for‐performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(12), pages 2047-2077, December.
    3. Tetlock, Philip E. & Vieider, Ferdinand M. & Patil, Shefali V. & Grant, Adam M., 2013. "Accountability and ideology: When left looks right and right looks left," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 22-35.
    4. Giuseppe Attanasi & Ylenia Curci & Patrick Llerena & Maria del Pino Ramos-Sosa & Adriana Carolina Pinate & Giulia Urso, 2019. "Looking at Creativity from East to West: Risk Taking and Intrinsic Motivation in Socially and Culturally Diverse Countries," Working Papers of BETA 2019-38, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    5. Leopoldo Fergusson & Carlos Molina, 2020. "Facebook Causes Protests," HiCN Working Papers 323, Households in Conflict Network.
    6. Scott Rozelle & Yiran Xia & Dimitris Friesen & Bronson Vanderjack & Nourya Cohen, 2020. "Correction to: Moving Beyond Lewis: Employment and Wage Trends in China’s High- and Low-Skilled Industries and the Emergence of an Era of Polarization," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 62(4), pages 774-775, December.
    7. Alina Mirela Teacu (Parincu), 2019. "Neuromanagement – the Impact of Neuroscience on the Organizational Performance," Risk in Contemporary Economy, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, pages 487-493.
    8. Karunakaran, Arvind & Orlikowski, Wanda J. & Scott, Susan V., 2022. "Crowd-based accountability: examining how social media commentary reconfigures organizational accountability," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114401, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Alona Goloborodko, 2022. "Theoretical and Methodological Principles of Managing the Enterprise's Integrative Development," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 4, pages 139-146, December.
    10. Klaus Desmet & Ignacio Ortuño-Ortín & Romain Wacziarg, 2009. "The political economy of ethnolinguistic cleavages," Working Papers 2009-17, Instituto Madrileño de Estudios Avanzados (IMDEA) Ciencias Sociales.
    11. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1119-1154, September.
    12. Dev, Pritha, 2014. "Identity and fragmentation in networks," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 86-100.
    13. Michel Anteby & Curtis K. Chan, 2018. "A Self-Fulfilling Cycle of Coercive Surveillance: Workers’ Invisibility Practices and Managerial Justification," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 247-263, April.
    14. Fukai, Taiyo & Kawaguchi, Daiji & Kondo, Ayako & Yokoyama, Izumi, 2024. "How do firms attain internal and external flexibility of employment?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    15. David Vallat, 2015. "Une alternative au dualisme État-Marché : l’économie collaborative, questions pratiques et épistémologiques," Working Papers halshs-01249308, HAL.
    16. Jeremy Atack & Robert A. Margo & Paul Rhode, 2020. "‘Mechanization Takes Command’: Inanimate Power and Labor Productivity in Late Nineteenth Century American Manufacturing," NBER Working Papers 27436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. repec:cam:camjip:2101 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Anil K. Gupta & Paul E. Tesluk & M. Susan Taylor, 2007. "Innovation At and Across Multiple Levels of Analysis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 885-897, December.
    19. Genevieve Musca, 2007. "La construction de compétences dans l'action," Post-Print hal-01517916, HAL.
    20. Matija Kovacic & Claudio Zoli, 2021. "Ethnic distribution, effective power and conflict," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(2), pages 257-299, August.
    21. Jinia Mukerjee & Roy Thurik & Olivier Torrès & Annelot Wismans, 2024. "Measuring organizational play in small businesses," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 2443-2476, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ororsc:v:33:y:2022:i:2:p:541-570. 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.