Employee Monitoring: Is Your Oversight Strategy Hurting Retention?

As the rise of remote and hybrid work continues to shape the modern workforce, many businesses have turned to employee monitoring tools in a bid to maintain productivity and manage performance. From tracking website usage to monitoring keystrokes and communications, the intent is often to ensure accountability—but the impact on trust is becoming harder to ignore.

A recent study has revealed a critical insight into employee sentiment: over half of UK workers would consider quitting their job if they discovered they were being monitored by their employer. With 85% of employers admitting to monitoring activities like web browsing and screen activity, this disconnect is significant.

Furthermore, 42% of employees say that monitoring internal communications is unethical, while nearly 50% report that it leads to increased stress. Alarmingly, 17% would even take a pay cut to avoid being tracked—highlighting just how strongly employees feel about their privacy.

These findings make one thing clear: employee surveillance isn’t just a policy issue—it’s a cultural one. Trust, autonomy, and mental wellbeing are on the line, and businesses need to tread carefully. Striking the right balance between operational oversight and employee privacy has become not only a compliance concern but a vital element of long-term talent retention.

“Surveillance shouldn’t be the first solution—it should be the last resort,”

In a recent UK market update, Liz Jones, UK Managing Director at people2people, shared her thoughts on the growing debate around workplace surveillance.

Referencing the "Stat of the Week," Jones highlighted the tension between employer intentions and employee reactions. “Over half of UK workers would consider quitting if they found out they were being monitored,” she said. “That’s a huge signal for any business thinking about implementing or expanding tracking systems.”

Jones noted that while some degree of oversight is understandable—particularly in remote-first environments—there needs to be a better balance between trust and control. “Many employees see this as a serious breach of trust,” she explained. “And it’s not just a personal opinion—there’s measurable impact on stress levels, engagement, and retention.”

According to Jones, the disconnect often stems from how these monitoring tools are communicated and implemented. “When people aren’t told clearly what’s being tracked and why, that lack of transparency only fuels discomfort,” she said.

And the consequences go beyond resignation threats. Reduced morale, lower engagement, and increased employee anxiety are all common ripple effects of poorly managed surveillance policies. For employers focused on long-term growth and culture, this creates a serious challenge.

“Surveillance shouldn’t be the first solution—it should be the last resort,” Jones added. “There are better ways to encourage accountability without creating a culture of fear.”

In today’s talent market, where values, wellbeing, and work-life balance weigh heavily in job decisions, culture plays an outsized role in retention. For Jones, the emphasis should be on fostering performance through empowerment—not policing.

Rethinking Oversight: How to Build a Trust-First Culture

Rather than defaulting to constant monitoring, businesses can improve performance and accountability through a culture centred on trust, transparency, and mutual respect. Here are several strategies to consider:

Be Transparent and Upfront
If monitoring is necessary, communicate it clearly. Explain what data is being collected, how it will be used, and who will have access to it. Employees should never feel blindsided.

Focus on Outcomes, Not Activity
Shift the performance conversation from time spent online to results achieved. Set clear KPIs and goals, and empower staff to manage their work autonomously.

Avoid Blanket Monitoring
Instead of wide-scale surveillance, consider targeted support for areas where improvement is needed. Broad monitoring creates a culture of mistrust, especially among high performers.

Engage Employees in the Process
Invite feedback before rolling out new tracking systems. Ask employees how they feel about monitoring and what alternatives they believe would foster greater accountability and performance.

Encourage Managerial Coaching, Not Policing
Equip your leaders to mentor, not monitor. Training managers to have regular check-ins, performance conversations, and development planning is more effective than silent oversight.

Protect Privacy Where Possible
Refrain from collecting unnecessary or sensitive data. The less invasive your approach, the more likely you are to preserve employee trust and avoid backlash.

Measure Wellbeing, Not Just Productivity
Track indicators of employee wellbeing—such as engagement levels, burnout risk, and satisfaction—alongside performance data. This creates a more holistic view of team health.

Reward Autonomy and Responsibility
Create a work culture that values independence. Recognise employees who take initiative and deliver consistently without the need for heavy supervision.

Regularly Review Oversight Policies
Conduct periodic reviews of any monitoring systems in place. Are they still necessary? Are they achieving the intended outcomes? Policies should evolve with your workforce.

Foster Psychological Safety
Employees should feel comfortable raising concerns, reporting stress, or pushing back against practices that don’t align with your values. Open dialogue is key to long-term success.

At the end of the day, employee oversight isn’t inherently wrong—but how it’s done makes all the difference. Monitoring practices that lack clarity, context, or consent can do more harm than good. By choosing trust, transparency, and communication, businesses can create environments where accountability thrives—without sacrificing culture or employee loyalty.

Is your monitoring strategy helping your team—or hurting it?