.

←

→

Twitter Blocked, Facebook Banned, LinkedIn Locked

April 28th, 2009 | Business, Social Media, Social Networking


If we could spy out his monitor...

Those are common headlines these days it seems. Your company and mine are blocking just about every man of social networking and social media site. I’ve hedged about committing to lambasting this sort of policy. I’m a social networking addict.

My friend Phil Gerbyshak over at Slacker Manager has a different take though. Here’s a quote from the article Block New Media at Work.

We block these because we have no way of monitoring all the stuff people might say while they are using their work computer. I work for a financial services company, and we are required to keep a copy of EVERY piece of electronic communication our associates might send to their clients. And it’s not possible to do that right now, at least not easily, if we allow access to these sites.

It seems there’s another side to this issue. So often folks like me only look at what’s being denied to us; we fail to see how our very use of these tools could be harmful.

I don’t work for a financial company yet our company is just as concerned about negative interactions and keeping track of emails and such. Any appreciably large company is at risk for what they send out either verbally, in email, or by some odd chance video.

The only issue I have with this approach is that folks are free to use Twitter when they aren’t at work. They could just as easily bad mouth the company or its clients at those times. As a matter of fact, it’s likely they’ll be more inclined. Witness the recent spat of folks losing their jobs by stuff they posted when not at work.

So what’s your take? Block? Not block? Is this a political or legal issue? Moral issue? Challenge yourself on this issue.

Oh yeah, if you’re reading this at work, thank your HR department.

Similar Posts:

Tags: , , , , , ,

  • tinatangos
    Another way to look at it, is it if a lot of people are doing things on Facebook, etc., it slows down the company server and makes everything on the network slow down. When I was still in the corporate world, I remember everything would get quite slow at particular times of the day (when everybody seemed to be on break, using that time to check personal e-mail, play on Facebook, etc.)
  • If it were as simple as just logging keystrokes, or grabbing the feed, it would be one thing. We're also required to store all communications, in an easily searchable format, on the offchance a regulator or someone else wants to review it on a moment's notice.

    The key here is what folks do FROM A WORK PC. What you do from home, with your personal PC and your personal e-mail (as long as you don't say financially sensitive stuff) is on you. I've heard of folks from any number of firms who bring in a personal laptop to play on Facebook, Twitter, and whatever during the day. And that's fine by me.

    As long as we live in the most litigious country in the world, and as long as there is money to be made from folks NOT being responsible for themselves, restrictions like this will have their place.

    Awesome commentary here that has given me a LOT to think about! Wow!
  • Todd,

    There is alot to like in this blog post.

    Depending upon what you do, monitoring your employee's social media information can be very valuable. My wife worked for the YMCA where access was blocked which meant that the managers hiring staff could not do research on prospective employees such as checking their Myspace pages. The last thing you want is a camp counselor who has a myspace page with questionable content that might be viewed by campers or their parents.

    I think allowing it at work is like allowing the internet. Everything must be done in moderation. I personally use Twitter search to find many things related to my job and what I am working on. This would not be possible with just a general Google search.
  • We have a social media policy that looks a lot like those written by big software companies. In a nutshell, act responsibly - you will be held accountable for your actions. Most of our employees are virtual (including myself); my time from 8am until late in the evening is spent in a mix of work related/personal interactions and oftentimes those are one in the same (such as tweeting about the latest work-related outward-facing activities, or DM'ing a member with a quick question or vice versa).

    People need to respect their employers - they are paying your salaries, hopefully your health insurance, etc. They deserve to get the services they are paying for. Unfortunately there are a few folks lacking a common sense gene and end up doing foolish things. It's a shame that an entire workplace needs to suffer for the mistakes of a few.
  • Thanks for sharing. First I've heard from a virtual employee on this. Act responsibly seems like it should be enough doesn't it.

    Common sense is neither is the old saying. :)

    Yes, you're right about respecting your employer. Folks these days have nowhere near the appreciation I believe previous generations had for their job and their employer. I've gotten new found respect for mine lately.

    Who the heck said Internet access should be a right anyway?
  • Maybe this is naive of me, but if the issue is keeping a record of communications that are made by employees to clients (or prospective clients), and the company could stand to benefit from the employees using Twitter, for example, to communicate (as Karen pointed out is a distinct possibility), what's to stop the companies from just keeping an aggregate feed of all the Twitter streams from their employees? That way, every "tweet" sent out by an employee is sent to one "pot" and stored, and can be accessed if necessary.

