Psychological acceptance of organizational video surveillance

2.1 Video surveillance

The terms CCTV (closed circuit television) and video surveillance have recently appeared, and replaced the term of video surveillance, which came into use in 1981. Video surveillance is a technical and societal means of control and surveillance for viewing images using cameras. These cameras are installed on public roads or on the premises of private or public places. There is no official definition of video surveillance so the following definition is chosen: video surveillance means “watching what is happening remotely on a screen, using a camera set up on site”.

2.2 A control mechanism

The use of a control technique refers to the sociological concept of societal control. That sets the mechanisms and means by which society can maintain its cohesion. It leads people to respect these rules called standards and governed by values. The implemented means of control include the mode of management, technique. Cameras must be visible, and employees should not be filmed without them knowing. Employers have the right to control and monitor staff activities during working hours, and can implement a monitoring device; the use of a secret surveillance method is nevertheless excluded. They may use the video records from the installed cameras without the knowledge of employees on premises which they have no access to, in order to establish their guilt. It is useful to recall the importance of the sense of intrusion highlighted in the literature on the panoptic system [7, 29]. Video surveillance is similar to the traditional functioning of the panoptic model (prison-type architecture designed by Jeremy Bentham in the late eighteenth century). The approach chosen put forward different options for the implementation of cameras with different viewing systems: in the manager’s office, manager’s home, via the Internet in safe premises. Indeed, not knowing who is watching you can be an anxiety-inducing or rejection factor. In companies or on public roads, it is not necessarily the police who view the images; security guards or shop-owners can also do so. The defenders of individual freedom are concerned. When viewing images, managers of private companies have control over the population. Jean-Jacques Rousseau [46] insists, that all legitimate authority and power must be based on a social or societal contract, grounded on people’s collegial will. While Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury argues for the ‘general interest’, Rousseau seeks the authentically original, ‘common good’ notion, toward the collegial promotion and protection of people’s common benefit and interest [30].

2.3 Acceptance of a control mechanism

The theme of acceptance is common to the fields of law, organizational sociology and management sciences. Acceptance is a both legal and organizational concept. It’s possible to give a legal definition of acceptance to begin with. In French civil law, acceptance is the consent of a person to an offer that was made to him. This is a unilateral act of will. Other definitions of the concept of acceptance can be found in the field of management sciences.

There are many definitions of the concept of acceptance in management sciences. The definitions of acceptance in literature mainly concern the acceptance of new technologies [5, 15]. Literature in the fields of psychology and management science refers to values, needs, attitudes [4] and emotions. The approaches revealed by the literature review on the technologies relate to models that consider the utility, use, attitudes, behaviours, beliefs, diffusion, adoption and appropriation. In this article, acceptance will be considered in the strict sense because the mechanism, once installed, is mandatory and included in the work conditions. The literature review has shown that there are three stages prior to acceptance: comprehension, adherence-legitimisation and resignation. The more employees question the authenticity of procedures and data from the mechanism, the less they will be ready to use and accept it. The refusal of video surveillance by employees corresponds to a protest dimension. It is the denial of controls. This refusal process is fuelled by numerous public debates about control and freedom. Acceptance is therefore presented as the way an individual, a collective body or an organisation perceives the challenges related to these technologies (strengths, benefits, risks, opportunities) to suit everyday situations, and react (positively or negatively) [10]. Acceptance is based on the trust that a user has in the cameras. Depending on the status, function and role of employees, their activity and use or experience, the importance attached to video surveillance can be very different.

Information System (IS) theories have focused on the study of the behaviour and attitudes of employees in a given technological environment. These theories are based on work in the field of social psychology. They revealed the importance of perception, intention of use, usefulness (Technology Acceptance Model, [15]), and highlighted the importance of some individual characteristics. The quality of information was highlighted by De Lone and Mc Lean [16, 17] in the theory of IS success, and was re-iterated later in the Mandatory Use of Software Technologies [13]. These approaches have helped to identify the importance of characteristics related to roll-out such as information. The legal aspect has nevertheless been avoided. During the implementation of a new technique, individuals are subjected to management upheavals and required to comply with new guidelines and procedures. They must first comprehend the technique and work with it every day.

