Why tracking software destroys trust

Auto-clickers aren’t the problem. Distrust is. I read a post that a Filipino hire was caught on day one trying to cheat a time tracker with an auto-clicker. Yes, it’s dishonest. But let’s zoom out: Why was she being measured by clicks in the first place? In the Philippines, millions of professionals are treated like they can’t be trusted unless a software is watching their every move. Every mouse jiggle recorded. Every second logged. That isn’t management. It’s surveillance. And here’s the irony: When you monitor people like robots, they’ll start acting like robots or worse, looking for ways to beat the system. Not because they can’t work. But because the system itself whispers: we don’t trust you. At Team Up Now, we do it differently. We don’t track seconds, we track trust. If a teammate closes the books accurately, solves problems, and carries responsibility… Why would I care how many times their mouse moved? When you hire well, you don’t need Big Brother. You need partnership. 👉 Do you think Filipino professionals should keep tolerating time-tracking culture, or is it time we demand output-based trust instead?

When Surveillance Masquerades as Reform Anurag Behar’s recent piece is a timely reminder: cameras in classrooms do not create accountability, they destroy trust. Yet, in India today, surveillance technology is being normalised as an unquestioned “solution” in education. From biometric attendance to AI-driven monitoring, these tools are promoted without meaningful debate. The Karnataka government’s plan to install mobile-based Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven Facial Recognition Attendance System, linked to the Students Achievement Tracking System (SATS), in schools shows how far this dangerous trend has gone. Despite a detailed objection from Critical EdTech India (CETI) via Gurumurthy Kasinathan, there has been no reconsideration. Global research is clear. UNESCO (2023) warns that surveillance undermines dignity, trust, and equity. Districts in the US and EU have paused or banned such practices. In India, however, invasive EdTech is pushed without scrutiny. Accountability in education cannot be reduced to data streams and camera feeds. It emerges from professional ethics, supportive governance, and community trust. If technology is used, it must serve pedagogy, not control. The real question is this: Are we reforming education, or merely digitising its erosion? #EducationPolicy #EdTech #Surveillance #ChildRights #Teachers #IndiaEducation #CriticalEdTech #Accountability

45 minutes in, Pranav submitted his resignation, leaving 25 LPA on the table. Yes, even after securing that "dream" remote job. At first, I thought it was ridiculous. We had worked for this for nearly one and a half months. Countless resume rewrites. Mock interviews. Even a negotiation win. He was thrilled when he got the offer. I thought we had cracked it. But when he called me that day, he wasn’t excited. He was… restless. “They’re installing monitoring software on every device,” he said. I understood what he was saying. Pranav wasn’t chasing just the money. He was chasing autonomy. He wanted a remote job, not a surveillance contract. He wanted the freedom to solve problems in his own flow, not under the constant gaze of a digital overlord counting keystrokes. He wasn’t running away from hard work. He was running from mistrust. And honestly? I really get it. We glamorize high-paying jobs, but ignore what they cost mentally. What good is 25 LPA if your day starts with anxiety and ends with guilt? Here’s the uncomfortable truth: Surveillance culture is making brilliant minds quit. Not because they’re lazy—but because they value creativity, flow, and trust more than a paycheck. As a career coach, I want us to have better conversations. Not every resignation is about entitlement. Some are about integrity. If you’re a founder, manager, or HR leader reading this, ask yourself: Are we hiring humans or tracking bots? Are we building a culture of accountability—or fear? Do we want problem solvers—or process followers? Pranav left that job—but not the industry. He's now interviewing with companies that trust first and manage second. And me? I’ll keep fighting for professionals like him. Because a job should challenge you, not monitor you.

Is spying on remote employees ethical and why is the answer HELL NO? Remote work is dominating the job market. But... some employers are convinced their team is secretly binging Netflix when they should be on the clock. 🎬 Cue the rise of employee tracking software. These remote surveillance tools allow employers to monitor their WFH teams and their productivity. Some say they’re ethical if companies are transparent about them. Others say they cross the line, into a total invasion of privacy. The most popular tools are: → Employee monitoring software that logs keystrokes and auto screenshots → Time-tracking tools (Many include idle time detection. Take a 20-minute break? Report it and make it up.) → Monitoring chats, emails etc. All of these are incredibly counterproductive. Here’s why: 👀 It breeds trust and disloyalty. This means decreased morale, lower job satisfaction, and, ultimately, higher turnover. 🎨 It stifles creativity. Employees need the freedom to think outside the box and come up with new ideas without these heightened levels of scrutiny. 📊 It’s not backed by research. Remote workers are crushing it. Studies consistently show that remote crews are more productive than their in-office counterparts. They work longer hours, take fewer breaks, and are less likely to call in sick. So what’s the solution? It’s not complicated... 🏆 Focus on Outcomes, Not Hours Instead of tracking hours worked, measure results and the quality of their work. Are employees meeting deadlines? Did they hit their KPIs? Are they happy and engaged? Good. Their Spotify playlists or cat video breaks don’t matter. ✅ Set Clear Expectations Make sure your employees understand what’s expected of them — they’ll be more confident and productive. When good managers and leaders communicate these expectations openly, it shows trust in their team’s ability to deliver. 💻 Invest In the Right Remote Tools Plenty of productivity tools can help you track progress without invading privacy. Tools like Asana, Trello, Monday(dot)com, etc., provide an overview of everything your team needs to accomplish. Software like Toggl Track empowers your team to manage their own time effectively. Happy humans build thriving businesses — no robot could ever compete with that!

