Facebook: The newest site for companies to block

Share This!

Neville Hobson writes that more than two-thirds of UK companies are blocking employee access to Facebook and similar sites based on the fear that employees will waste time rather than get their work done. (This according to according to a study reported in the Daily Telegraph.

I wish I could say I was surprised by this, but I was expecting it. The report does, however, afford me the opportunity to list the problems I have with blocking employee access to anything on the web, an exercise I haven’t undertaken here in some time. Here goes:

• The productivity myth—Are employees really wasting time? Has anybody in the organization actually measured? Or is work getting done, is it getting done on time, and is it quality work? Most employees will not risk their jobs to screw around online. If they spend an hour online for non-work-related purposes, they’ll put in an extra hour to get the job done. That hour may be spent doing work at home, but on the other hand, employees are routinely expected to take work home with them. That’s the nature of work-life integration: If you expect me to do work at home, then I expect the employer to tolerate me engaging in non-work activities at work. The measure of productivity is the amount of output created.
  
  
  
• The statistics prove it’s a productivity issue—Statistics from companies that sell blocking software is suspect, and that’s a charitable characterization. The number of hours an average employee spends surfing (based on more questionable research) is multiplied by the number of employees, and the result is multiplied by an average hourly pay rate to come up with a terrifying “lost productivity” figure. You have to wonder how all that lost productivity can be reconciled against Bureau of Labor Statistics analysis showing producitivity continues to grow. These “studies” don’t account for the extra time an employee puts in to compensate for the time spent online, or the regular workload he takes home with him. They’re just designed to frighten executives into buying their products.
  
  
  
• There is no business value in Facebook or similar social networks—That’s what they said about the web. Remember when nobody could have web access without special dispensation from a member of the executive team, in writing? Then it was message boards. Then instant messaging. It took me less than 30 seconds to find Facebook groups on accounting, engineering, human resources and geology (I once worked for an oil company where good geologists were in high demand).
  
  
  
• We have to—it’s a legal issue—Company lawyers objected to email when it was new, fearing that email made it too easy to inadvertently (or intentionally) leak proprietary information. Imagine work without email today. There is a tendency among lawyers to fear new technologies. They had the same worries about fax machines, photocopiers, and even the telephone. Instant Messaging raised legal concerns, but today more than half of U.S. workers use IM for work-related purposes.
  
  
  
• Blocking access is the way to deal with abuse—Companies seeking to build an engaged workforce turn around an send a message to all employees that says, “We don’t trust any of you as far as we can throw you.” Since engagement requires trust, this is an engagement-killing move. It also can affect business. At one company, instant messaging was shut down when federal requirements for IM record-keeping went into effect; the move was made with no research to determine how important IM had become to the conduct of day-to-day business in this company. At some companies (IBM and Raytheon come to mind), switching off IM would cripple the business. At another company, implementing web filtering software suddenly denied access to websites that hundreds of employees used to do their work. Sites needed to obtain data could not be made available for weeks, due to a convuluted IT process, even though employees needed them immediately. At one healthcare company, all blogs are blocked based on the belief that blogs contain no valuable content, despite the presence of thousands of healthcare-related blogs, including influential ones like Eye on FDA, for example, that could provide a lot of employees with valuable intelligence.

The solution is simple: Establish and communicate policies governing what employees can and cannot do online. The policies should recognize that business value can accrue from these activities and that some personal activities are acceptable, assuming it’s not interfering with the ability to get work done. Supervisors should be trained to identify abuse so that policies are enforced by exception.

A CEO once proudly told me he had invested half a million dollars in hardware and software to block employees from visiting pornographic websites. When I wondered if that money might have better been invested in customer service, he bristled: “It is inappropriate for employees to view pornography in the workplace.”

“Of course it’s not,” I said. “So you have people stationed at every company entrance checking purses and briefcases for printed porn?”

“Don’t be stupid,” he told me. “That’s a supervisor’s job.”

