Corporate Hubris?

16May08

           

     Today I read a puzzling article on www.ninemsn.com.au which was based on the increased use by company’s of a system called Voice Risk Analysis. I found it particularly interesting that the software company who made a the version of the system in question had the nerve to do so in the first place.

     The article tells “Software listens to the caller’s voice to detect changes that suggest they are under pressure or lying, and alerts the person taking the call.”

     Really?

     I believe I speak for every employee when saying that when we phone in sick it’s obvious that we feel under some degree of pressure. Speaking to the boss and explaining that you can’t come into work, knowing that they’ll be dissapointed and feel that you’ve let the team down, is an experience all of us would rather avoid if given the choice. The science behind this fact? The brain knows that we’re uncomfortable and this affects our vocal chords, just like a nervous karaoke singer, or like a comedian with stage fright.

      It’ll show.

     An article written about this very subject posted on an American website (The Language Guy) exemplifies why this extraordinarily expensive and wasteful project is neither ethical or reliable. It states:

     “The fact is, first, that pieces of voice risk analysis equipment are not “lie detectors.” They have much lower reliability than lie detectors and, as we all know, even lie detectors are not accepted in American courts as proving the truth or falsity of claims by defendants and witnesses.”

     So, speaking legally, how can any reputable business even consider employing a machine that basically operates on flawed technology?

     I’ll tell you how.

     A company operates on what is called “A bottom line.” This is common knowledge. The Bottom Line dictates that if something or someone does not conform to the company’s best interests, it is therefore a threat to the Bottom Line. When people call in sick, this creates an obvious dynamic. The employees seat is empty, thus affecting productivity, yet the Bottom Line (being the company’s treasure chest) is being dipped into, to pay the employee his sick leave entitlement.

     When this situation is true of several employees at once, The Bottom Line is therefore affected greatly. The company utilizes a tactic that forces the employee into a difficult choice. Come to work or get fired. Sick or not sick. That the company puts the decision making process in the hands of a machine implies that they do not genuinely care about the health of the employee. Rather, they pass the buck to the machine. Imagine all the call centres and offices around the country employing this logic. Never mind the legitimate doctor’s certificate, or even the obvious strain in your voice from being terribly ill. If the good little machine says you’re lying, then you’re lying. No ifs. No buts.

     If this is the future of the Australian workplace, I’d rather pick fruit.

    

      Yours sincerely,  -BJH

      

Filed under: Corporate Ethics   |  Leave a Comment
Tags: Corporate greed, Ethics