2.4 Employment agreement in French law

This research article deals with the acceptance of video surveillance in the workplace. It is therefore important to limit the investigation to legal acceptance (social law). In France, case law has developed this definition: “Agreement by which a person, the employee, agrees to perform a certain activity (work) for another person (the employer) under the authority of whom said employee is placed (subordination), in return for cash compensation (salary).” The relationship established between employees and employers is governed by submission, but this does not constitute acceptance. However, the employment agreement binding the employee to the company can be a component of acceptance due to the related stakes (salary, social status). The notion of consent is essential here: even when the contract is a legal obligation, agreement is always required. When installing cameras in a company, display is obligatory, but contract amendment is not a prerequisite. Thus, as regards video surveillance, the consent of employees is not necessarily requested during the installation of cameras. Only staff representatives are consulted. When adopting video surveillance, acceptance is the result of a tacit agreement (posting) or express approval. In the latter case, agreement amendment is required.

3.1 Overview of the methodological framework

The first Purpose of the study was to demonstrate that acceptance of the control mechanism is related to the way it is rolled out (procedures and information), and to the kind of mutual promises made between employees and the organisation.

A qualitative approach was used and video surveillance was studied into three fields: shops, supermarkets, offices/casinos, banks/transports.

All the persons interviewed are anonymous (names were changed). The methodological approaches put forward by Van Maanen [48] and Wacheux [49] were referred to, and an opportunistic methodology was used. The problem with this methodology was access to the field: some employers were reluctant to discuss a sensitive issue related to security and control. Nevertheless, some employees agreed to answer questions, without requesting the consent of their employer, which provided access to the field. Some respondents gave us written material and we also had recordings or written data which made analysis reliable. The documents provided by the respondents enabled us to give a more pragmatic dimension to this research [36]. Some data were observed, others were recorded, transcribed. This led to a mix of oral and written material. Successive interviews were conducted in order to make this work legitimate and reliable. 43 interviews were conducted in three different fields in companies open to the public where cameras are installed. The phenomenon was observed in companies open to the public for their ease of access. Respondents often found it hard to talk about this taboo subject, despite it being highly publicised by the media. Faced with this difficulty, it seemed appropriate to target companies where the only reason for video surveillance is the protection of users or customers.

3.2 Dictionary of themes and data analysis

Thematic analysis is a method “to identify recurring general themes that appear in various, more concrete content in verbal or textual expressions” [33]. It is used to identify and study similar expressions and phrases in a corpus. This allows previously collected qualitative data to be analysed. A repository, called dictionary of themes, was drawn up early on in the interview phase, and brought together the themes, dimensions and transcripts, and produced a kind of transcript categorisation. This tool was used to reduce the data collected during the transcription of the interviews. Indeed, analysis is only possible if the data have been pre-sorted. The thematic analysis focused on the literature review and the interview transcripts. The dictionary of themes was scalable and was developed in three steps: identification of themes: progressive and comprehensive identification of subjects at the end of the first reading. This step allowed us to identify recurring ideas, the use of metaphors and analogies, identify expressive differences and similarities, and identify the expressions corresponding to the theoretical issues of research. The second step was to establish theoretical links after the second reading. The third step was to analyse the data collected in the field using the theoretical foundations identified. This formalisation allowed us to find keywords and recurring themes. Analysis of the collected discourse has identified the elements that are considered when a player makes an individual assessment about the legitimacy of cameras.

4.1 Mandatory and no mandatory

Approaches to Information Systems help us to see the characteristics that make employees accept a control mechanism. Referring to the TAM, technology acceptance model [15], which is incomplete, Chang gradually introduced the “Mandatory” concept [13]. In an environment where the use of technique is required, users are asked to use it in order to keep their jobs [11]. It seems inappropriate to talk about user intention as in a “mandatory” environment, the user is captive and powerless. The way control mechanism is deployed can change the way it is perceived and received by employees. In an environment where the mechanism is obligatory, users are obliged to use it. There is therefore no question of dichotomy or choice (whether to use the mechanism or not): the camera is imposed under the employer’s authority, in compliance with human rights and freedom. However, we can mention the possibility of an individual or collective negotiation when installing cameras. Indeed, the obligation to provide information stipulated in the French Labour Code does not presuppose prior negotiation. Staff representatives are consulted without being able to influence the decision of management during any negotiation. A fundamental difference between a compulsory scheme and a voluntary mechanism is the lack of choice for employees and the need to comply. “Having to notify employees of the use of electronic monitoring is considered as a form of consideration and respect by the organisation towards its employees” [3]. If the information is clear and of good quality, the cameras will be better accepted.

