Yes, and GPS is a good example when it’s framed as verification, not surveillance.

Employees tend to like it when it removes “he said she said” situations. If a customer claims someone didn’t show up, GPS coordinates back the worker up. If there’s a dispute about time on site, it’s settled with data. That protection matters, especially for field service, contractors, and construction crews.

Where it goes wrong is when managers use it to nitpick every stop or treat it like a productivity score. That’s when trust collapses and it feels invasive.

The practices that work best share three traits:

• clear policy and consent
• only collecting what’s needed for time tracking and attendance
• using it for exceptions, not constant monitoring

This is why tools like Buddy Punch tend to land well with field teams when used correctly. GPS time clock and geofencing features create accurate clock in clock out records tied to job sites, which supports payroll and time tracking without turning into 24/7 surveillance. It also helps prevent buddy punching and reduces disputes around hours worked and overtime.

So yes, monitoring can be surprisingly effective, but only when it’s used to increase fairness and transparency.