6 ms·

I've seen a couple of the "let's bring social networks to the workplace" products and quite frankly none have impressed me so far. The real problem is not provi

by kriro 11y ago

I've seen a couple of the "let's bring social networks to the workplace" products and quite frankly none have impressed me so far. The real problem is not providing great technology but actually getting people in corporate environments to use it in a meaningful way. These projects usually end in the same manner...network is rolled out, used for a couple of weeks and fades into obscurity rarely used (and often leaving an extra attack vector). Or in other words...most lose the battle to good old email. That being said...this is potentially scary news for companies that are in the HR 2.0 business for lack of a better word. Typically their solutions have alumni management, stay in contact etc. that they tout. Well if your company has FB work and they later add the option to integrate private FB accounts of ex employees or something that's interesting. I know they say for now those are separate but I wouldn't be shocked if that changes eventually. Edit: If they want to segment this they should have given it an entirely different name imo. I'm sure there are marketing people at FB that are way more brilliant than me but this seems like a typical positioning mistake. You think you need to rely on your powerful main brand when you really want to create a new brand because you're attacking a different positioning slot in customer's heads. Don't have my Ries/Trout book at hand but it sounds familiar enough that I'll browse through it at home.

bambax 11y ago
Upvoted for the positioning part: brand extension is almost always a mistake. In this case maybe they want to leverage the fact that almost everyone has fb, but in the mind of users fb is not associated with "work". And it's likely to hurt their main brand because it will drain more "coolness" out of it.
- Swizec 11y ago
  Or, as is already the case with a lot of us millenials: We have fb. Everyone we know has fb. Everyone we get to know is added to fb. There is no distinction between private life and work life. Fb is where we keep track of who we know. Fb is where we ask around if anyone knows of a company looking for a person. Fb is where we ask around if any person is looking for a company. Fb is where we group text. Fb is where we do all serious social networking. The first thing that happens when joining a new company is that everyone sends me Fb friend requests. That said, it looks like Slack is doing a great job of replacing email for in-office communication.
  - jeggeragain 11y ago
    Don't be so sure your experience matches everyone else's. The 'we' you mentioned does not include me. I will add all my work contacts on LinkedIn but I will only add a few (about 5%) on FB; ones who I socialise with outside of work.
    - Swizec 11y ago
      True. That part probably depends on how big are the companies you work for. It seems very customary to add at least everyone on your direct team to Fb though.
      - collyw 11y ago
        Screw that.
      - nrivadeneira 11y ago
        I don't find that to be the case either. Anecdotal, obviously, but I've worked for companies that range in size and I never add anyone from work on Facebook. Same goes for my wife. We joined Facebook in the early days when you needed a .edu email address to join, so I've got a lot of college partying photos up there. I've always seen it more of a private space. Not sure if the time you join and your original perception of the service changes your use.
        jenscow 11y ago
        > I never add anyone from work on Facebook. Same goes for my wife. Wise choice, although I'm sure she has other ways of seeing what you get up to.
      - gilleain 11y ago
        Hell no.
      - pc86 11y ago
        I am very methodical about when I add coworkers to my (private) Facebook profile: the day after I leave. I see my coworkers for approximately 1/3 of my entire week. If I have a question for them it can wait until tomorrow/Monday. I have nothing to gain by them having access to photos of me at a bar with friends or pictures of me at a half marathon or something.
oneeyedpigeon 11y ago
Slack's been incredibly successful of late. You might not think of it as a 'social network', but it does most of what Facebook at Work is advertising itself as.
- Swinx43 11y ago
  Slack is definitely a better option than Facebook at Work in my opinion. Social networks are a time suck at best and marketing one to an enterprise is simply inviting cynicism and negativity from those people that actually have work to do (obviously almost everyone except HR). Slack is not positioned as a social network but as a productivity and collaboration tool, a role it fulfils really well. If I had to choose I would pick Slack over Facebook at Work any day of the week.
  - dunk010 11y ago
    Or IRC.
  - hellbanTHIS 11y ago
    My first thought was Slack must have turned down Facebook's offer, thank the gods. It's not too weird to ask coworkers to sign up for Slack, but it would be really weird and probably unacceptable to ask someone who works for you to sign up for Facebook for all kinds of reasons. I'd feel more comfortable requiring employees to use Reddit at work, seriously.
  - bertil 11y ago
    I have used both options quite intensively for more than six months each (both Facebook internal tools at Facebook, and Facebook at Work at Facebook; I am probably one of the very few who has and has no direct financial interest in either company) and Facebook at Work is significantly richer in features than Slack — notably longer posts that allow to explain, argue, compare. It is useful up to the point where meeting (outside of creative explorations) become non-essential. Slack is great for quick-reaction and coordinated team org, but not suggest features, walk people through non-trivial decision, structure posts and comments.
- 11y ago
mattlutze 11y ago
I think it can be tough for folks to disrupt enterprise collaboration when they try to attack it with consumer social networking. Do I want to chat with coworkers all day and be bombarded by notifications? I like not being able to get to my personal Facebook when I'm at the office and we know that multitasking productively is a myth at best and may actively reduce our mental performance[1][2]. The thing is, the biggest component of enterprise collaboration is information and knowledge management. If Facebook is leveraging its existing information management feature set this platform would be a no-go for me, because their whole set-up is designed to push new information at you and bury anything else as soon as possible. As well, chat or groups without file/information/data management features is a quarter-measure. 1: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/august24/multitask-research-study-082409.html http://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/august24/multitask-resear... 2: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201209/the-true-cost-multi-tasking https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201209/the-t...
osoti 11y ago
From 7 cases to 4 million: America at high Alert from Zika Virus :WHO http://goo.gl/1MZ68q http://goo.gl/1MZ68q
quaffapint 11y ago
As mentioned in your first paragraph is exactly what has happened in our mega-corp. People are too afraid to post anything general to the entire corp public, and anything they need to talk to specific people about they use IM or Email.
frostmatthew 11y ago
> The real problem is not providing great technology but actually getting people in corporate environments to use it in a meaningful way. At VMware we use SocialCast[1] (not sure if we used it before we bought them or not, that was before my time) and it's certainly used in a "meaningful way". Not everyone in the company uses it regularly but certainly more than enough for a sufficient critical mass that if you have a question you can ask it in the appropriate group(s) and you'll most likely have an answer within hours (and often minutes). [1] http://socialcast.com/ http://socialcast.com/
Justsignedup 11y ago
I work in a small company where we wanted to use these actively. Reasons they fail: - Nobody is sitting there waiting for their news feed to update. - Nobody is posting information there as they would with friends because THEY ARE AT WORK, they worry their boss will see something stupid. This is why memes and other things rarely get posted on work networks. - Nobody wants to seem like they are slacking off talking on social networks instead of working (even on the work one). - No memes and other fun related things, nobody cares and nobody checks. Slack on the other hand was a huge hit. We have a few groups of like minded people who just chat it up. Usually for short bursts. Everyone prefers it over the social network tools. And everyone stays active in it. A major feature is the notification that someone sent you a direct message (might be important) or sent a message to a room (meh) or sent a message to a muted room (probably not important).
- frostmatthew 11y ago
  In another comment[1] I mentioned I've found use of a work social network valuable/meaningful - I think part of the reason our observations/experiences are so different is that you work in a small company and I at a large one. Not everyone can be expected to make use of it (much like not everyone uses social media outside of work) so I think for it to succeed the company has to be of sufficient size so that the portion using the social network is enough to provide value. As for some of your specific points: > Nobody is sitting there waiting for their news feed to update. I check the feed in the morning and usually again in the afternoon. It's not expected to be something you stare at for eight hours a day. > Nobody wants to seem like they are slacking off talking on social networks instead of working (even on the work one). Think that's more of a company culture issue - our use of it is appreciated/encouraged. > No memes and other fun related things, nobody cares and nobody checks. The vast majority of posts are work-related but we have plenty of groups strictly for non-work/fun purposes (e.g. we have a group for discussing video games). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11026577 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11026577

