Background

In the recent few years, the ever-increasing technology has brought about digital reconnaissance and its improvement on a daily basis. Ball (2010) states digital reconnaissance studies scholars like David Lyon (1994) or Clive Norris and Gary Armstrong (1999) have it that the state in which we live insecure and uncertain environment and thus it makes digital reconnaissance  a necessary tool for monitoring of the various phenomenon that occur at work places, homes and anywhere. Rapid growth in technology is taking digital reconnaissance to another level.

Digital reconnaissance techniques are most used in workplaces and organizations according to past researches carried out on topics such as the uses of digital surveillance in the workplace, its impacts on employees. However, past researches have contradicting views towards what employees say about the existence of digital reconnaissance in their workplaces; this research will therefore concentrate in this area.

Keywords

Digital reconnaissance, monitoring, workplace, employers and employees

Background

With the view of influencing, managing, directing, protecting people, governments and organizations have adopted digital reconnaissance as the way forward to.  The great communications technology increase and its ever-growing impacts shows that workplaces regard digital reconnaissance as one of their concerns that require crucial attention for the secure development of the organization. This has been a concern in recent years and area of interest for many scholars. However, it has not been understood what the employees in workplaces have to say about digital reconnaissance significance as far as work is monitoring and tracking is concerned.

Globally, the invisible revolution of digital investigation McNall and Roch (2009) and renaissance of risk (beck, 1992) has been an input that is attaining a high degree of concern as the involvement of humans in organizations have been transformed by the developments of new workplaces and new practices of work (Kallinikos, 2003), which included the conditions of control mechanisms. The work transformations affects the way discernibility along with the presence of workers (employees) is structured and this causes an effect in the way work practices are structured.

 Digital reconnaissance also known as e-Digital reconnaissance Alder et al. (2008) and electronic monitoring (Ball & Margulis, 2011) has been adopted to use by many organizations in recent years (Ledema & Rhodes, 2010). Many reasons and mainly for security of the workplace environment for both the organization and employees, monitoring the activities of employees in workplaces have encouraged the adoption of digital reconnaissance in organizations. In making decisions concerning employees, HR departments use data gathered by surveillance methods to evaluate them. Employers make these monitoring techniques of importance with reasons like improving the productivity and quality of work, avoiding the misuse of resources that belong to the organization, and protecting the confidentiality of the organizations among others. This however, has left the trust between the workers and their employers being questioned because employees also have views towards the use digital reconnaissance in workplaces (Subaši? et al. 2011, p.170). The research will therefore seek to investigate the how digital reconnaissance / e-digital reconnaissance or electronic monitoring affect the employees of an organization in their work places.

• How much awareness do employees have about the different types of digital reconnaissance that the employers use in workplaces?
• How do digital reconnaissance techniques used affect employee work rate?
• What are the views that workers (employees) have concerning monitoring their actions through digital reconnaissance?

Review of Literature

Review of Literature

Digital reconnaissance involves electronic digital reconnaissance and electronic monitoring. Electronic digital reconnaissance means a “keep watch” or monitoring electronically and therefore these two terms monitoring and digital reconnaissance may be used to mean the same thing (Alge and Hansen 2014, p.209)

According to Chen et al. (2008), electronic digital reconnaissance refers to when an organization involves the use information technology (IT) like computers, cameras to gather data that concerns to how its workforce behave or perform at workplace. Digital reconnaissance was introduced in organizations by employers to provide a safe working environment for its employees. Various types of digital reconnaissance techniques is being used and implemented by employers to ensure asset protection from both employees and shoplifters.

Digital reconnaissance is when the management is able to record hand keep track of how they perform, behave and personalities according to Kidwell and Sprague (2009) digital reconnaissance have emerged in recent years which has made it to become common in organizations which has made easy for employers to track and monitor employees in the workplace.

When talking about digital reconnaissance from the workplace context, it is more than the use of cameras that track employee’s movements within the organizations, because Digital reconnaissance can also be done to track employees (workers) outside the organizations from different locations. This in the recent time has been done by the use of drones. Developed organizations have devices that can track organization vehicles; this enables them to improve efficiency of their employees as well as the quality of their performances (Bhave 2014, p.603). According to Sewell et al. (2012) employers and organizations found out that through the means of monitoring employees that workers are more productive if they have interaction that is more social.