I have never been able to understand why that changes when the delivery channel happens to be technology-based. It’s simple: Supervisor detects declining performance in an employee on her staff. She sees he’s spending a lot of time behind closed doors. She asks IT to check his logs and finds he’s spending six hours a day on social networks (or porn sites or gambling sites or shopping sites or whatever). She disciplines the employee. Word spreads that an employee was discliplined (or even fired) for violating the policy, an important reinforcement since culture is driven by reward and recognition.

As for Facebook and other social networks, I have no doubt that 12-24 months from now, companies will have figured out how these resources apply to business, the restrictions will have been lifted, and policies enacted. At the same time, new restrictions will be introduced to block whatever comes next.

1. 2 years ago I might have understood those blocking policies of companies thinking employees will be productive one hundred percent after having entered the companies gate. Not because they were right but because the employees only could be online via the employer’s infrastructure.

   But now more and more employees belong to that generation that uses facebook (or similar community sites). And more and more members of that generation belong to the early adopters who use mobile devices of any kind. More and more of those mobile devices support UMTS and even WiFi. Subnotebooks with 12’’ displays are more and more common. Not far away from my office there is a Paulaner (a German brewery) with public wifi ...

   What will those companies do when they discover that their employees don’t depend on the company’s infrastructure to use facebook or any other community or web service?

   What will those companies do when they discover that they try to fight the symptom but not the reason? The reason that I would call the disease of bad leadership? The disease that prevents employees doing a good job so they decide to focus on other things? What will they do?

   But to be honest - I think only few are capable to recognize this…

   Posted by Frank Hamm  on  07/29  at  11:00 AM

2. Shel - The story of the CEO who invested 500,000 in hardware and software to prevent… is priceless. Corporate, in my opinion, is not in touch with their work force. Frank Hamm has hit the nail on the head -”...companies...fighting the symptom but not the reason. The reason that I would call the disease of bad leadership...”. I would have said no leadership, at least no leadership that is ethical, honest and in touch. Does the axiom - “you reap what you sow” apply? Great story - take care.

   Posted by MorganLighter  on  07/29  at  01:47 PM

3. All true Shel. Managemnent are Our Parents & Employees are The Children. Sad.
   Love & Peace, Clarence

   Posted by Clarence Jones  on  07/29  at  08:02 PM

4. How many of the “blocking” companies mentioned include TRUST in their value statements?

   The failure to DO what they SAY will cause greater PRODUCTIVITY issues than any time employees spend of FACEBOOK.

   The key to engagement is employees who SAY great things about a company, STAY with the company, and STRIVE to go above and beyond - and that’s because and employee BELIEVES in the company and it’s practices.

   It is better for companies to provide guidelines and standards of conduct and Manage productivity of an employee by their objectives and goals.

   I think it’s is important to have guidelines so that employees understand what they are - but these have to be linked back to values and standards of conduct that are reinforced through training and communications.

   I agree with Shel that blocking these sites say a lot more to employees about how trusted and respected they are.

   Posted by Priya Bates  on  07/30  at  05:47 AM

5. A long, long, time ago, in a galaxy far, far, away (or so it seems now) our company fax machine, (that’s right, ONE, for a S&L;with $1.8 billion in deposits) was locked away in the computer room (raised floors, geeks in white lab coats running around, punch cards and tape decks, etc.). In order to send a fax you had to get sign-off from the EVP or CEO.

   Over the years, as I’ve encountered this type of management thinking, or more accurate, non-thinking, I’ve recounted this story. Invariably I get the response, “Well, that’s was just plain stupid,” or something similar. All the while defending blocking access to online information for the lunacy you mentioned.

   Posted by Craig Jolley  on  07/30  at  09:13 AM

6. Great post, Shel. It reminds us all of the huge hill we seem to always have in front of us when it comes to building engagement and trust in our organizations. Facebook is popular because it allows people to easily keep in touch with their friends and business colleagues in a working world that has forced so much disconnection on us. If one of the goals of today’s companies is helping its employees lead more balanced lives (which is often a written value that’s not really respected), Facebook should be seen as a giant opportunity. But, of course, it is viewed as a threat and feeds into IT policies that erode trust and, by demotivating people, reduce productivity.

   A the IABC conference I saw a session about Hewlett Packard and the presenter was saying that the company may invite all its employees to be part of HP groups on Facebook. It’s good to know that everyone isn’t just trying to shut this kind of behavior down.

