If you are considering workforce tracking, someone on your team will object. Most objections are reasonable. Here are the common ones and the honest answers.
"Is it even legal in India?"
India has no statute that bans or specifically authorises employee monitoring. The DPDP Act, 2023 governs the personal data it produces, with most obligations applying from around May 2027 under the DPDP Rules, 2025. Contracts, notices and IT policies matter too. Read employee monitoring in India: what is legal and take legal advice for your situation.
"People will quit."
Covert or punitive monitoring does damage trust. Disclosed, role-proportionate tracking that employees can see is a different thing. Roll it out with notice, a pilot and a feedback channel — see rolling out monitoring without attrition.
"It is surveillance."
It can be. The line is purpose, proportionality and transparency — see monitoring vs surveillance. Kyrospect does not do keylogging or hidden monitoring, and every employee can view their own tracked records.
"Activity data does not measure output."
Agreed. Use it as context for conversations and billing evidence, not as a performance score.
"Screenshots will capture sensitive data."
They can. Use them only where needed, enable privacy blur (a workspace-level on/off toggle in Kyrospect, not selective redaction), restrict who can view them and set retention.
"Why trust an early-access vendor?"
You should verify rather than trust. Kyrospect publishes what is shipped versus planned on its roadmap, its security practices and its DPA. It has no certifications or customer results to show yet, and says so. Pilot it with a small team first.
"We are too small for this."
Then use only Track Basic (free) for shift hours and skip screenshots. Add more only when there is a clear reason.