How digital micromanagement is reshaping work—and mental health

At her third-floor desk in Cyber Hub, Gurugram, Divya Bhaskar opens Telegram. A new message blinks before she can sip her coffee.

“Did you send the client update? What about the 9:30 am agenda? Upload the slides before 9:10 am, please. And rename the file. Also, I’ll be reviewing every email from now on.”

It’s from her manager—her eighth message before 9:05 am.

Bhaskar, a 27-year-old product analyst at a mid-sized SaaS company, used to love her job. Now, she dreams of quitting weekly. “I have a master’s from the University of Delhi. I am extremely cooperative because I believe in hard work. But I spend more time justifying my existence than creating value. I feel like a cog with a surveillance tag.”

The unrelenting weight of the watch

Digital micromanaging triggers high cortisol levels, a stress hormone linked to anxiety, burnout, and even depression,” says Dr Jasmine Arora, consultant, clinical psychologist at Artemis Hospitals. Unlike traditional micromanagement, which might occur through occasional desk visits, digital micromanagement is relentless and invisible.

The psychological toll of such round-the-clock surveillance is profound. Employees, especially in remote environments, report an omnipresent sense of being watched. “Employees are surveilled around the clock by keystroke monitors, time tracking applications, and real-time dashboards,” says Dr Arora. It also erases boundaries, making it difficult to disconnect mentally from work and heightening the risk of technostress and occupational burnout.

Ravichandran Venkatraman, an educationist and social enterprise leader, echoes this concern. “The remote work boom triggered by the pandemic led to an explosion of employee surveillance tools. Employers, unable to ‘see’ their teams, turned to software that ‘quantifies’ productivity—often equating presence with performance.” But he warns: “Employee surveillance can have several detrimental effects on the workforce… contributing to cognitive fatigue and burnout.”

 

Fear in the brain, fatigue in the body

What happens neurologically when someone feels constantly monitored, even if they’re meeting expectations?

“The part of their brain that handles fear and danger gets activated. This leads to a stress response, releasing cortisol, which, over time, impacts memory, concentration, and emotional stability. Even high performers aren’t spared. Rather than motivating, their brains remain in a place of hypervigilance, draining mental energy and creativity,” explains Dr Arora.

This hypervigilance doesn’t turn off when the laptop shuts down. Many remote workers describe the lingering sensation of “being watched” even when they’re offline. It’s a state of hypervigilance. Dr Arora adds, “Over time, this drains energy, weakens focus… and induces depersonalisation, meaning that employees feel disconnected from the work they do and themselves as a means of managing excessive stress.”

 

The trust deficit

At its core, digital micromanagement signals a deep and damaging lack of trust.

“Excessive monitoring sends a loud message: ‘We don’t trust you,’” says Venkatraman. “This breaks down psychological safety—the core ingredient of high-performing teams.” He points to evidence from Google’s Project Aristotle, which found that trust and psychological safety, not micromanagement, are what drive team success.

Dr Arora elaborates on the psychological consequences of this distrust: “When trust is lost, productivity is all about seen activity and not actual outcomes. This can develop a survival culture, wherein employees focus more on avoiding errors than on innovation.”

For younger workers, raised in surveillance-heavy education systems, this normalisation of constant observation can have long-term effects. “Such constant monitoring can lead to learned helplessness and lower motivation, which makes true productivity more difficult to attain,” says Dr Arora.

 

Management’s own anxiety loop

Interestingly, this obsessive need to track every minute may itself be a sign of managerial distress. “The desire to monitor employees minute by minute can be viewed as a sign of managerial worry,” Dr Arora explains. “It stems from intolerance of ambiguity and fear of loss of control… Sadly, this increases anxiety for everyone involved and harms team morale.”

The cost of this surveillance culture is not just emotional—it’s tangible. “A 2023 Microsoft Work Trend Index revealed that a substantial 41 per cent of employees who feel excessively monitored consider leaving their jobs,” notes Venkatraman.

Where innovation goes to die

Creativity, innovation, and risk-taking are the first casualties in a culture of surveillance. “As employees know every step is monitored, they will play it safe and refrain from new ideas,” Dr Arora warns. “This anxiety about making errors constrains creative thinking… monitoring every click transforms a workplace into a stressful environment, destroying the boldness and freedom that fuel real advancement.”

Venkatraman agrees: “Surveillance shifts employee priorities from genuine output to simply being marked as present, encouraging individuals to prioritise ‘looking busy’ rather than engaging in meaningful work.”

 

Can companies choose a better way?

Despite the bleak outlook, both experts believe there’s hope—if companies are willing to choose trust over control.

“To design a psychologically safe online work environment,” Dr Arora advises, “the first non-negotiable is trusting more than tracking. Second, clear boundaries must be respected… Allow people to disconnect guilt-free. Third, promote open communication without fear.”

Venkatraman suggests organisations adopt outcome-focused KPIs and flexible deliverables. “Leaders should prioritise check-ins, not checkups… replacing surveillance with regular one-on-one conversations,” he says. He also cites innovative strategies such as Atlassian’s transparent project boards and Netflix’s “freedom and responsibility” model as examples of performance without policing.

As data privacy regulations tighten across the globe—from India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 to Europe’s GDPR—organisations are being forced to justify surveillance practices. But legislation aside, the real question remains: Will companies use tech to empower or police?

“The organisations that choose trust,” says Venkatraman, “will win talent, loyalty and innovation in the long run.”

 

All images:  Pexels 

Also read: The early 2000s never really ended

Also read: Foreign films showcased at Cannes that truly moved us