2

LEVEL of INTEREST

Managers are employees who have personal records of their own. Unlike many other social issues, therefore, the problem of personal information and how it is used affects all employees.

PERSONAL EXPERIENCES

The respondents were asked whether they or a member of their immediate families had ever had an experience in which personal information about them was used in a way that upset them. In light of the broad phrasing of the question, designed to include family and events at any time or in any place, it was surprising to find that 86 percent of the respondents stated that they had never had an upsetting experience.

The 14 percent who indicated that they or a member of their family had had a negative experience were then asked to describe what happened. Responses were so varied that they defied easy categorization or general classification, but the most frequent response (62 respondents) referred to an upsetting experience relating to the use or extension of credit.

Complaints regarding negative credit experiences included mixups in identities, lack of efficient and fair means to correct credit records, the loss of credit due to a dispute over small, even miniscule, sums of money, and the ease with which others could obtain personal credit information. One respondent stated: "During an initial inspection of an apartment I wanted to rent, the landlord inadvertently showed me a copy of my credit report. Though the information was positive and accurate, I resented the ease with which he obtained it and the fact that his obtaining it was quite premature."

Other upsetting experiences included problems with banks, inaccurate employment records, insurance investigations, and the release of medical information. Complaints ranged from real estate agents who gave a buyer personal information unrelated to a sale to the disclosure of an individual's financial information by an insurance investigator who was talking to the person's neighbors. Concern was again expressed about the scope of the information-acquisition powers of others. One respondent wrote, "As a result of litigation in an auto accident, the opposing attorneys subpoenaed all my employment records as well as my complete medical history and federal and state income tax records." Another respondent told of severe harassment by hiring agencies that had received misleading information about his talents.

Of the 14 percent of respondents who replied that they had had an upsetting experience, 37 percent reported that the problem had been resolved to their satisfaction, whereas 63 percent stated that the problem had not. The high incidence of failure, however, may be explained by the fact that many of the responses, such as "ease of access to information about me" were not specific. grievances that could be redressed.

THE ETHICAL AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS CONFRONTING BUSINESS

Respondents were asked to describe the most important social or ethical problem facing business today. Because many respondents described more than one problem, it is only possible to list the responses in terms of frequency of citation, rather that the percentage of respondents giving each response. (See Exhibit 3.)

A

Honesty in business was the most frequently cited prob. lem, and problems of government regulation ranked second. Surprisingly, privacy, in all its forms, was tenth. Because the questionnaire dealt with privacy, one might have expected that more respondents would have been led to cite some aspect of information privacy. Moreover, respondents who cited privacy as the most important problem were primarily concerned with situations having little or no bearing on the employment setting. Concern focused on the general state of personal privacy-for example, unnecessary and unjusti fied intrusions into private affairs by government or business representatives.

However, the fact that privacy ranked tenth does not mean that it is of no importance. As in any situation, priorities must be assigned. We can only conclude that the majority of respondents felt strongly that, at this time, there are problems of more importance that need addressing first.

Many of the managers who viewed honesty as the most important problem cited the dilemma of the honest businessman in a world of cutthroat competition. Others, looking within their own organizations, voiced concern that honesty and morality had been replaced by ladder-climbing and self-serving philosophies. Whitecollar crime, misrepresentations on employment applications, apparent profiteering by senior management, and the production and shipment of goods that did not meet required specifications were all given as ex

amples of the problem of “honesty". Here are some of the specific comments:

"Business needs to identify with and adhere to a code of ethics. Every day we read about illegal payments, bribes, and other deeds that mar an already tarnished public image."

• Business must speak the truth in communicating with employees and with other businesses."

• "Business leaders must be more vocal in backing integrity and demonstrating it by their own examples." • "Most business people are only conditionally honest. If it's legal, it's okay. If it can be gotten away with, it's okay. Integrity is tough to find and hard to practice."

• "All management needs is to manage in an open and honest manner that will stand up to complete public disclosure. Management is not honest with itself or with its employees."