   Posted by Ron Shewchuk  on  07/30  at  10:22 AM

7. I am a contracting web developer and so get to see many different companies at work with their various ways of restricting access. 
   I was hired to build a alternative clothing and toy ecommerce site complete with authorised member access only picture galleries shall I just say of questionable material.  The company was an ISP who built customised sites for clients(not in the UK), however because of the company policy on viewing pornographic material I was not allowed to view the images I was just given a directory structure diagram with image names.  Also because of the sexual nature of the text content I had to build the site so that the client could log on and enter the text remotely.
   Now I am not about to name any names but it was very amusing when the client finally cancelled the contract after 6 weeks through sheer frustration and the company was left with an unfinished templated web site and database and no pictures to console themselves with either.  Worst of all it cost them over £10,000 in my wages and another £2,000 in expenses and around the £50K mark in a lost sale. Not to mention the other sales they would have got from the client.
   I have to admit I did contact the client directly and built the site for them at their offices, found them a hosting company and put the new site live.  As for the ISP I think they are downsizing if not already down and out.
   Most companies I have worked for have had some form or another of restricted access.  However I have found that the CEO is very much influenced by the IT server people who look after the network.  Most sites I visit in the course of my work day are work related, however even some sites such as Microsoft Developers Knoledge base are blocked.  I have also found that those companies that stick rigidly to the policy move forward very slowly, those that have a more flexible attitude always seem to be one step further down the road and are the ones who push the bounds with their web sites and use of the latest technology.  No guessing which companies I prefer to work for.

   Posted by Peter Reynolds  on  07/31  at  11:08 AM

8. In Germany more and more managers become aware of the importance of values for themselves and for their companies.

   Some managers even founded a “values committee”, a network to connect managers in the age between 25 and 45. I hope that some day those managers are in the CxO level and that they won’t have forgotten their values…

   Posted by Frank Hamm  on  08/01  at  05:29 AM

9. It’s fascinating to watch the corporate world evolve as younger people, with completely different values than their elders, start exercising their influence. They demand things like a balanced life, a say in the business, a noble cause. They grew up in a wired world and their families and networks are more important to them than their jobs.

   The frustrating thing is it will take maybe ten or even twenty more years for the transition to new leadership to take place, although some companies are already ahead of the curve.

   Posted by Ron Shewchuk  on  08/01  at  06:50 AM

10. Here is Australia, bosses have turned around and are promoting social sites such as facebook and myspace to increase productivity as these types of sites reduce stress levels in the office.

    Posted by Jason  on  02/11  at  03:49 PM

11. someone smart would use a proxy :D

    Posted by weizhong  on  02/23  at  05:52 AM

12. And kids knows that proxy thingy already. I think parents should used DNS for filtering.

    Posted by walmart shopping online  on  02/25  at  04:59 PM

13. For a publicly listed company it is the responsibility of the board to run the business for the shareholders. This means taking into consideration the views of the shareholders.

    Posted by offshore  on  03/13  at  10:49 AM

14. It’s really surprising to note that employers are blocking access to Facebook for their employees based on the fear that employees will waste time rather than get their work done . How can it be true? Any way they are supposed to finish the work assigned with the timeline, right?

    Posted by Eric  on  05/28  at  11:23 PM

15. Facebook is actually a great tool for promotion of a business and so many of them are missing out because of blocking software.

    I also think Jason (See comment 10.) makes a great point and they have got it spot on in Australia. Sites such as Facebook can reduce stress levels as well as teach social skills; two things which are very important in any large company.

    Posted by Proxy  on  07/20  at  05:19 AM

16. Its a waste of time blocking sites like facebook because there are 100000 of proxy sites on the internet and every day new ones you cant stop it. If you want a proxy go to http://proxy.org plenty of proxy sites Or join a google or yahoo group to get daily new proxy sites.

    Posted by marco  on  07/31  at  11:17 PM

17. Your site is great and I really appreciate it! I have always enjoyed reading your site.

    Posted by Virtual online internet casino gambling  on  08/23  at  07:44 PM