HR Frontiers with Senyo M Adjabeng: Data privacy and ethics in an evolving HR landscape

A quiet revolution is underway in the heart of Ghana.  It is not marked by the clatter of machinery or the fervour of a sales pitch, but by the silent hum of servers and the discreet click of a mouse.  Human Resource Management in Ghana is undergoing a profound digital transformation.

From e-recruitment platforms and digital CV repositories to biometric clock-in systems, cloud-based performance management tools, and employee monitoring software, the modern Ghanaian workplace is a prolific generator of personal data.

This shift, while driving efficiency and strategic insight, has thrust upon us a critical and complex imperative – the urgent need to establish robust frameworks for data privacy and ethics in HR management.  The question is no longer if we collect data, but how we steward it, protect it, and ethically wield it in the service of both organisational goals and human dignity.

The context of this challenge is uniquely Ghanaian, situated at the intersection of global digital trends and local socio-cultural realities.  The passage of the Data Protection Act, 2012 (Act 843) was a landmark step, positioning Ghana as a regional leader in recognising the right to privacy.  The Act established the Data Protection Commission (DPC) and laid down principles for the fair processing of personal data.

Yet, the journey from legislative enactment to ingrained organisational practice is a long one.  In many Ghanaian organisations, HR data practices remain rooted in an era of paper files and informal trust, now awkwardly superimposed on digital systems.

Employee data, national ID numbers, bank details, medical records, performance appraisals, disciplinary history, and even real-time location data, flows into digital repositories, often without clear transparency, defined retention periods, or rigorous security protocols.  The ethical dilemma is palpable.  This data holds the key to unlocking talent potential, streamlining operations, and mitigating risks, but it also holds the power to discriminate, manipulate, and cause irreparable harm if misused.

The Data Protection Commission (DPC) of Ghana stands as the central and independent statutory body under the Data Protection Act, 2012 (Act 843) to oversee the implementation and enforcement of data protection law in the country. Its role is multifaceted, encompassing regulation, enforcement, education, and advisory functions, making it the guardian of the fundamental right to privacy as it pertains to personal data. In essence, the DPC serves as the rule-maker, watchdog, educator, and arbiter in Ghana’s evolving data ecosystem.

At its core, the DPC functions as the primary regulator.  It is responsible for developing and issuing detailed regulations, guidelines, and codes of practice that provide the practical framework for compliance with Act 843.  These instruments translate the law’s broad principles into actionable steps for entities known as data controllers and processors, which include businesses, government agencies, NGOs, and employers.

By setting these standards, the DPC provides clarity on issues such as data security requirements, conditions for valid consent, procedures for handling data breaches, and the lawful transfer of data outside Ghana.  This regulatory function is crucial for creating a predictable and standardized environment for data processing across all sectors of the economy.

A critical and highly visible role of the DPC is that of enforcer and investigator. The Commission is empowered to monitor compliance with the law, both proactively and in response to complaints. It has the authority to conduct audits and investigations into the data processing activities of any organization.

When violations are found, the DPC wields significant enforcement powers. These include issuing warnings, enforcement notices demanding specific corrective actions, imposing substantial administrative fines, and in severe cases, pursuing criminal prosecution through the courts.

To foster a culture of accountability, the DPC administers a data controller registration regime.  While not all data controllers are required to register, the Act empowers the DPC to designate categories that must.  Many organizations that process data as a core part of their operations, including certain financial institutions, telecom companies, and large-scale employers, are expected to formally register with the Commission.

This process creates a register of accountable entities, facilitates oversight, and signals to the public which organizations are recognized as data controllers under the law. The DPC maintains this register and ensures that registered entities comply with their ongoing obligations.

In the realm of dispute resolution, the Commission serves as an initial arbiter.  Individuals who believe their data protection rights have been infringed upon can lodge a complaint with the DPC.  The Commission will then investigate the complaint and attempt to facilitate a resolution between the parties.

This provides an accessible, often faster, and less costly alternative to immediate court action for resolving data privacy grievances.  The DPC’s decisions in such matters carry significant weight and can be enforced.  The role of Ghana’s DPC is comprehensive and dynamic.  It is not merely a punitive body but an institution designed to shepherd stakeholders towards a digital future built on transparency and trust.

The ethical recruitment funnel presents the first critical juncture.  Today, a job applicant in Ghana may submit a CV online, their data instantly parsed by an Applicant Tracking System (ATS).  Their social media profiles are often scrutinised, a practice known as ‘cyber-vetting’ which can reveal protected attributes like religious beliefs, pregnancy, or union affiliations.