The use of the mechanism can be made mandatory by law. Users are obliged to use the mechanism because it is the only way to perform their daily tasks [2]. This mandatory concept is similar to the obligation for certain businesses to install video surveillance (banks-casinos). Their activity makes mechanism be mandatory, and their employees who become users must therefore comply. Likewise, the binding force of the employment agreement changes the perception of new technique within an organisation. Employees find themselves in the mandatory model, because it is captive. Several situations qualified as mandatory can be encountered: mandatory cases related to the activity, the existence of valuable assets to be protected and public protection. Mandatory cases related to the job: handling money; risky positions. The nature of the activity is apparently essential for employee acceptance. Indeed, some activities are regulated. The field of the study included companies whose activity presents cash flow risks: banks, casinos. “It is imposed by the staff regulations, as our business is risky” (Nadège). Situations that are “non-mandatory” were also encountered, where cameras may seem unnecessary (Sports hall, regional university). The cameras are mandatory in sectors where required by the regulations. In other sectors, the cameras are not required by law but is mentioned as such by some respondents. Some employees (business schools) consider the school more as a place open to the public than a workplace, which favours acceptance. The implementation of video surveillance seems to be “a continuation of what is done on the street.” For Charles, Danielle and Evelyne, the lack of transparency raises questions but the nature of the activity requires the presence of cameras. The lack of justification is also mentioned: Fabienne: “Why are cameras placed in these places?” She thinks that the presence of cameras is justified in the interests of the regulation of behaviour, despite the lack of information in her school.

4.2 The legal nature of the agreement and the psychological contract with the employer

The purpose of this part is to show the importance of the nature of employment agreements and related obligations, and the role of the psychological connection established with the employer in the acceptance of video surveillance by employees. A work contract is an agreement by which one or more persons are obliged to give, to do or not to do something for one or more other persons (Article 1101 of the French Civil Code). It is a question of a meeting of minds giving rise to mutual obligations. Contract law is based on contractual freedom subsequent to freedom of choice. The employment agreement is therefore the result of an exchange of consent by the two parties: the employer and the employee. Consent is defined in Article 1128 of the French Civil Code, which provides that four conditions are essential for an agreement to be valid: the consent of the obligated party; its ability to contract; some subject that is the theme of the commitment; a licit cause in the obligation. Under French law, the normal kind of employment agreement is an open-ended contract. The people met had open-ended contracts, fixed-term contracts or professional training contracts. The temporary and insecure nature of the latter two contracts may suggest that the behaviour of individuals in the company changes: they want to be recruited, to do well and gain the manager’s trust. As part of the field study, some people met had insecure contracts, favourable to video surveillance (Romain), and others who were more reserved, (Mallaury and Charline). Once Charline’s contract had changed from a professional training to a fixed-term contract, her opinion also changed. The legal nature of the contract can become a possible component of acceptance. The employment agreement determines the work conditions “by which the labour factor agrees, for a certain pay that may be fixed or variable, to obey the directives of an entrepreneur within certain limits” [24]. The psychological contract has captured the attention of researchers as a framework for understanding the employment relationship. The concept of reciprocity is one of the founding elements of both the employment agreement and the psychological contract [42]. Just like the employment contract, the psychological contract implies obligations and promises [18, 40]. If the employment agreement or the IT charter mentions video surveillance, employees more readily consent to being filmed. Analysis of the topics discussed during interviews and keywords can reveal that a company’s values are reflected in the psychological contract, since a number of terms directly or indirectly refer to them. The words used can therefore convey a form of psychological contract. In this restaurant, expectations are trust, safety and protection. Safety is an obligation driven by the employment agreement, and seems to be an important part of the psychological contract. Cameras may soon be placed in university lecture halls. Management has not justified the project. This is a significant change for a population unaccustomed to changes in work conditions, and can be a violation of the psychological contract. Changes to the rules in the employment conditions can cause stress and adjustment behaviours. As the rules of the game have changed, the way cameras are installed has displeased people, and this can lead to a sense of injustice. The civil servants could then subsequently adopt adjustment strategies. These manifestations of discontent show that a psychological contract exists throughout the employment conditions. When an employee believes that the employer has failed to keep its promises (tacit or explicit), he or she equates that to a breach of the contract that binds him or her to the organisation [38]. The study reveals how acceptance is established. Some people may think that organisations use video surveillance against them, and this can sometimes create anxiety. Others feel safe and this creates wellbeing. “I feel spied on. I feel they want to test my punctuality, my honesty and my skills.” (Charline), “Employees are hostile to cameras for fear of them being used against them.” (Micheline).

