I understood it (I think), basically they were saying some people only do their job when their manager is around hence the monkeys and people aren’t that different after all.

Hope this helps

Its the specificity that's important. The general vibe is easy to interpret for commonly understood phrases, but often language complexity allows for subtle nuances that may be difficult to interpret if they are not properly used.

I would have thought:

> Well, some people are known for only doing their job when a manager is around. They behave similarly after all [to the monkeys].

Also, some days I wish there was a way to fix typos in restaurant menus.

Although I would still be flummoxed by "Pork Floss, Chinese Sausage Scorched Rice" (cơm cháy chà bông lạp xưởng)

Let’s break it down:

> some people is know

Some people are known

> for only do their job when a manager is around.

for only doing their job when a manager is around.

> They behave similar after all.

Their behavior is similar to the chimpanzees in the study.

Now, let’s put that all together:

> Some people are known for only doing their job when a manager is around. Their behavior is similar to the chimpanzees in the study.

That wasn’t so hard now, was it?

Edit: I see that the two sibling comments to mine interpreted it the same way.