A research done by Nancy Flynn, ePolicy Institute’ executive director as stated in an article by (Riva Richmond 2012) found out that two thirds of companies keep track of their employees and half have fired their employees for emails and  web infringements. Nancy said it is a fact in business that risks like legal risks exist and regulatory risks exists. She said that either intentionally or accidentally, employees put businesses into risks. This article also gives tips through which electronic monitoring be approached fairly and effectively i.e.; i) set down policies, this will make responsibilities and rights known to every worker in that organization (Eivazi 2011, p.520). Organizations should design a policy that will explain how they will do monitoring in the organization and how they secure and destroy data, this should also be able to explain the needs for security. ii) Make known to the your workforce and explain the business risks caused when the digital policies and assets are not used in the right way and define the privacy of the workers at the workplace. iii) Technology devices like mobile devices and networks should be used to in alerts of potential problems, blocking and filtering some contents that could create a hostile work environment (Whitson 2013, p.163)

Types of digital reconnaissance used in the workplace

According to Sánchez et al. (2012), the views about digital reconnaissance were aligned with the technology Assessment report of 1987 of United States. Digital reconnaissance at the workplace has since the early 1980s’been questioned.

Vuokko (2008) stated that a great number of organizations are now adopting electronic monitoring and it is on a rise for the recent years, which brought the reasons as to why organizations and employers use digital reconnaissance in the work environment to be a concern.

Emerging technologies and as it develops, employees always find different forms of technology to use in a workplace in ways that should not be used in the workplace environment and has led to the adoption of digital reconnaissance  forms and monitoring on the employees by employers and organizations. Digital reconnaissance is practiced in workplaces so as to monitor employees who use web because it is not part of their tasks (Chang et al. 2015, p.100). In addition, employees spend vast amounts of time being on internet as they seek personal interest at workplace instead of doing business and work associated activities. These personal interests according to Jensen and Raver (2012) include activities like being on social media like facebook, whatsapp, twitter and others, include browsing which made the employers and organizations to limit and monitor the use and access of internet at workplaces

Digital reconnaissance is used for measuring efficiency, data security, and compliance with security laws. Much as digital reconnaissance methods are applied to protect against shoplifters and other criminals in organizations, it also keeps an eye on workers (employees). Monitoring techniques help the employers to discover or understand the strengths and weaknesses of their workforce, this enable them allocate them to do what they can do best. This may as well help the employers to know how to coach their employees because it outlays for them which areas to concentrate in while coaching and as well to evaluate the employees (Thompson et al. 2009, p.2193)

Cyber slacking is another reason as to why employees are being monitored, and this simply means the use of the internet for personal use during working hours according to Jeske and Santuzzi (2015). This may also be called cyber loafing, abuse of the internet. The argument is real that the impacts digital reconnaissance or monitoring employees by organizations or employers is raising concerns.

Organizations and employers today practice different kinds of digital reconnaissance or electronic monitoring techniques with emerging technology strategies and this includes tools, devices used to monitor employees, this devices used are both tangible or intangible (softwares). The devices used by employers and organizations are drones, cctv cameras and others being the forms of electronic monitoring techniques used by these employers to monitor employees at workplace include wireless communications (Lupton (2014), Computer keystroke capturing and Video cameras (Ciocchetti 2011, p.300). Internet digital reconnaissance  which involves service and network digital reconnaissance  (Rosenberg 2010, p.143), and phone digital reconnaissance  is another form of digital reconnaissance  that are commonly carried out in workplaces and this involves the tracking of employees conversations on phone. The most recent technology is also enables the organizations and employers to use digital reconnaissance tools systems like Smartcards and identity cards that contain all the employee’s details to track employees and control their accessibility of various departments and buildings, including recognitions and finger print scanners (Snyder and Cornetto, 2009, p.480)

Organizations like hospitals that are based in different locations, employers can monitor their employees’ health and safety practices with digital reconnaissance technologies such as video digital reconnaissance and such practices are attracting attentions from a number of employees in the workplace environment

Methodology

When attempting a research study, there are a number of research approaches that can be employed in order to collect the relevant information in regard to the research question. The approaches may be either quantitative, qualitative or both depending on the study questions and the type of the data be collected (Seo et al. 2015, p.250) among which may include; survey, questionnaires, and interviews among many others. When choosing a methodology, it is important to evaluate the possible strengths and weaknesses in relation to the research study as b

Qualitative research is done to promote greater understanding of the way things are and why they are the way they are and for this case it will seek to understand the employees view digital reconnaissance  and how it affects them in their workplaces and this done through intensive and extensive observation, interviews and discussions. This promote a greater understanding how employees view digital reconnaissance in their workplaces and it is usually descriptive in nature. Quantitative research is one that is based on the methodological principles, it involves collection of numerical data in order to explain how employees view digital reconnaissance practices in workplaces (Seo et al. 2015, p.250).