The theory of the psychological contract focuses on the potential role of sociology in dealing with the psychological processes that determine the interpretation of the promises made by the parties. In the employment agreement, there are clear expectations of the tasks assigned to employees (nature and hours of work, pay, etc.), and also implicit expectations on work behaviour (loyalty, honesty, involvement in work, etc.). Rousseau and Anton [43] emphasise the importance of the implementation procedures. Indeed, the past actions of the company in terms of breach of contract and compensation contribute to employees’ confidence in the organisation [41, 47].

Like the employment agreement, the psychological contract implies mutuality and reciprocity between the employee and the employer. Once the employment agreement has been signed, both parties obligate themselves reciprocally, therefore establishing a connection, which is not legal but psychological. In addition to reciprocal obligations, both parties have reciprocal expectations.

The theory of the psychological contract helps to see the employment relationship [44].

Analysis of the interviews shows that both parties (the employment conditions) have a fairly common perception of the psychological contract. The rules’ change in the relationship can cause stress and behavioural adjustments. Since the new mechanism is not perceived as being legitimate, employees can react bypassing the problem.

Such demonstration of dissatisfaction shows that the psychological contract is present throughout the employment relationship. Table 1 propose a comparison between Employment agreement and psychological contract.

In the notion of agreement, there is a will, an obligation, a promise, a commitment and some sanctions. It establishes reciprocal obligations. Several authors point out that safety and security are among primary concerns of the employment conditions for employees and are to be considered part of even a transactional contract.

The link with agreements is already explored. For Rousseau [44] the psychological contract is, contract thinking, contract makers contemporary contract forms, how contracts are violated and what happens then, how contracts change, how to link strategy to contracts, changing social contracts. The psychological contract is individual beliefs shaped by the organization, regarding terms of an exchange agreement between individuals and their organization. Mutuality and reciprocity are represented by the extent of agreement. Employees and employers manifest across different psychological contract obligations.

Rousseau [44] also focuses on perceived promises, the organization’s influence on an individual’s psychological contract through explicit and implicit signals is much greater. However, the degree to which an organization can shape an individual’s psychological contract is contingent to some extent on an individual’s schema which serves to guide an individual’s interpretations of obligations and allows an individual to operate in a loosely pre-programmed unconscious manner until something out of the ordinary happens [14].

The psychological contract is hope and has four aspects: the expression of a free will, its Incompleteness, sacrifices related to the evolution of situations and people and Consent is the willingness to engage, and must be clear to express the acceptance of the parties. The concept of agreement in legal terms leads to the concept of contract. It is therefore impossible to study the acceptance of video surveillance by an employee without talking about the prior legal agreement with the organisation. The employment agreements organises a series of reciprocal obligations in the employer/employee conditions (pay, working hours, data processing, confidentiality). However, these rights and duties do not cover all the mutual expectations that the employer and the employee can maintain. The psychological contract is informal, unwritten, based on implicit and explicit individual beliefs and on mutual obligations. This exchange is based on both obligations and promises. Levinson et al. [34] consider the psychological contract as “the sum of the mutual expectations between the two parties present.” Rousseau [44] insists on the perception of the individual and defines the psychological contract as follows: “the belief of an individual in relation to the terms and conditions of a reciprocal exchange agreement between that person and another party”. Campoy et al. [21] mention pay, job security, development (training and career), recognition, work content, communication, working hours and work-life balance, for employers [26]. Employees can then forge an idea of the confidence that they can have in their employers, and if it is good, they will more readily agree to commit to a lasting relationship. Promises of security and pay are no longer enough to ensure the commitment of employees. The involvement of employees depends more on the employer’s ability to go beyond promises and to guarantee equal relationship. The employment agreement refers to rational elements, while the psychological contract refers to feelings. A shift may then occur between a perceived psychological contract and reality. The emphasis is thus put on the notion of obligations based on perceived promises. In business, if there is a contract, there is also a will, consent, obligations, promises, commitment, cooperation, sanctions and connections. “The organisational variation of the contract stipulates that the control associated with delegation is based on the fact that employees’ freedom of choice is restricted, and on the implementation of rules and procedures. (....). (....)” [40]. Most of the research in this field concerns the consequences of breach or violation of the psychological contract. It is worth mentioning the work of Robinson and Morrison [39], Lester, Turnley, Bloodgood and Bolino [35] and Chen Zhong and Tsui [23] that showed the negative effects of a difference in perception of the terms of a psychological contract, on organizational commitment, job performance and the intention to leave the company. There is a violation or breach of the psychological contract when employees believe their employers have failed to meet their obligations [37]. When an employee believes that promises are not kept, it can lead to a sense of injustice, disappointment and stress. Violation of the psychological contract can sometimes explain attitudes and behaviour following changes in work and, in particular, when a control mechanism is introduced. Breach of the employment agreement results from the will of one party (resignation or dismissal) while breaching the psychological contract can lead to a loss of confidence, motivation and commitment. As part of video surveillance, setting up cameras, acceptance rarely amounts to a modification of the employment agreement in the companies we encountered. With the introduction of cameras, employee retention over the long term needs to take account of the relational promises of the psychological contract. The employer protects in exchange for faithfulness and loyalty, which can be a way of acceptance of control mechanism.