by kriro 11y ago

bambax 11y ago

Upvoted for the positioning part: brand extension is almost always a mistake. In this case maybe they want to leverage the fact that almost everyone has fb, but in the mind of users fb is not associated with "work". And it's likely to hurt their main brand because it will drain more "coolness" out of it.

Swizec 11y ago
Or, as is already the case with a lot of us millenials: We have fb. Everyone we know has fb. Everyone we get to know is added to fb. There is no distinction between private life and work life. Fb is where we keep track of who we know. Fb is where we ask around if anyone knows of a company looking for a person. Fb is where we ask around if any person is looking for a company. Fb is where we group text. Fb is where we do all serious social networking. The first thing that happens when joining a new company is that everyone sends me Fb friend requests. That said, it looks like Slack is doing a great job of replacing email for in-office communication.
- jeggeragain 11y ago
  Don't be so sure your experience matches everyone else's. The 'we' you mentioned does not include me. I will add all my work contacts on LinkedIn but I will only add a few (about 5%) on FB; ones who I socialise with outside of work.
  - Swizec 11y ago
    True. That part probably depends on how big are the companies you work for. It seems very customary to add at least everyone on your direct team to Fb though.
    - collyw 11y ago
      Screw that.
    - nrivadeneira 11y ago
      I don't find that to be the case either. Anecdotal, obviously, but I've worked for companies that range in size and I never add anyone from work on Facebook. Same goes for my wife. We joined Facebook in the early days when you needed a .edu email address to join, so I've got a lot of college partying photos up there. I've always seen it more of a private space. Not sure if the time you join and your original perception of the service changes your use.
      - jenscow 11y ago
        > I never add anyone from work on Facebook. Same goes for my wife. Wise choice, although I'm sure she has other ways of seeing what you get up to.
    - gilleain 11y ago
      Hell no.
    - pc86 11y ago
      I am very methodical about when I add coworkers to my (private) Facebook profile: the day after I leave. I see my coworkers for approximately 1/3 of my entire week. If I have a question for them it can wait until tomorrow/Monday. I have nothing to gain by them having access to photos of me at a bar with friends or pictures of me at a half marathon or something.

oneeyedpigeon 11y ago

Slack's been incredibly successful of late. You might not think of it as a 'social network', but it does most of what Facebook at Work is advertising itself as.