    Granted, the DM feature of Twitter, or any other personal messages through Facebook/LinkedIn/Etc. get a bit more fishy, but if Twitter streams are public to the potential clients, they are also public to the employers...
  • You're correct. The company could require registration of a person's private account, or they could just discover them. Heck, it'd be just as easy for a company to watch for all traffic related to them that's happening online.

    They make tools for that already.

    Also, I'm not sure it's ethical to monitor an employee's Twitter stream on the off chance he/she might something negatively impacting to their employer.
  • In response to the ethics question, I argue that if it's public domain (like tweets are), the employer has every right to look at it, for whatever reason they want... Public is public. Is it unethical for a high school teacher to monitor students' Twitter feed on the off chance they'll use TwitPic to post a picture of them drinking underage? If it's public domain, it's your own fault for doing something you shouldn't say. An employee needs to know that if their twitter account makes any reference to the company they work for (even if it's in their bio or in a post in the blog that they list as their website), they speak as a representative of the company and are responsible for what they say.
  • Excellent argument about being in the public domain. Even if they didn't monitor it intentionally, they can still see what's said about them in that stream or streams.
  • Being that I use to be in the "IT dept" at one time in my past - IT can monitor anything - and the smaller the company you work at, the chances are they are.

    Kind of a terrible thing, but it does happen - ethical or not.
  • Rex,

    Oh yeah, in small shops, everything could be monitored. I know of some companies that literally track every key stroke. I guess they feel they need to.
  • Off topic perhaps, but I would think, that monitoring keystrokes would be unethical because monitoring keystrokes can give you a person's passwords... Just a thought.
  • Not at all off topic, and that would be an invasion of privacy. :)
  • Agreed. Not off topic.
  • Not really sure where the law falls on key stroke captures. I've not followed any court cases. Now I want to go look.
  • *whisper* Blog about what you find! :)
  • This is a great thread! I'd love to reply to each comment, as all are actually valid.

    The main point to remember is that when you work for some company - you are on their dime (or using their bandwidth). While there are ways around it, such as smart phone usage to tweet, check mail, browse, etc... I think the main point(s) to bring home are:

    1. Companies in 2009 need to really re-evaluate their internet usage policies - and with regard to that - what they block from their workers use during business hours.

    2. There is no right or wrong management technique as far as punish the one or punish all users. Re: one screw up, all punished - the team building 101 comment I just made.

    3. LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook/MySpace - are all tools that could be used to enhance a workers productivity.

    The last one gotcha, right? Seriously - if you work in a cubicle all day doing the same thing over and over - and you don't have time to check something else - you'll more than likely end up on the news one night in a most unflattering scene.

    Great thread, but for some reason this web site keeps crashing my browser. :(

    Rex
  • Lots of great feedback Rex. You're my star commenter today!

    Your #1 is so true. They are only hurting themselves if they keep those blinders on.

    Funny thing. I can't access Facebook, but our marketing guys can.
  • Making a policy for anything; time off, tardiness, etc simply because one or two individuals have abused it, is quite simply a manager who hasn’t the skills to deal with the individual who is abusing.

    If you have one person who consistently arrives late - do you punish everybody else with a memo that tardiness will be docked from their pay?

    Or do you find out the root cause of the abusing individuals tardiness?

    Hint: if you answered with the first part, you fail.
  • Elliot,

    Strong point. Why punish or restrict all when it's really a small percentage that would abuse the privilege. In my experience though, companies tend to over restrict rather than chance dealing with one abuse case. It must be easier from an HR perspective.

    Thoughts?
  • @Elliot @tojosan - I agree to some extent, but if your purpose is to build a team, than that thought will fail. In order to build a team, one screws up, you all get punished.

    Team building 101. :)
  • I'm more of a ditch the one off guy than punish the whole team. Peer pressure doesn't work so well as it used to. HR has really got us over a barrel with pushing our peers around.
  • So would I, ever read what Seth wrote recently concerning the "one guy that the company needs" - but is a pain in the a$$ otherwise? :)
  • I've dealt with those 'one guy' situations before. :)
  • A friend of mine is a financial planner with a large national company that just went through a few buyouts. All three of the companies involved had the same policy of not allowing their financial planners to use social media as a networking tool. Not even if they were doing it from home on their own time.

    I can't believe that a financial planner is supposed to be able to network for new clients without being on LinkedIn or Facebook. Let alone Twitter. But, he can't. He IS still allowed to go to BNI groups and talk to people in person. I guess they figure that he isn't putting anything in writing at these events.

