Productivity Paranoia: How to Track Output Without Killing Trust

When offices emptied in 2020, something else quietly disappeared: the ability to watch people work.

In response, companies filled the gap with software. Screens were monitored, keystrokes counted, mouse movements tracked. Some firms went further—recording webcams, flagging inactivity during bathroom breaks, even asking staff to explain silent Slack statuses.

Today, the backlash is in full swing. Workers are pushing back—quietly or not. Demand for “mouse jiggler” software and devices, designed to simulate activity and avoid surveillance triggers, has exploded. The phrase now sees over 33,000 monthly searches in the US alone.

But this didn’t lead to a huge boost in productivity. Instead, it created something called "productivity paranoia"—a growing fear among managers that if they couldn't see the work, it wasn't getting done.

Today, the backlash is in full swing. But the question remains: how do you track performance without damaging trust?

The Fear Behind the Surveillance

At the center of this paranoia is a simple fear: the fear of falling behind, of having lazy employees, and of losing control. "When I’m coaching executives, we talk a lot about shifting from monitoring to meaningful connection," said Bronwen Sciortino, Simplicity Expert and author. She clarifies her point by adding that "constant checking sends a message that you don’t trust your people—even if that’s not your intention.”

The irony is that this fear often causes the very disengagement managers were trying to prevent. The need to monitor everything suggests a lack of trust. And when people feel mistrusted, they tend to stop giving their best.

As Jennifer Maxson, a leadership coach, put it, "When your team can see that your productivity tracking is coming out of support rather than micro-managing, it can help team morale."

If your first reaction to remote work is to install keystroke trackers, you’re not improving productivity. You’re telling your team you don’t believe they will work unless they are watched.

Meike Bettscheider, an executive coach, observes this dynamic most acutely in times of uncertainty. “The instinct is to control — to check in more, monitor more, push harder,” she notes.

This instinct, however, is a mistake. A manager’s own anxiety, not a real drop in performance, is often what starts the cycle of watching people too closely. As Ms. Bettscheider puts it, the real shift comes from leaders who “let go of monitoring every move and start building real presence.”

The Antidote: A Culture of Collaborative Clarity

If paranoia is the problem, the solution is not more control, but a new kind of relationship between manager and employee. This requires moving from a top-down, oversight-based model to a transparent, trust-based partnership. The most effective leaders, it seems, have already begun this change.

Tracking is not for watching people, but for finding where teams are having problems, where support is needed, and, most importantly, for celebrating achievements. This is a simple but powerful change: it goes from a tool of control to a resource for empowerment.

Ketan Dattani, a CEO, explains that the first step is to be transparent about the purpose of tracking. "When managers explain the purpose behind tracking productivity, it shifts from being perceived as micromanagement to becoming a constructive tool," he says.

This is a subtle but powerful change: it moves from a tool of control to a resource for empowerment.

'The phrase "mouse jiggler" now sees over 33,000 monthly searches in the US alone'

This new model is built on working together to set goals. Jennifer Maxson advises managers to let team members create agendas for their one-on-one meetings. This “allows them to bring up areas where they have questions or needs.”

Involving teams in setting goals and metrics creates a sense of ownership and accountability that surveillance can never create. Tayba Azim, a psychotherapist, refers to this as co-designing “clear, shared goals” that are “rooted in their values and strengths.” This process, she believes, connects productivity to a larger purpose and encourages people to take pride in their work.

From Micromanagement to Empowerment

The next key to this new approach is a strong focus on results rather than activity. Helen Lewis, a director in the marketing industry, notes that "micromanagement kills creativity for everyone." Her solution is simple: "We use shared project trackers where everyone can see what’s been done and what’s coming up, so productivity is transparent without being invasive.”

By focusing on what needs to be done and when, managers give their teams the freedom and trust to work in a way that suits them best. This approach, as Ms. Lewis found, gets more done when "people feel seen, trusted, and supported.”

If your first reaction to remote work is to install keystroke trackers, you’re telling your team you don’t believe they will work unless they are watched.

In this model, tracking is not a punishment but a tool for helping each other. Shona Hamilton, an HR consultant, highlights the importance of using productivity tools to “maintain transparency.”

However, the key lies in how you respond to the data. “When you see a dip, don't focus on what the team have done wrong or failed at, understand why productivity has dipped and be supportive,” she advises.

This shift from punishment to understanding is the sign of a healthy, high-performing culture. It shows that a drop in output might mean someone is facing a problem, doesn’t have the right tools, or is dealing with a personal issue—all of which require empathy and support, not suspicion.

The Long-Term Reward of Trust

The ultimate benefit of this trust-based model is not just less managerial paranoia, but a significant boost to a company's most important asset: its people. A culture built on trust creates a positive cycle. When leaders trust their teams, employees feel respected. When employees feel respected, they are more engaged, more loyal, and more willing to take ownership of their work.

Bronwen Sciortino describes the ideal leader as someone who is “calm, clear, and consistent.” When a leader acts this way, their team will follow their lead.

The result is a more resilient and productive workforce. This is not about being a "soft" manager; it is a smart choice for the long term. The quick gains from surveillance are often fake, hiding the deeper problems of disengagement and anger. The long-term reward of trust, however, is a team that is not only productive, but also creative, tough, and truly committed to a shared success.

In the end, the era of "productivity paranoia" is a passing trend—a sign of old management styles struggling with modern work. As the world moves beyond the factory floor, so must its managers. T

he future of work will not be won by those who watch the closest, but by those who trust the most.