Interviews

An interview is a one on one discussion between the interviewer and the interviewee respondents. According to Oates Seo et al. (2015) an interview involves a conversation between two or more people. When doing an interview, additional information can be gathered. This allows the interviewer to ask a detailed question and is also able to get a detailed answer as compared to other methodologies like questionnaires that provide brief answers. (Seo et al. 2015, p.250).

Interview methodology is the most common method used in collecting data because it can collect data from all groups of respondents like the educated, non educated among others. This is of a benefit because it provides an insight that is deep and detailed information on the research topic being studied, its also flexible and adjustable as it allows the interviewer to ask an additional question. However, interview method consumes a lot of time in collecting data, analyzing it and drawing conclusions mostly in data that is not structured.

This refers to when a researcher designs questions that can help to collect data about a the research topic that is being studied. If the questionnaires designs correct questions, then the data collected will be meaningful and if the questions are not correct, the study will be invalid. Questionnaires are always designed in line with the objectives of the study and should be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time bond. Questionnaires may not need the help of the researcher; data can be collected even with the researchers’ absence. Questionnaires does not require much time in collecting and analyzing data collected but it limits the responses of the respondents and does not give out the honesty in the responses and this makes data that is not reliable in a research.

Surveys

This refers to a study done by involving a big group of people to find out how things are done the way they are done. Survey may make use of already available data or data collected for other purposes. Normally under survey, a researcher asks a question to a big number of respondents or informants’ which then can be analyzed to find any pattern in the data. In some circumstances, already existing data may be used when using surveys method(data collected earlier) or longitudinal (collected over a period) because of the large number of cases. Surveys can even be done or distributed through the internet and emails and this makes it be widely used for research purposes. Using survey method can be of an advantage since it covers a large and a wide range of audience and this enables a comprehensive conclusion. This because an ample population is represented but however it may also be a disadvantage because it does not provide much details on the topic being investigated since it may focus on getting large amount of data than the depth of the research

Experiment

An experiment may imply the deliberate manipulation of different variables available for investigation with the aim of understanding the possible outcome. This intervention may include individuals, pupils, teachers, schools. An experiment may be used in the comparison of different variables while making use of different treatments strategies/ methods. This is called true experiment and if allocation is any other basis for example using naturally arising or self-selected groups, it is usually called quasi experiment

Case studies

This is concerned with the collection of empirical data from a firsthand source usually focusing in a small group in which the information can easily be analyzed after the collection.  Casestudies provide reliable and dependable information as it is regarded as one of the most reliable methods for data collection in research studies and is much used when applying qualitative research method. It usually provides rich detail about those cases of predominantly qualitative approaches. This normally uses different approaches including questionnaires, observations, and interviews.  Analysis is always needed in order to make a conclusion from the vast quantities of data collected by case study method. Case studies is in three type’s namely explanatory research, descriptive research, and exploratory research. Case study helps in executing difficult researches and detailed researches however, its time consuming and it requires ethical considerations so as to access the requirements that is needed to do the research

This research will employ interview (qualitative research) to answer the research topic. It involves asking questions to the participants (employees) and allowing them give answers, which are open-ended of which employees may not state when survey method is used. This also gives the employees a chance to expand on their answers to questions being asked or a detailed answer, interview method also gives a platform where questions related to the topic is asked so as to achieve in-depth answers from the employees. Interview entails a face-to-face conversation between the interviewer and the respondents (employees) and so this will enable the employees speak their minds as far as digital reconnaissance is concerned at their workplaces. This method will also provide a platform for the employees to ask questions when they seek an understanding of anything related to what is expected of them in the research. For this case, 25 participants from three different organizations will be asked to be involved or take part in these interviews

The researcher will also use survey method to answer the research question of how the digital reconnaissance techniques affect the employees at their workplaces since it is a fast and easy way of gathering data in a setting that has a big population in a short period of time. Since interviews will be done to get an information that is detailed, survey will be done to enable us get information that can be expressed or interpreted in mathematical procedures and create generalized conclusions. Survey method will take into consideration that the employees do not have a lot of time since some digital reconnaissance techniques are already tracking them and so it will reduce time wastage and therefore 200 participants from different organizations will be involved in doing this study.

