Interesting post.. thank you for sharing!
I believe that to what extent does the corporations’ fiduciary duty extend: thinking of the trend oof the “S” of ESG, it certainly can extend to monitoring and caring about employee’s well being. But question of privacy is certainly an important point to note. So I agree that the employees should have the discretion to not to disclose their information, but otherwise, I think it is ok for company (or a third party) to know the information to track and ensure their well-being.
I think this is a important initiative especially in this era. As people are commenting mostly on the positive sides, let me address the concerns of this point: we need to make sure that the gap is due to inequality, but not competency. For example, if they are taking an survey, it needs to stand on the basis that all woman employee are honestly answering the survey (i.e. not blaming on gender equality the consequences of their lack of performance). But the difficult point is, if the culture itself is men-oriented, you could kind of make an argument that the lack of performance is due to culture…
Very interesting post !
I agree that it doesn’t reveal the quality of the judgement. But as other classmates are commenting, I wonder whether it at least provide incentive to employees to do better, simply giving them the feeling that they are “looked and measured”.
The only thing that I am worried about of the product is, that I feel people gives bad scores (as well as good scores) regardless of the quality of what you are trying to measure. This concern could only be taken away if there are enough samples, but if not, it might be a problem.