'We've heard the feedback...' Microsoft 365 axes per-user productivity monitoring after privacy backlash
- Reference: 1606852666
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/12/01/productivity_score/
- Source link:
Following outcry from subscribers and privacy campaigners, the Windows giant has [1]now vowed to wind back the functionality so that it no longer produces scores for individual users, and instead just summarizes the output of a whole organization. It was feared the dashboard could have been used by bad bosses to measure the productivity of specific employees using daft metrics like the volume of emails or chat messages sent through Microsoft 365.
When we looked at a preview of the feature [2]in May , Microsoft's director of product marketing Melissa Grant and corporate veep Brad Anderson were at pains to insist the software goliath wasn't in the business of closely monitoring their customers' employees. Anderson [3]last year advocated using telemetry to detect iffy connectivity, poor configuration, and garbage hardware, to identify ways to improve staff productivity as opposed to measuring individual workers' actions.
Privacy campaigner flags concerns about Microsoft's creepy Productivity Score [4]READ MORE
However, when Productivity Score made its debut in Microsoft 365, punters and privacy warriors alike were [5]alarmed at the granularity of its data capture. While Microsoft insisted the technology was all about painting a picture of the way a whole organization uses Microsoft 365 resources and services – such as number of documents shared via OneDrive and emails created overall – Austria-based digital-rights activist Wolfie Christl told us: "The system clearly does monitor employee activities."
Indeed, a glimpse at Microsoft's own [6]promotional video for the dashboard – which is still up at time of writing – showed metrics collected by Microsoft 365 down to the individual level: Amy sent emails over 22 days, Tom used Yammer for three days, etc. It's something that could be switched off by an administrator yet still potentially available nonetheless.
"We've heard the feedback," said Jared Spataro, corporate veep for Microsoft 365 on Tuesday, before announcing the following changes to head off the brewing privacy storm:
We’re removing user names from the product. During preview, we added a feature that showed end-user names and associated actions over a 28-day period. In response to feedback over the last week, we’re removing that feature entirely. Going forward, the communications, meetings, content collaboration, teamwork, and mobility measures in Productivity Score will only aggregate data at the organization level—providing a clear measure of organization-level adoption of key features. No one in the organization will be able to use Productivity Score to access data about how an individual user is using apps and services in Microsoft 365.
...and...
we’re modifying the user interface to make it clearer that Productivity Score is a measure of organizational adoption of technology—and not individual user behavior. Over the last few days, we’ve realized that there was some confusion about the capabilities of the product. Productivity Score produces a score for the organization and was never designed to score individual users. We’ll make that clearer in the user interface and improve our privacy disclosures in the product to ensure that IT admins know exactly what we do and don’t track.
Yes, what could have given possibly given anyone the idea, not least any confusion, that Productivity Score was "designed to score individual users?"
[7]
Still from Microsoft's video promoting its Productivity Score dashboard ... Click to enlarge
The above image is from Microsoft's YouTube video touting the features of Productivity Score, including a breakdown of people's use of email and chat.
"We always strive to get the balance right," Spataro continued, "but if and when we miss, we will listen carefully and make appropriate adjustments."
By the way, APIs [8]exist to pull all manner of data out of the Microsoft Graph and, while Productivity Score will now work at the level of an organization rather than down to the individual level, the furore has highlighted just how much data is lurking beneath the surface in Redmond's super-cloud. ®
Get our [9]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/blog/2020/12/01/our-commitment-to-privacy-in-microsoft-productivity-score/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2020/05/01/microsofts_productivity_score/
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/28/brad_anderson_putting_the_boot_into_boot_times/
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2020/11/26/productivity_score/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2020/11/26/productivity_score/
[6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8te3OmHnlg
[7] https://regmedia.co.uk/2020/12/01/screenshot_youtube_microsoft_productivity.jpg
[8] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/graph/social-intel-concept-overview#why-integrate-with-people-data
[9] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: I don't understand
Simple: it is a US organization run by an Indian. Both countries were workers' right are almost non-existent. Then they hit Europe - and found their "bright" idea could even be utterly illegal - and expose them to costly lawsuits if ever made available.
Re: I don't understand
I cringed then laughed. Pretty accurate.
Out of interest what are they typically monitoring? Should I prepare pointless email ping pong with a colleague?
Re: I don't understand
Honestly, when I first read about this "feature", what came to my mind was the Dilbert cartoon of a few years ago when, if my memory serves, the PHB announces that he'll be judging people based on how many questions they ask in meetings.
Cue Asok raising his hand in the next Staff and asking "Who else likes cheese?".
Re: I don't understand
I bet the process went like this:
Manager 1: I wonder whether we can get organizations using extra tools if we give them metrics and make it look like they're beneficial.
Manager 2: Yes, but it needs a catchy name to indicate that it's not a sales push. And maybe, if we can think of any, some actual useful features.
Manager 1: Well, the optimal use of our services should help with productivity. While paying us for extra services doesn't constitute optimal, the benefits to the customers, if any, are productivity related.
Manager 2: Productivity score. I like it. But what happens if someone adopts a tool, our score says they get extra points, but it doesn't roll out to anyone else. They might figure that out and cancel the thing that only one person uses.
Manager 1: Simple. We'll score all the users individually and show how other people can gain in "productivity". People who want the total productivity score will be able to see who's not using a feature yet and get them to do so.
[months later]
Manager 1: Why are all these privacy things coming up? This isn't really a privacy issue. It's just for sales.
Manager 2: I don't know. I mean you could theoretically extract information about communication frequency, but nothing about communication quality let alone noncommunication productivity. Using this to grade workers would be ridiculously idiotic.
Engineer: You are assigning sortable scores to individuals, calling it "productivity score", and you aren't expecting some crap manager somewhere to use this without understanding what it really means? Think it through.
Re: I don't understand
> How can an organisation make something like this and not predict the backlash?
The same could be said of many if not all of the siloed products that are so popular today, yet most of the time they seem to get away with it.
Good
Dear MS,
Please employ someone* with the ability to make rational appraisals of new 'features' before they are implemented.
* Obviously a marketing or business management background is an instant NO here as ethics and understanding of normal human behaviour is required.
"such as number of documents shared via OneDrive and emails created overall"
Well as metrics go, that must be one in the utter bollocks corner of the magic quadrant.
Weird metrics
I constantly get emails saying "It's been a quiet week" implying that I do no work, yet I never feel like I stop working... Also, I didn't ask Microsoft to rate my weeks so please in the future allow opt-in for this trash.
Thanks.
I don't understand
How can an organisation make something like this and not predict the backlash? It screams hubristic management and fearful staff.