Swinx43 11y ago
Slack is definitely a better option than Facebook at Work in my opinion. Social networks are a time suck at best and marketing one to an enterprise is simply inviting cynicism and negativity from those people that actually have work to do (obviously almost everyone except HR). Slack is not positioned as a social network but as a productivity and collaboration tool, a role it fulfils really well. If I had to choose I would pick Slack over Facebook at Work any day of the week.
- dunk010 11y ago
  Or IRC.
- hellbanTHIS 11y ago
  My first thought was Slack must have turned down Facebook's offer, thank the gods. It's not too weird to ask coworkers to sign up for Slack, but it would be really weird and probably unacceptable to ask someone who works for you to sign up for Facebook for all kinds of reasons. I'd feel more comfortable requiring employees to use Reddit at work, seriously.
- bertil 11y ago
  I have used both options quite intensively for more than six months each (both Facebook internal tools at Facebook, and Facebook at Work at Facebook; I am probably one of the very few who has and has no direct financial interest in either company) and Facebook at Work is significantly richer in features than Slack — notably longer posts that allow to explain, argue, compare. It is useful up to the point where meeting (outside of creative explorations) become non-essential. Slack is great for quick-reaction and coordinated team org, but not suggest features, walk people through non-trivial decision, structure posts and comments.
11y ago

mattlutze 11y ago

I think it can be tough for folks to disrupt enterprise collaboration when they try to attack it with consumer social networking. Do I want to chat with coworkers all day and be bombarded by notifications? I like not being able to get to my personal Facebook when I'm at the office and we know that multitasking productively is a myth at best and may actively reduce our mental performance[1][2]. The thing is, the biggest component of enterprise collaboration is information and knowledge management. If Facebook is leveraging its existing information management feature set this platform would be a no-go for me, because their whole set-up is designed to push new information at you and bury anything else as soon as possible. As well, chat or groups without file/information/data management features is a quarter-measure. 1: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/august24/multitask-research-study-082409.html http://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/august24/multitask-resear... 2: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201209/the-true-cost-multi-tasking https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201209/the-t...

osoti 11y ago

From 7 cases to 4 million: America at high Alert from Zika Virus :WHO http://goo.gl/1MZ68q http://goo.gl/1MZ68q

quaffapint 11y ago

As mentioned in your first paragraph is exactly what has happened in our mega-corp. People are too afraid to post anything general to the entire corp public, and anything they need to talk to specific people about they use IM or Email.

frostmatthew 11y ago

> The real problem is not providing great technology but actually getting people in corporate environments to use it in a meaningful way. At VMware we use SocialCast[1] (not sure if we used it before we bought them or not, that was before my time) and it's certainly used in a "meaningful way". Not everyone in the company uses it regularly but certainly more than enough for a sufficient critical mass that if you have a question you can ask it in the appropriate group(s) and you'll most likely have an answer within hours (and often minutes). [1] http://socialcast.com/ http://socialcast.com/

Justsignedup 11y ago

I work in a small company where we wanted to use these actively. Reasons they fail: - Nobody is sitting there waiting for their news feed to update. - Nobody is posting information there as they would with friends because THEY ARE AT WORK, they worry their boss will see something stupid. This is why memes and other things rarely get posted on work networks. - Nobody wants to seem like they are slacking off talking on social networks instead of working (even on the work one). - No memes and other fun related things, nobody cares and nobody checks. Slack on the other hand was a huge hit. We have a few groups of like minded people who just chat it up. Usually for short bursts. Everyone prefers it over the social network tools. And everyone stays active in it. A major feature is the notification that someone sent you a direct message (might be important) or sent a message to a room (meh) or sent a message to a muted room (probably not important).

frostmatthew 11y ago
In another comment[1] I mentioned I've found use of a work social network valuable/meaningful - I think part of the reason our observations/experiences are so different is that you work in a small company and I at a large one. Not everyone can be expected to make use of it (much like not everyone uses social media outside of work) so I think for it to succeed the company has to be of sufficient size so that the portion using the social network is enough to provide value. As for some of your specific points: > Nobody is sitting there waiting for their news feed to update. I check the feed in the morning and usually again in the afternoon. It's not expected to be something you stare at for eight hours a day. > Nobody wants to seem like they are slacking off talking on social networks instead of working (even on the work one). Think that's more of a company culture issue - our use of it is appreciated/encouraged. > No memes and other fun related things, nobody cares and nobody checks. The vast majority of posts are work-related but we have plenty of groups strictly for non-work/fun purposes (e.g. we have a group for discussing video games). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11026577 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11026577