This is full of quotes that show the Dilbertesque nature of some of these metrics. It is true that they seem to be concentrated in the serving industry, but there are traces of them in the tech industry as well, which could conceivably increase a lot (after all, we just love the quantified self, don't we?).
"At a tech company, his company found, workers who sat at larger tables in the cafeteria, thus communicating more, were more productive than workers who sat at smaller tables."
Is this effect statistically significant? Was it validated by forcing the people at the larger tables to switch to smaller ones, and proving that their productivity decreased as a result? Maybe a larger percentage of disgruntled workers sat by themselves, along with a couple of really high performers?
Drawing broad strokes that appeal to higher management ("oh, they were communicating more, that's why they were more productive") is going to lead to decisions that are not fully thought through, and tend to club everyone into a single mould defined by broad conclusions from this data, ("Let's have two team meetings every day, just to ensure that everyone communicates and is on their toes all the time.")
So, If you are an employee or a manager, keep this in mind, and strongly resist any of these nonsensical monitoring devices. It will lead to less creative and disgruntled employees who are now trying to solve the problem of how to beat these metrics instead of whatever problem they were supposed to solve in the first place.
---------------
"Servers, knowing they were being monitored, pushed customers to have that dessert or a second beer."
On a tangential note, seeing how popular chain restaurants and takeout places are in the US, this probably strongly contributes to the rising obesity percentage.
"At a tech company, his company found, workers who sat at larger tables in the cafeteria, thus communicating more, were more productive than workers who sat at smaller tables."
Is this effect statistically significant? Was it validated by forcing the people at the larger tables to switch to smaller ones, and proving that their productivity decreased as a result? Maybe a larger percentage of disgruntled workers sat by themselves, along with a couple of really high performers?
Drawing broad strokes that appeal to higher management ("oh, they were communicating more, that's why they were more productive") is going to lead to decisions that are not fully thought through, and tend to club everyone into a single mould defined by broad conclusions from this data, ("Let's have two team meetings every day, just to ensure that everyone communicates and is on their toes all the time.")
So, If you are an employee or a manager, keep this in mind, and strongly resist any of these nonsensical monitoring devices. It will lead to less creative and disgruntled employees who are now trying to solve the problem of how to beat these metrics instead of whatever problem they were supposed to solve in the first place.
---------------
"Servers, knowing they were being monitored, pushed customers to have that dessert or a second beer."
On a tangential note, seeing how popular chain restaurants and takeout places are in the US, this probably strongly contributes to the rising obesity percentage.