While intended to assess cultural fit, this unregulated digging raises serious ethical questions about relevance, consent, and bias.  Furthermore, the collection of excessive personal information at the application stage, details far beyond what is necessary for an initial screening, has become commonplace.

Under Act 843, the principle of “minimisation” demands that data collected be adequate, relevant, and not excessive.  Ethically, it demands respect for the candidate’s privacy from the very first interaction, setting a tone of trust and professionalism.

Upon employment, the data relationship intensifies.  Biometric data for attendance, often using fingerprints or facial recognition, is collected.  Email and communication tools are monitored for security and productivity.

Performance metrics are quantified and analysed.  The ethical detail shifts to transparency and proportionality.  Employees have a right to know what data is being collected, for what explicit purpose, how long it will be stored, and who will have access to it.

The concept of “proportionality” is vital – is the level of surveillance, such as constant keystroke monitoring, proportionate to the risk it seeks to manage, or does it create a culture of distrust and anxiety?  The Ghanaian workplace, with its strong communal undertones, can be particularly eroded by a sense of invisible, omnipresent monitoring.

Ethical HR management requires clear policies that are communicated not as edicts but as part of a mutual covenant of responsibility and protection.  Perhaps the most sensitive arena is that of employee health data, especially with the increased focus on wellness programmes and the lingering lessons from pandemic-era health checks.

Genetic information, HIV status, mental health records, and disability details are categories of especially sensitive data under Act 843, requiring higher standards of protection.

The ethical line is distinct.   Data collected for a corporate wellness initiative must not become a tool for profiling or covertly identifying individuals deemed “high risk” or potentially costly.  The ethical HR leader must be the custodian of this sensitive information, ensuring it is used only for its stated, benevolent purpose and guarded with the highest security, separate from general personnel files.

The challenges are compounded by cultural factors.  In a society where relationships and informal networks are paramount, there can be a tendency to view data informally – a friend in HR might be asked to “just check” something on an employee’s file.  This cultural informality clashes directly with the formal requirements of confidentiality and access control mandated by data privacy principles.

Furthermore, a relative lack of awareness among employees about their data rights, the right to access, correct, or even request deletion of their data, can create a power imbalance.  Ethical HR must, therefore, embark on a mission of education, empowering employees as informed stakeholders in their own data ecosystem.

Ethical HR management requires clear policies that are communicated not as commandments but as part of a mutual covenant of responsibility and protection.  The future of work in Ghana depends not just on the data we collect, but on the wisdom and ethics with which we govern it.

So, what is the path forward for the Ghanaian HR strategist?  It begins with a mindset shift, viewing personal data not as an organisational asset to be exploited freely, but as a sacred trust borrowed from the employee.

Practical steps must follow. First, organisations must conduct a comprehensive data audit for their HR function.  What data is collected?  Where is it stored?  Who has access?  What is the legal basis for each processing activity?  This map is the foundational document.  Second, robust, clear, and accessible data privacy policies must be developed and communicated in plain language, not legalese.  These policies should cover the entire employee lifecycle, from recruitment to exit.

Third, invest in security.  This includes both technical measures (encryption, access controls, secure servers) and organisational measures (training for HR staff, strict confidentiality clauses, clear protocols for data sharing with third parties like insurers or pension managers).

And finally, is the cultivation of an ethical data culture.  This is  and must be leadership-driven.  It means that when faced with a decision, say on implementing a new monitoring software or using analytics to identify employees at risk of leaving, the first questions are ethical – Do we have informed consent? Is this proportionate?  Could this have a discriminatory effect?  Are we being transparent?

The opportunity for Ghana is immense.  By getting data privacy and ethics right in HR, we do more than avoid fines.  We build workplaces rooted in transparency, fairness, and respect.  We foster innovation because employees in trusted environments are more engaged and creative.  We position Ghanaian companies as responsible players in the global digital economy, attracting investment and partnerships.  The invisible ledger of employee data is being written every day.

The charge for HR leaders, business strategists, and policymakers is to ensure that every entry in that ledger is made with integrity, guarded with diligence, and ultimately used to build not just more efficient businesses, but better, more respectful, and more human workplaces for the Ghanaian of today and tomorrow.  The future of work in Ghana depends not just on the data we collect, but on the wisdom and ethics with which we govern it.

The post HR Frontiers with Senyo M Adjabeng: Data privacy and ethics in an evolving HR landscape appeared first on The Business & Financial Times.

Read Full Story