The ever-rising digital reconnaissance tools in workplaces comes with impacts to the surrounding or work environment under the digital reconnaissance. Researches from different researchers have proved that digital reconnaissance techniques exist in organizations but it has not been understood how employees feel about this digital reconnaissance practices. Therefore, the researcher will investigate how digital reconnaissance or e-digital reconnaissance or electronic monitoring affect employees of an organization in their workplaces. Different methodologies will be employed to answer this research question

Project plan

tasks	start date	end date	duration
writing and submission of proposal	5/1/2018	13-May-18	13
conducting of the research study	5/15/2018	3-Jun-18	18
progress report submission	6/6/2018	17-Jun-18	11
handing in of the final report	6/21/2018	8/4/2018	14

References

Alder, G.S., Schminke, M., Noel, T.W. and Kuenzi, M., 2008. Employee reactions to internet monitoring: The moderating role of ethical orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), p.481.

Alge, B.J. and Hansen, S.D., 2014. Workplace monitoring and surveillance research since 1984: A review and agenda (pp. 209-237). Routledge, New York.

Ball, K., 2010. Workplace surveillance: An overview. Labor History, 51(1), pp.87-106.

Ball, K.S. and Margulis, S.T., 2011. Electronic monitoring and surveillance in call centres: a framework for investigation. New technology, work and employment, 26(2), pp.113-126.

Bhave, D.P., 2014. The invisible eye? Electronic performance monitoring and employee job performance. Personnel psychology, 67(3), pp.605-635.

Chang, S.E., Liu, A.Y. and Lin, S., 2015. Exploring privacy and trust for employee monitoring. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 115(1), pp.88-106.

Chen, J.V., Chen, C.C. and Yang, H.H., 2008. An empirical evaluation of key factors contributing to internet abuse in the workplace. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 108(1), pp.87-106.

Ciocchetti, C.A., 2011. The Eavesdropping Employer: A Twenty?First Century Framework for Employee Monitoring. American Business Law Journal, 48(2), pp.285-369.

Eivazi, K., 2011. Computer use monitoring and privacy at work. Computer Law & Security Review, 27(5), pp.516-523.

Jensen, J.M. and Raver, J.L., 2012. When self-management and surveillance collide: Consequences for employees’ organizational citizenship and counterproductive work behaviors. Group & Organization Management, 37(3), pp.308-346.

Jeske, D. and Santuzzi, A.M., 2015. Monitoring what and how: psychological implications of electronic performance monitoring. New Technology, Work and Employment, 30(1), pp.62-78.

Kidwell, R.E. and Sprague, R., 2009. Electronic surveillance in the global workplace: Laws, ethics, research and practice. New Technology, Work and Employment, 24(2), pp.194-208.

Lupton, D., 2014. Self-tracking modes: Reflexive self-monitoring and data practices.

McNall, L.A. and Roch, S.G., 2009. A social exchange model of employee reactions to electronic performance monitoring. Human Performance, 22(3), pp.204-224.

Posey, C., Bennett, B., Roberts, T. and Lowry, P., 2011. When computer monitoring backfires: Invasion of privacy and organizational injustice as precursors to computer abuse.

Rosenberg, K., 2010. Location Surveillance by GPS: Balancing an Employer’s Business Interest with Employee Privacy. Wash. JL Tech. & Arts, 6, p.143.

Sánchez Abril, P., Levin, A. and Del Riego, A., 2012. Blurred boundaries: Social media privacy and the twenty?first?century employee. American Business Law Journal, 49(1), pp.63-124.

Seo, J., Han, S., Lee, S. and Kim, H., 2015. Computer vision techniques for construction safety and health monitoring. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 29(2), pp.239-251.

Sewell, G., Barker, J.R. and Nyberg, D., 2012. Working under intensive surveillance: When does ‘measuring everything that moves’ become intolerable?. Human Relations, 65(2), pp.189-215.

Snyder, J.L. and Cornetto, K.M., 2009. Employee perceptions of e-mail monitoring from a boundary management perspective. Communication Studies, 60(5), pp.476-492.

Subaši?, E., Reynolds, K.J., Turner, J.C., Veenstra, K.E. and Haslam, S.A., 2011. Leadership, power and the use of surveillance: Implications of shared social identity for leaders’ capacity to influence. The leadership quarterly, 22(1), pp.170-181.

Thompson, L.F., Sebastianelli, J.D. and Murray, N.P., 2009. Monitoring Online Training Behaviors: Awareness of Electronic Surveillance Hinders E?Learners. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(9), pp.2191-2212.

Vuokko, R., 2008. Surveillance at workplace and at home: social issues in transforming care work with mobile technology. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 6(1), pp.60-75.

Whitson, J.R., 2013. Gaming the quantified self. Surveillance & Society, 11(1/2), p.163.