3 ms·
If I read it right and they had around 1k users after 3 years of trialling Workplace, I think it’s less a case of “ending the trial” as it is “pulling the cord
by pdpi 7y ago
If I read it right and they had around 1k users after 3 years of trialling Workplace, I think it’s less a case of “ending the trial” as it is “pulling the cord on life support”.
The article distinctly makes it sound as if they only trialled because they were offered a generous free usage period, without a clear desire to actually integrate it into their daily routine.
The timeline suggests that they were onboarded in the early days of Workplace, and I would blame FB’s nascent enterprise sales team for being too immature to recognise what was a losing battle from the get go.
- keanzu 7y agoThey fail to mention how many potential users there were and whether this was high or low take up. "The acronym CERN is also used to refer to the laboratory, which in 2016 had 2,500 scientific, technical, and administrative staff members, and hosted about 12,000 users." Is it 1000 out of 2500 or 1000 out of 14500 or am I using an invalid source and the actual staff count is completely different?
- pdpi 7y agoFB’s target was almost certainly the whole enchilada, so it’s penetration of 1000 out of 14500. Even if you call it 1000 out of 2500, that’s 40% adoption over three years, for a tool that wants to be the centrepiece of your collaboration architecture.
- Cederfjard 7y agoEven worse, the current top comment (clarified further by one of its children) is saying that they only had 150 active users per week.