[Amadou]

I skimmed the research paper and I don't think it says what the Atlantic article claims. It looks like the paper's authors think making employee-theft less cost-effective caused employees to make up the difference in their income by working harder on tasks that also generated income for the company. That doesn't mean they worked harder, just that they spent the same effort in different areas.

Assuming their model is even correct (I didn't see an attempt to test the model itself in this paper) that would mean jobs which are not associated with easy theft would not benefit from getting the big brother treatment.

But that's just my evaluation based on skimming it.