    Of course, he can have a Twitter or FB account, or even LinkedIn, and he can say he is a financial planner, but he can't say where he works.

    These companies need to change their policies or they will find themselves left in the dust by new independent companies that network the using cutting age tools.
  • I agree - companies need to get with the 21st century and really take a strong look at their policies.
  • Yes, it makes me wonder if those companies really see LinkedIn as a threat to productivity or business. More likely they consider them a place where an agent or employee might be tempted to seek alternate or outside work.

    One can only guess about policies, even with it spelled out as to why.
  • Lynne
    Shouldn't matter if you company blocks you... they can't block the use of your private mobile.....
  • True statement. I can check Twitter at any time I have a free minute. Blackberry for the win.
  • Todd, you raise some interesting questions that are very hard to answer. I do think Rex makes some very good points, though.

    Large companies are completely worried about their image and what is being said about them and whether or not they are liable for any of it, and at the same time they don't understand social media, and on top of that, the landscape is changing faster than they cankeep up with anyway.

    I guess the bottom line for me is, a company can run itself however it wants. And if they want to block these sites, they can block them. If they want to play whack-a-mole with all their employee's electronic devices, that is up to them as well. I can't help but think that there is a more progressive way to handle the whole issue, however.

    -Greg
  • I honestly think Rex's points are more valid than a company worrying what an employ might say online. Honestly, there is no controlling that other than through threat of penalties or being fired.

    Preventing over use though, that's a matter of trust. If a person is wasting time online, chances are they were wasting time doing something else before.
  • I think it goes beyond what it appears to be on the surface. It's not only a legal issue, but one that the old guard doesn't know how to deal with properly. While some work places should allow access to these services, in other places you would see quite an abuse of access.

    The issue probably lies in the fact that today's corporations have no idea how to control any of this. But instead of blocking sites, which people can easily get around, they might want to think of more efficient work flow as well as figuring out how much of a head count they really need to get the job done.

    There is where the real issue is. Nine times out of ten where you find internet usage abused the most is places that have too many workers for the job that is required. If the workers really have time to get on twitter, blog post, etc... that tells me that management haven't done their jobs in evaluating staffing requirements.

    Hey - you may say I am full of sh*t, but I've been in the poorly managed environs of the cubicle farms - and while I no longer crawl through that sludge, I know what was wrong - and also launched a nice career for myself from within those cubicles.

    Just proved correct what I just stated above. It's not the access or lack of access - it's the management of the head counts. Trust me, if I had enough work to do, I wouldn't have had time to twitter, post blogs, and work my way out of the cubicle environment daily at my last day job gig. :)

    Rex
  • "There is where the real issue is. Nine times out of ten where you find internet usage abused the most is places that have too many workers for the job that is required. If the workers really have time to get on twitter, blog post, etc... that tells me that management haven't done their jobs in evaluating staffing requirements. "

    Wow. That's a strong statement my friend. I'll not call bull on it, but in my experience at work, internet use has little to do with how busy someone is. THere are several folks that work with me that have Yahoo for their personal email and check it throughout the day. They'll do that regardless of how busy they are.

    Also, there are those eBay and other site addicts. They'll always find time out for those even on the busiest of days. Then there's me. I'm totally addicted to Twitter, but what I do is strictly check my replies and DMs throughout the day. Never more frequently than when I first arrive and at lunch. The rest of the time is very sporadic. But I almost always make time for replies and DMs.

    Now do I believe there is a utilization problem? Most certainly. Most of that has to do with being constrained by archaic work practices and principles. Long ago devoid of applicability in the world of cube farms and pure knowledge workers, such as myself.

    Good points though and a strong arguement.
  • Some people just have control issues. 'Nuff said.
  • Ha. You're so right there.
  • I think this is going to become untenable, even for financial corporations. OK, so they are required to keep record of every communication that's sent - how are they going to do that when more and more people have iPhones or smart phones with apps that allow them access to Twitter or Facebook?

    I understand that copmanies don't want to be on the hook for not complying with regulations, but I honestly don't see how the regulations can continue to exist as they are with the rate at which technologies are evolving.

    Furthermore, it's a huge opportunity for a company who can come up with a product or solution to catalog, track or make record of social conversations for companies.

    @amymengel
  • Amy,

    Good possibility what you say is true. The growth of these technologies has outpaced the old rules and management styles. What's coming is a storm around these.

    What I wonder is if most of these services will create corporate friendly tie-ins. LinkedIn seems like they'd be spearheading this effort.

    Thanks for stopping by and sharing.
blog comments powered by Disqus