• "There is a lack of transmittal of strong ethical principles from the top of an organization to the working and lower management levels."

• "The public feels, with some justification, that business is dishonest (payments under the table, fixing prices, producing poor quality products, not honoring warranties, and so on). Positive action without government rules and regulations should be taken by industry to remedy these problems."

• "It is essential to maintain a high ethical standard-and to enforce it. There are too many questionable and

Respondents who stated that government "regulation" was the biggest problem facing business today complained of nuisance legislation, restraints on individual freedom, the duplicative powers of regulatory agencies, interference in hiring practices, union relations, and discriminatory laws. One respondent put it this way: "Overregulation and protection have resulted in a society virtually unable to make a decision for itself. We are depriving the average American of the very initiative and independence which gave birth to this nation." Another stated, "The problem is the hypocrisy of legislators who impose regulations and restrictions on the business community, but exempt themselves from similar rules."

SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND CONCERNS Respondents were asked a series of questions to determine how important they considered their own personal information. They were also asked how employees at their companies generally felt about personal information. Ironically, the managers' responses showed that as individuals they were more concerned with their own information than they believed other employees were with their own. Four out of five managers (81 percent) said that they were concerned about who saw their

LEVEL OF INTEREST

personal information. Yet only 53 percent believed that other employees were concerned about who saw their personal information. Some 84 percent of all respondents stated that they had a pretty good idea of the types of information their company kept about them. Yet, only slightly over one third (37 percent) indicated that they believed most of their company's employees understood how the company used personal information. At the same time, 45 percent of the managers agreed with the statement; "Most employees want to inspect their employment records." And an overwhelming 88 percent of the managers rejected the statement, "Only an employee with something to hide would be concerned with who sees his or her personal information." Ninety-seven percent of all the managers stated that it was very important that companies protect the confidentiality of employee records.

CONCLUSIONS

When asked to state what they saw as the major problems facing business today, managers listed business ethics and government regulation in the first and second places; privacy ranked tenth. This does not mean that fair information practices is unimportant. Privacy may not be of primary concern to managers because relatively few of them have ever had an upsetting exIperience with the handling of their own personal information.

Most managers feel that they understand the information their company keeps about them, and they are concerned about who sees their personal information. Yet they do not feel that employees are particularly knowledgeable or concerned about the information companies have about them. This ironic situation may arise because in one case managers were asked to express personal concern, but in their responses about their employees' feelings, the managers may have felt that since they have seen little concern, there really is none.

3

The ability to inspect one's personal records is a central theme of all privacy legislation. Many privacy advocates believe that personal inspection is the best way to ensure the accuracy of information. Many businesses already permit such inspection: 69 percent of respondents stated that their companies permitted employees to inspect their own personal records; 23 percent stated that their companies did not.

Respondents were asked to comment on the major effect on a company when employees are allowed to inspect their personal records. Because many respondents listed several effects-both positive and negativethe numbers add to over 100 percent. Seventy-two percent cited positive effects and 30 percent cited negative effects.

The positive effects most frequently mentioned were greater trust, improved morale, increased accuracy, and fairer and more objective evaluations of employees. In support of this belief, some of the managers pointed out that it was only natural for employees to be suspicious of what they were not permitted to see, and that feedback to employees was the only way to ensure constructive growth and change.

Eighteen percent expressed belief that such access would improve morale. Here are some of their comments:

"It will have a very positive effect on morale. Without this right, employees feel threatened and are more fearful of manipulation. Not knowing what's *in there' can be unhealthy."

• "Employees will be more comfortable and therefore more productive. Access allows all employees to know their contribution to the firm."

• "Produces a more democratic employee-employer relationship."

• "Improves participation by employees in meeting company goals."

• "Gives the company an image of openness with all cinployees. This open relationship can result in a relaxed working atmosphere, easier bargaining attitudes, and fewer grievances."

