Close Window
Login to your account
Please login
 
 
 

HRD 2012's blog

3 reasons you can’t afford to ban Facebook from your workplace - Ben Betts

6 comments


I just thought I’d write a quick note on Facebook and its presence in the workplace. As an advocate of all things social media, you can imagine my stance on this topic – I believe no organisation should be blacklisting sites like Facebook. But of course many do.  If you work for a medium or large organisation here in the UK, chances are that your organisation is currently blocking Facebook.
 
This needs to stop, now. Here are 3 reasons why:
 
1. You will increasingly waste resources trying to block it. 

You can block Facebook on workstations, but you can’t block it on people’s phones. You can block the phones from your WiFi, but you can’t block the phone signal.  If people want to access Facebook, they will.  Would you rather they do it at their desk, where they can be seen, or in the bathroom, locked away for 20 minutes?

Access to Facebook on mobile devices is getting easier and easier.  In many parts of the world Facebook Zero has been rolled out to mobile networks, offering access to the site free-of-charge, without the need for a data plan. This is a significant driver of business for mobile network operators and puts Facebook in everyone’s hands, wherever they are.

2.  Facebook doesn’t always look like Facebook.

Mobile app’s like “Flipboard” take your Facebook newsfeed and make it into a page-turning magazine.  It looks more like the Wall Street Journal than Facebook; chances are if you saw someone using it, you would think it was a newspaper.  So now, you can’t even tell what Facebook really looks like.  Increasingly it is becoming a part of other platforms and other websites.  It's like Pokemon - you'll never catch them all. 

When Facebook stops looking like Facebook, stops being accessed through Facebook and is available through a device in everyone’s pocket that you don’t control, how much resource will you spend on banning it?

3.  The rise of online identity

You might not have heard of the phrase ‘Social Graph’ before, but chances are you’ve got one.  
 
The term was coined by Facebook to describe your online identity and the relationships you have with other people; those who are your family, your friends and your friends of friends.  Facebook isn’t the only website to claim some level of ownership of your Social Graph; LinkedIn, Twitter, Google and many more all have some of this information.  But Facebook is increasingly stretching its lead in terms of sheer numbers.  With over 600 million people having a Facebook profile today, it seems like only a matter of time before the global domination is complete.  
 
Think of the Social Graph as your single sign-on to life.  You are going to want to keep your Social Graph in one place, from which your identity can link with any number of applications and websites, seamlessly.  

As Facebook has evolved from a straightforward website into a platform that facilitates 3rd party applications, so the importance of the Social Graph has evolved.  At its simplest, Facebook as a platform manifests itself as a “like” button on a webpage; for an example see the BBC News website. Most good implementations of Facebook’s platform, using a technology known as the Open Graph Protocol, will be sending information back to your profile when you hit a “like” button. Next time you hit a button like this on a website, go check out your profile afterwards. You could find that the item you just ‘liked’ has now become a part of your profile. 

Once you start collecting this sort of information as a part of your profile, it becomes useful to friends within your Social Graph.  After-all, it’s likely that your friends have some of the same likes and dislikes that you do and if you like something, chances are they might too.  The potential of this idea is to bring a social layer to searching the web; this is hugely powerful and one of the key drivers behind Facebook’s enormous $50billion valuation.

Your company isn’t going to replicate this functionality within its walls.  As Facebook evolves its platform to reach ever increasing numbers of external websites, the Social Graph is going to become more relevant.  Soon, not being able to sign in to your Facebook account whilst you go about your online daily life will severely hamper your ability to use the internet as a useful work tool.  By banning Facebook, you will be denying people access to their identity.
 
--------
 
If your people are wasting time on Facebook, it is a symptom of a wider problem.  It will become increasingly difficult to enforce a ban on Facebook and increasingly restrictive to other activities in the coming years.  You will spend a fortune trying to block Facebook and chances are that you’ll have to scrap it all in a few years time anyway.
 
You can’t ban Facebook. That extends to any of the emerging platforms for communication, be it LinkedIn, Twitter or whatever. But the good news is, you don’t have to bother trying.   
 