You don’t build high-performing teams by watching the clock. You build them by setting the direction and getting out of the way. But too often, we see the opposite. Time-tracking tools are everywhere. Daily check-ins that feel more like surveillance. Leaders who confuse visibility with accountability. It’s usually not about control. It’s about fear. Fear that things will slip if we don’t measure every hour. Fear that people won’t perform unless we’re watching. But here’s what that mindset really does: – It signals distrust  – It slows people down  – It pushes your best talent to look elsewhere Because great engineers, designers, and product folks?  They don’t want to be micromanaged.  They want to be mission-driven. The fix isn’t more oversight.  It’s more clarity. 🎯 Clear targets, not vague expectations  🧭 Shared goals, not task checklists  🙌 Consistent trust, not conditional freedom When people know what they’re working toward—and feel trusted to figure out how to get there - they don’t just work harder. They think better.  They move faster.  They stay longer. So, next time you think about adding a new tracker, ask yourself:  Is this solving a problem, or just signaling one? Great teams aren’t built by watching.  They’re built by believing.

Otter.ai got sued for secretly recording millions of conversations for AI training. The lawsuit isn't about privacy violations. It's about something every AI founder should fear. Otter recorded 1 billion meetings since 2016. Only hosts gave permission. Participants had no idea their voices were feeding machine learning models. One investor call transcript leaked post-meeting discussions. The deal died. Here's what terrifies me about this case. Most AI founders think training data collection is a technical problem. Wrong. It's a trust destruction machine. During a recent executive discussion a Fortune 500 CTO shared something chilling. "We discovered our AI vendor was using our internal meetings for model training. Everything we said about competitors, strategies, even layoff plans." They terminated the contract immediately. The real issue isn't legal compliance. It's enterprise buyer psychology. When your AI learns from conversations, buyers assume you're listening to theirs. When transcripts leak sensitive discussions, trust evaporates instantly. When participants discover they were unknowing data sources, word spreads fast. Most AI companies focus on model performance. They ignore data collection perception. Enterprise buyers don't just evaluate your technology. They evaluate your trustworthiness with their secrets. Three questions every AI founder must answer: Are your users explicitly consenting to training data collection? If a sensitive conversation leaked tomorrow, would it destroy customer relationships? Do enterprise buyers understand exactly how their data trains your models? Your breakthrough algorithm means nothing if buyers can't trust your data practices. Enterprise deals stalling because of data concerns? StratNorth builds AI sales infrastructure that enterprises actually trust. Happy to chat.

I was on HubSpot’s website for two minutes. Then I got added on LinkedIn. Two minutes after that, I got a call from a BDR. It felt a bit creepy. But it also worked. Because I had intent. Right now, GTM looks like this: Intent signal → Slack ping → Outreach trigger → Call booked. It’s fast. It’s efficient. It’s becoming default. Every B2B founder I speak to from Series A to Series D is running some version of this. Same tech stack. Same AI assistants. Same automation playbooks. But here’s the problem: The same stack leads to the same experience. And buyers? They’re not stupid. Soon, they’ll browse in private. They’ll block tracking scripts. They’ll read your blogs anonymously. And your perfectly timed SDR trigger won’t fire. Because there’s no signal. This is where founders fall into the trap: You optimise the tech, and forget the human. You follow the playbook, and lose the plot. What just about works today with AI intent… Will stop working the moment it becomes saturated (12 months max). But you know what doesn’t saturate? You. The founder. The face. The one with a POV, not just a playbook. The only real GTM moat left is brand built on trust. And trust doesn’t come from a cookie trail, it comes from consistent, visible leadership. So keep running the signals. But pair them with story. Build the outbound machine. But give it a soul. Because when everything else is automated… You’re the only variable they’ll remember.

