Why ‘mousing around’ is a symptom of a larger problem at work

Wells Fargo recently fired more than a dozen employees after an investigation found that workers were using “mouse manipulators” to pretend to work.

In May, the financial services company said it had discovered that employees had used allegedly unethical workplace practices to create a “feeling of active work.” However, it was unclear how the employees performed in roles where their productivity could be measured by mouse movements.

Mouse jigglers are devices or software that simulate the movement of a mouse cursor, making you look like you’re working even when you’re away from your desk. While they’ve been around for years, their popularity has exploded during the pandemic as working from home has become the norm.

At first glance, faking your job may seem like a crime that could get you fired. But the ubiquity of these tools highlights a broader problem of a pervasive surveillance culture in the workplace – and an obsession with arbitrary productivity.

Read more: Working mothers are silenced at work with NDAs

Many studies show that remote workers are actually more productive than their in-office counterparts, yet a disturbing number of employers still spy on their employees working from home. According to a survey by ExpressVPN, 78% of employers engage in remote work supervision, even though 83% admit there are ethical concerns about employee monitoring.

Three-quarters of “productivity” tools take screenshots of an employee’s screen, based on the terms set by the employer, according to research from StandOut CV. Meanwhile, 22% of software can monitor people via their camera or screen recordings, and almost 10% can record audio from the device it’s installed on.

Of course, there may be legitimate reasons for checking in on employees. For example, a company may want to protect itself against potential lawsuits. But many employers use monitoring to check that people are actually working, even though it’s nearly impossible to measure productivity based on time spent at a desk.

In some jobs, productivity is relatively easy to estimate, for example by counting how many items are produced on an assembly line in a day. But in many jobs—including knowledge-based or creative roles, or marketing or finance—productivity is much more difficult to determine.

Understanding the impact and contribution of a worker’s work is much more difficult than simply counting the number of mouse clicks in an eight- or nine-hour workday. What happens if someone is “in the zone” and manages to finish the work in six hours? Should they spend the remaining hours of the workday getting on with their work so they can appear productive, or should they take the time to wind down so they can recharge and prepare for the next day?

Numerous studies have proven the benefits of taking regular breaks during the workday, including reduced stress, improved concentration and productivity. However, for many people, the anxiety of being caught “lazy” means they spend the remaining hours doing household chores.

The problem is that we arbitrarily prioritize “activity” over “results” because we equate being busy with being productive. In today’s fast-paced world, having too many jobs is a status symbol, a sign that you and your skills are in demand.

Being busy creates the impression of being engaged – and being seen as someone who puts in the effort often gives the employee a higher moral value. Being overworked and putting in extra hours is admirable. But in reality, very few people benefit from this approach to work.

Read more: What is productivity anxiety and why is it affecting more and more workers?

Overworking is a surefire way to increase stress and exhaustion, which can lead to burnout and mental health issues like anxiety and depression. Burned out employees are much less productive and less engaged in their work. Employers who have a bad habit of pushing employees to the brink may face more sick leave or quitting altogether, leading to higher employee turnover, which can be costly.

Yet many organizations continue to use workplace supervision to encourage people to work harder. However, research shows that this has the opposite effect. When organizations overwork employees, base their incentives primarily on the amount of work time, and over-monitor their activities, productivity and efficiency actually decline. A 2022 meta-analysis on the effects of electronic monitoring found that it provides no benefits and instead harms workplace culture and leads to undesirable behavior.

As surveillance increases, evidence is mounting that electronic surveillance can do more harm than good. When people know they are being watched, their stress levels skyrocket and trust is undermined, leading to disengagement from work and employers.

While this may be a concern for some managers, it may be more effective to trust that people are doing their job without having to watch their every move.

Watch: Wells Fargo fires dozens of workers for ‘pretending to work’

Download the Yahoo Finance app available for Apple AND Android.