Controlling access to these platforms can be governed by a sensible policy, clearly communicated.  In fact, the best Social Media policy I ever heard was simply “don’t do anything that would make us write a Social Media policy”.
 
If the use of these platforms for non-work activity is becoming a big issue within the organisation, then you probably have a wider cultural issue, not a social networking issue.  
 
Work to understand the impact new technology will have on your organisation and then seek to exploit the potential.  Because if you think platforms like Facebook are a big problem now, you ain’t seen nothing yet.  

Your comments

6 comments

6 comments

alanhilliar
Alan Richard Hilliar
07 March 2011 at 15:22

In the days before social media (yes, I can remember that far back) we used to recruit experienced salesmen on the basis of the network of contacts they had built up within the industry into which they were selling.

If a salesman (or woman) took a client out for lunch, or took an afternoon out to play golf with thme, we'd applaud their initiative in building up important relationships which could support future sales activity.

I often find that I need to make contact with others when I need to draw on their experience in areas where I don't have all the answers. The people I would contact first are those with whom I have some relationship and who know something about the topic I'm researching.

I would instinctively turn to LinkedIn rather than Facebook to trace those contacts, but that's personal preference as much as anything.

Friendships (or professional networks) are the oil that helps the world go round.

Increasingly, the old distinctions between work and non-work relationships have broken down, which is why so many organisations choose to have thier corporate profile on Facebook, Linked In, Twitter, etc, etc

We used to take people to task for time wasting (e.g. excessive personal phone calls) without the need either for a policy or monitoring systems.

I'd encourage organisation to see social networking as an asset not a liability.

Besides, the world is changing and you may have about as much sucess in turning back the tide as did King Canute.

Report comment Report this comment
Anonymous
Natalie Newton
17 March 2011 at 10:50

I think that social networking in the work place is an advantage. 1. if you block access, you'll just be seen as an organisation that doesnt keep its clients happy (all work and no play..) 2. if you dont block access, I would put in a social media policy into your handbook that states excessive use will cause disciplinary. That way, your giving a bit back to your employees. why not? they work their proverbial backsides off for you and you give them nothing back? they wont like you, and motivation in the company will decrease. don't cut your nose off to spite your face i say, everything in moderation.

Natalie Newton

www.ehrp.co.uk

Report comment Report this comment
AndreaBradley
Andrea Ellen Elizabeth Bradley
09 May 2011 at 13:09

What are the legal implications of allowing your employees to use all types of recording devices in various meetings?

Can you ban your employees of posting recordings on YouTube, especially if they haven't sought permission in advance ?

This is becoming an increasing problem especially with regards to employee relation situations.

I know social media is part of our everyday life and I read with interest the creation of a social media policy.

Could someone shed light on such policies?    

Report comment Report this comment
Printdesigns
Mark Thompson
17 November 2011 at 15:10

<p>We have no problem with staff using Facebook here if they are on breaks, lunch etc. Getting our staff to talk about the business on Facebook can only be a good thing and generate 'buzz' about what we are doing.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.printdesigns.com" title="Printdesigns Limited">Printdesigns Limited</a></p>

Report comment Report this comment
Printdesigns
Mark Thompson
17 November 2011 at 15:12

Sorry apologies for my formatting on the above post. The signature was intended to be our web address www.printdesigns.com

Report comment Report this comment
Anonymous
LawStudent
22 November 2011 at 19:01

@ Andrea. Recordings made in work meetings will be copyright protected, and the copyright is owned by the company. Thus the employee cannot distribute this as they please without the permission of the company.

Report comment Report this comment

Post a comment

Registration is not required to post a comment but if you sign in, you will not have to enter your details each time you comment. Registered members also have access to extra features such as a weekly newsletter, access to the community and special interest forums, a personalised website, and their own profile section.
All fields are required to make a comment
Name
Email (Will not be published)
 
To save your details
or
Register
terms and conditions
These comments are moderated. Your comment, if approved, may not appear immediately.
CIPD - Trackbacks
No trackbacks