Last night, I watched my niece get lost in her phone. She was deep into her favorite game, drawn in by an ad that seemed to know her better than she knew herself. "Marwa, how do they know exactly what I want...before I want it?" She didn’t click the ad but the ad clicked her. And that’s how I knew we’ve crossed a line. We're not just watching advertising evolve. We're watching consciousness being shaped. Look at what happened when Apple's App Tracking Transparency launched: Meta lost $14B in ad revenue. Why? → Their entire model relied on tracking users without consent → They prioritized data collection over user trust → When users got control, they choose privacy over convenience → Their targeting accuracy dropped 71% → As a result, advertisers pulled budgets when users got control But smart brands are already adapting: → Nike: Built community-first apps, saw 40% digital growth → Dove: Real beauty campaign drove 65% brand trust → Patagonia: Turned sustainability into $1.5B revenue The playbook is changing. 𝗦𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝘀: 1. Value over tracking 2. Trust over targeting 3. Authenticity over algorithms Apple's latest iOS 17.4 privacy features are about to make this gap even wider. - Enhanced privacy controls - Transparent data collection - User-first permissions The brands winning today aren't the ones with the most data. They're the ones people trust the most. Trust & privacy isn't just a metric-It's the new currency. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 - 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽𝘀 𝗼𝗿 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀? #DataPrivacy #BrandTrust #EthicalMarketing

Your chats are encrypted' But my keyboard knows what I want to say next. I was talking about brown shoes with my husband. Guess what showed up on ads the next day? Brown shoe ads. Convenient? Maybe. Creepy? Definitely. Costly for businesses? Absolutely. As a UX designer and privacy advocate, this bothers me. Where do we draw the line? → My messages aren't yours to analyze → My privacy isn't your growth strategy → My conversations aren't market research Let me share what most companies don't realize: Privacy violations can kill your business. Meta paid $𝟭.𝟯 𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻 for privacy violations Amazon faced a $𝟳𝟴𝟭 𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻 fine Facebook paid $𝟮𝟳𝟱 𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻 Google? $𝟭𝟲𝟵 𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻 settlement All for crossing the privacy line. Your Startup can loose everything because: → Users found out their data was oversold → Trust was broken by hidden tracking → Personalization went too far As a product designer and business owner, here's where I draw the line: The Privacy-First Framework I use: → Give users control to opt out easily → Only collect what you'll actually use → Make data collection obvious, not hidden → Delete data when you don't need it anymore Ask yourself: "Would I be comfortable explaining our data practices to my users face-to-face?" If the answer is no, you've crossed the line. Quick ethical guidelines: → Show users what you know about them → Be transparent about data sharing → Let them delete their data easily → Make 'Off' the default setting Because here's the truth: Users will forgive a bad design But they never forget a privacy breach Whether you're a designer or business owner/decision maker, you should have this talk with other stakeholders. P.S. What's your take on privacy vs personalization? Where do you draw the line?"

7 years ago, I received the results of an all-employee survey. It stated: 🚨Your business unit lacks trust. 🚨 It was a blow to my ego, but deep down, I knew there was a larger problem to such an overly simplified statement. This set me on a learning journey to understand what destroys trust and what builds trust. I discovered that numerous hierarchy and management practices will destroy trust - quickly. Here are several, often adopted, policies used to “safeguard” the company that quietly and softly, kills trust: 📉 Mandatory time clocks suggest that the company does not trust employees to manage their time responsibly, creating an environment of micromanagement and control. 📉 Internet usage policies that monitor or restrict access to certain websites, assuming employees will misuse their internet privileges. 📉 Email monitoring to check for inappropriate content or non-work-related communication, implying that employees cannot be trusted to use email responsibly. 📉 Micromanagement of breaks by enforcing rigid schedules and limiting the number of breaks, suggesting employees cannot manage their own time effectively. 📉 Attendance tracking for remote work using tools to track login/logout times and activity levels, indicating a lack of trust in employees' ability to work independently. 📉 Pre-approval for expenses requiring detailed approval for even minor expenses, showing that the company does not trust employees to make prudent financial decisions. 📉 No work-from-home flexibility rigidly enforcing office presence despite the feasibility of remote work, suggesting a lack of trust in employees' productivity outside the office environment. 📉 Limited access to resources restricting access to certain tools, information, or company spaces, indicating a belief that employees cannot be trusted with these resources. 📉 Overly detailed reporting requirements requiring exhaustive daily or weekly reports on activities and progress, implying that employees cannot be trusted to manage and report on their work effectively. Practices like these highlight a problem: a lack of trust that cripples the organization, costing your organization untold revenue. This led me to a transformative journey of learning and growth.     ✅ I developed a shared definition of trust within my team by encouraging them to write down and discuss their definitions.     ✅ I fostered open, vulnerable conversations among team members to build understanding and empathy.     ✅ I implemented consistent actions to build and maintain trust through effective communication and setting clear expectations. Trust has become a cornerstone of my leadership. The results I have witness since that fateful day 7 dreadful years ago? 📊 Improved team cohesion, higher employee satisfaction, and significant revenue growth. Trust impacts performance and your P&L statements. Is your team built on a foundation of trust?