Introducing video surveillance is justified by the safety of people and goods. The installation of cameras in the workplace generally meets a safety requirement, such as control of access to premises, or particular risk of theft. A company planning to implement video surveillance, must respect the principle of proportionality, and be able to justify its control over its employees with a legitimate interest. Recorded images can be viewed by the only people authorised to do so, as part of their job (management, security manager).

Acceptance depends on the way in which video surveillance is deployed. Employees are subjected to a regulatory context, legal standards or convention, and mutual agreement. They accept this depending on the legal nature of the agreement, the company’s activity and psychological contract with the employer. The sense of equality and fairness experienced during the implementation stages and the quality of the information given to employees are also important components of acceptance.

4.4 Fairness and the crucial role of information

For many, cameras are accepted for customer safety in banks, cash flows for casinos, protection of property and people in shops and transport. For others, monitoring seems to be inevitable. Consent has not been given. Most of the employees interviewed are aware that the company respects the law quite well (ethical charter, staff regulations, pictograms, consultation with staff representatives, declaration to the CNIL). Acceptance seems to be related to compliance with standards, to the primacy of community interests and the need to be in line with technical progress. The respondents mentioned the trust they have developed towards their manager. This trust comes from the way in which the project is managed and rolled out, and the communication around it. In this study, it appears that video surveillance goes beyond the employer’s promise of protection and safety. It sometimes betrays the trust relationship. Insofar as it is the job of supervisors to ensure that employees are committed and efficient, each manager must have as accurate ideas as possible about what motivates people at work. The management team will ensure effective communication about the project. The quality of information about the introduction of cameras in the company influences the perception of control mechanism. The French Labour Code provides for consultation of the health and safety committee and the works council, or staff representatives failing that. The impact is not neutral as indicated by an employee: “I was informed, there is no reason to refuse.”(Octave). The employees met were nearly all able to answer the question about how the information was given, even in the case of young employees: “There is an informative poster in the staff corridor, and it is mentioned in the employment contract” (Charline). Likewise, in sectors where video surveillance is a security imperative, the information is displayed and employees, informed. This is the case in the casino and banking sectors: “Posters are used to inform employees and customers” (Thérèse). At “K company”, employees training is a continuation of the information process to make employees aware of the regulatory constraints of video surveillance: “During the training of young drivers, once a month, twelve people have half a day’s training on video surveillance: they know they have to abide by the law” (Jean-Louis). The lack of information is sometimes mentioned: the first remark from Arnaud (Business School) is that the cameras are visible but no information is available: there are no pictograms or indication in the staff regulations. Information and the role of management are therefore essential. Some companies do not have staff representatives and have therefore made informal arrangements, like in the case of Sports hall (3 employees). In larger companies with HR and legal departments, the deployment processes seem to be more precise: “At first, staff representative bodies were consulted, before there was a vast communication and information campaign (..) The mandatory displays were also put up when the equipment was installed.” (Octave). The literature review with the work on organizational justice and fairness [25, 31], had previously revealed the importance of information in the project. Interactional justice depends on several criteria: the justification of the decision, and the accuracy of the explanations (both constituents of informational justice) [3]. The latter, after having given their opinion, then perceive a form of procedural justice [6, 32]. This is procedural justice described by Greenberg. In the end, the implementation of video surveillance is an organisational change that can affect the motivation of employees. The role of the HR department is really crucial as a change agent. Information about video surveillance was mentioned by 17 persons.