"Openness and candor can be productive if the files are kept in an honest and forthright manner and the process of individual personal review is handled correctly."

Many other respondents specifically noted that employee access would increase the accuracy of the information that was kept. Comments ran like this:

• "Errors are brought out. Completeness of records is checked. Misplaced or missing data is noted."

• "The company is forced to examine its personnel policies and build in more fairness than if employees are not allowed to see the files. Management can no longer hide its prejudices behind the cloak of confidentiality and is forced to deal with reality-openly."

"Employee access forces managers and supervisors to be more accurate and objective."

• "Line supervisors are forced to be more direct, candid, and realistic in dealing with employees. Supervisors can't get away with badmouthing employees in

the file and not telling employees where they stand. The biggest impact of employee access will be to make managers do the job they should have been doing from the beginning-that is, managing their employees."

• "It should help eliminate the unfair advantages to individuals who could use the employee's file as a secret weapon."

• “It will keep the company honest and will minimize patronage, while encouraging objective job performance evaluations and use of job standards.”

"Forces the company to purge useless and irrelevant data."

"Access will require the company to give extensive training to everybody who is responsible for submitting documents to the file, and it will create screening or audit activities to ensure that what goes in is adequate, complete, and fair, and complies with government and company rules."

"Outdated, irrelevant, or erroneous information will be brought to the attention of the company and will be removed or corrected. Our experience is that the costs to the company are minimal, while the accuracy of the records is considerably increased by this procedure."

The 30 percent who cited negative impacts when employees had access to their files believed that such access would result in less accuracy and poorer evaluations. They also felt that such access would increase the costs of doing business, encourage management to behave clandestinely, and create less trust. Here are some of their comments:

"Access will invite problems of all kinds and a constant parade to the personnel office."

• "In most cases, employees would challenge their file's contents."

• "It would cause constant bickering. It would be a field day for the malcontents! Nevertheless, I believe employees should have the right to see their records."

• "Information contained therein may be misinterpreted or misunderstood."

• "Candid opinions would be modified because of possible legal, labor, or personal attack."

• "Most managers are too weak to tell an employee face to face what they really think. Now that employees can see their records, managers will not tell the truth for the files either, and more weak people will be promoted."

• "Access will increase the drift towards socialism. First, it tempers the candor of information that super

KNOWLEDGE OF CURRENT COMPANY PRACTICES visors are willing to write regarding their employees. Second, it permits employees to establish causes for grievance complaints and unfair labor practices. Third, it requires consistency of approach toward all employees." • "Access will create two sets of files-unofficial and official."

"It will cause a loss of productivity by allowing an additional avenue for grievances and time off to examine records."

"Companies will have to provide qualified staff to explain reports and analyses to employees, thus adding costs to running the business.”

Managers were also asked whether their companies had procedures to ensure the accuracy of personal information held about their employees. Forty-two percent indicated that their companies had such procedures; 28 percent stated they did not; and 30 percent were uncertain. Managers who stated their firms had procedures represented all sizes of organizations. In response to a separate question, 84 percent of the respondents stated they believed that their firms kept employee records free from hearsay and secondhand information.

When the managers were asked to state what specific procedures were used to ensure accuracy, responses fell into two major categories. The most frequent response indicated some form of supervisory audit of employee records. The other major response was permitting or requiring employees to inspect their records. In some companies, employees were asked to review their records with their supervisors and to note their agreement by initialing a review form. Other employees were asked to review their records (usually once a year) and submit any corrections they felt were needed. Other company polices restricted the placement of subjective information in any employee's file, the use of computers to store and audit information, and a rule that all nega tive information must be discussed with the employee.

The issue of permitting employees to control the release of information outside the organization is much less clear-cut. Although many privacy advocates believe that an employee's consent should be obtained before information is released outside the corporation, only 47 percent of the respondents stated that their companics had written rules or procedures for this. Thirtynine percent said their companies had no such rules or procedures. However, a significant discrepancy appeared among respondents employed by different sizes of