How Leaders Can Give Autonomy to Content Moderators

Autonomy and Psychological Wellbeing 

In organizational psychology, the concept of job autonomy has been regularly studied to understand its effect on psychological wellbeing. For those familiar with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model of occupational stress, job autonomy is understood as a resource in the psychosocial work environment which should “a) reduce strain associated with job demands, b) enhance the capacity of workers to achieve work goals and c) stimulate personal and professional growth, learning and development” (Clausen et al., 2021). 

We can define autonomy in the workplace as employees having some level of control over how they get work done, how they accomplish tasks, set deadlines and where or when they can work. Whilst the research demonstrates some mixed results in the association of job autonomy and psychological wellbeing, the overarching premise is that an optimal level of autonomy in the role can enhance workers’ wellbeing. Imagine it as an inverse U-shape or bell curve: where job autonomy is too low, psychological wellbeing decreases and where it is too high, the same is true; when it reaches an optimal level however, psychological wellbeing increases with autonomy (Clausen et al., 2021). 

We believe that leadership in Trust & Safety have a responsibility to assess psychosocial hazards in the workplace, much like occupational health and safety standards. Minimizing the risks of such hazards has impacts on absenteeism, presenteeism, overall job performance and retention. Content Moderators who are at higher risk of developing mental ill health and mental health difficulties require employers that understand these hazards and strategically implement risk mitigation tactics. Unfortunately, job autonomy is one hazard that can be sticky in content moderation. 

Why It’s a Sticky Problem in Human Moderation 

There are several reasons why job autonomy is a sticky problem in content moderation. Firstly, platform policies are designed to control user behavior. They keep users safe from harms and help guide moderators to make appropriate decisions. However, this means that moderators are forced to comply with strict rules the platform has developed, rather than relying on personal beliefs and value systems. This minimizes the amount of control over how they make their decisions. 

Secondly, the nature of moderation requires a 24/7/365 working model. To meet the operational demands of moderation – particularly for very large online platforms and search engines – someone must be reviewing cases at all times. This therefore limits the ability to offer flexible working hours which is an element of job autonomy. 

Thirdly and similar to the above, operational requirements often rely on moderators working onsite with no remote working options. Although this is generally understood to be a safeguarding technique to minimize potential exposure of egregious content to others in a home-working environment and creating psychological distance from the content, it is simply another area where the moderators lack control. 

Finally, operational and performance metrics are heavily measured for Content Moderators. This includes average handling times, accuracy in enforcing policy, daily productivity hours, and sometimes even total tickets or cases closed. Again, this is designed to keep users safe from harm but, limits the autonomy of moderators in the work environment. 

These are only some of the most prevalent barriers to job autonomy in content moderation work. Others can include being assigned to new projects without consultation, ineffective training methods, and requirements to work onsite rather than remotely. 

Small Changes, Big Impact 

Though there are challenges in supporting job autonomy for moderators, we must not forget that Trust & Safety professionals are adept at finding solutions! There are small changes leadership and organizations can make to increase job autonomy for your moderators which will have a positive impact on their psychological wellbeing, while continuing to keep your platform users safe from harm. 

Consider the below and adapt where needed: 

1. Listen to your moderators around policy and the decisions they are making. Holding regular meetings between policy developers and moderators can only improve the process. You might even consider having engineering teams sit in on meetings during new product launches as moderators will be the first to spot any gaps that can be addressed. 
2. Find where you can be flexible. For example, allowing moderators autonomy to choose when they take wellness breaks and meals, rather than mandating specific times. Keep in mind your diverse population, also. How can you be flexible around prayer times, religious occasions, family obligations, medical appointments, and more? 
3. Ensure that a clear rationale is laid out for moderators required to work onsite, and where possible, offer flexibility for hybrid working or make accommodations for remote working. Some adaptations could include having 1 dedicated day per week for moderators to work remotely on non-egregious workflows, in a rotational pattern. Other facilities such as privacy screens and headphones can be purchased for remote moderators who may be living with others in the home.
4. Lead with compassion. Understand and acknowledge the challenges that come with the role of moderator, especially around job autonomy. Provide opportunities for moderators to seek roles that provide more autonomy. Mentor them to build on their strengths and upskill for areas of improvement.
5. Recognize the strengths of your moderation teams at both the group and individual level. You might allow team members to choose their preferred workflows whilst balancing their level of exposure to highly egregious materials such as CSAM, TVEC, and SSI. Alternatively, you might seek volunteers for new projects rather than simply assigning them to a new team. 

Conclusion 

Job autonomy is a psychosocial hazard in the work environment which can have detrimental effects on psychological wellbeing. While Content Moderators may be faced with barriers in achieving optimal job autonomy, leadership in organizations can still take steps to enhance autonomy. By implementing small changes, organizations can improve the overall wellbeing of their Trust & Safety teams.