Facebook At Work: Helpful or a Hazard?
It seems we're always going back and forth on the subject of Facebook's usefulness at work. Some would argue that Facebook is no longer just a time-wasting application for poking people and throwing sheep - it's a critical part of their daily communications with co-workers, colleagues, and others within their industry. In fact, earlier this month, we reported on a study that showed the growing acceptance of social networking applications in the workplace. The study noted that nearly half of I.T. professionals now saw Facebook as one of the apps that had business value.
Yet today, there's new information being released that seems to say something different about the state of social networking applications in the workplace. According to Nucleus Research, Facebook causes a 1.5% decrease in employee productivity.
Facebook at Work = Lost Productivity?
According to the Nucleus Research survey, employers are losing 1.5 workers per 100 in employee productivity to the supposed time-wasting activity known as "Facebooking." To reach that number, the company surveyed a random sampling of 237 office workers.
The findings revealed that nearly two-thirds of those who visit Facebook do so during business hours and they stay on the site for an average of minutes per day when they do.
Despite what you've heard touted about the necessity of Facebook in today's business world, those responding to this survey overwhelmingly admitted they didn't see any business reason for using the site. In total, 87% of respondents basically said their time on Facebook at work had no business-related purpose.
Of course, given the small sample size of this survey, it's hard to form any definitive conclusions...although that hasn't stopped Nucleus Research from doing so. They're suggesting that companies "evaluate their Facebook policies and the cost to the organization...as today blocking Facebook may actually result in a 1.5 percent gain in productivity."
A Second Opinion
We think that Nucleus Research isn't seeing the bigger picture here, so we'd like to counter their research with some findings from the University of Melbourne. U of M professor Dr. Brent Coker also surveyed a small sample of office workers (300 to be exact) and came to a rather different conclusion.
He found that people who took small breaks between tasks were 9% more productive than their colleagues who did not. "It gives them a chance to reset their concentration," says Coker. That means that companies who block access to social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook are actually inadvertently decreasing employee productivity.
Besides, we hate to break the news to Nucleus Research, but employees have always found ways to take these sorts of small mental breaks at work. Before social networks - heck, before computers, even - workers would typically gather around the water cooler for some mindless banter. Others take cigarette breaks, head to the vending machines, or stop by a co-worker's office for chit-chat as they make their way through the office. Employees don't need Facebook to goof off, you see.
But out of all the ways to take a break at work, Facebook really seems to be the least offensive - especially if the employee has built up a work-related network of friends and colleagues on the site. Who knows? They might even find themselves chatting about work while on Facebook!
At the end of the day, though, this isn't a simple black or white issue. Sometimes using Facebook may be productive for employees, sometimes it's not. Either way, the knee-jerk reaction from organizations shouldn't be to simply block access to the social network. Perhaps businesses should just focus on rewarding the employees who perform their jobs well and disciplining those who don't do their work? That seems like a more reasonable way to stimulate employee productivity, don't you agree?
Share
Facebook
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
if business dont like their employees on facebook at work just restrict the website and restrict proxies that way they cant get around the firewall.
What does the study say about reading articles about facebook studies at work?
Sarah,
Good points. Facebook definitely has some strong merits and really depends on the position and scope of your job. While it is beneficial for strengthening and building relationships solid for business, it can easily also become something that can distract from productivity if abused for sure.
I can say from personal experience that popping over to Facebook to write a note to friends/family, stopping over at ESPN to check out the box scores or spending a few minutes at another non-business related site helps clear the mind for and helps get me back on track. It's nice to give the mind a break.
Brian
If 9 out of 10 employees experience a 9% productivity gain from small breaks on Facebook, but 1 ends up wasting their entire day on there (i.e. 100% productivity decrease), organization wide there is still a net productivity loss.
Since those 9 people will find some other way to take those small breaks, blocking Facebook will lead to a 81% productivity increase (9 / 10 find other small breaks, and the other 1 doesn't waste the day on Facebook).
The two viewpoints presented in your post aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
The missing metric on this is the productivity impact from people who over-socialize in person during the office day. I would imagine it's the same type of person. The solution isn't to block Facebook, the solution is better management and evaluation of employees to discourage time-wasting.
@Tom - Good question.
@Christopher: Good point. I'd like to see some data on that.
I have been saying all along that social networking is time-wasting for employees. Laborers who don't involve their daily jobs with computers don't come out and say that they're unproductive at work since they don't use a social network during work hours.
You can find all bullshit studies that says , using social networking does lift work productivity. It wouldn't change the fact that once someone is logging on to the net to post something or check social networking sites, even for a couple of minutes or so, that amount of time is wasted, no ifs and no buts. But proponents of social networking sites would say, but that 2 minutes will help the user to refresh their mind from being bored, which they can compensate in doing more with that refreshing mind. If I interview someone for a job, where he/she gives such view, I would say adios brother (or sister). I am not going to hire you, with that slightest indication that you may get bored at work where the remedy would be to spend 2 minutes on Facebook or Twitter a day. How do I know that in fact that the bored work is indeed gets bored all day, but just use the excuse to say that spending 2 minutes a day on Facebook will lift productivity. Unless the employer can read the mind of the interviewee, there is no way to check out the enthusiasm of an applicant about the job if they come in with a pre-conceived idea that it is part of being a productive worker to log-in a few minutes a day to Facebook.
You often read about some mangers endorsing the employees use of social networking sites themselves. One might want to ask if those managers themselves are heavy users of social networkings, which blinded them to the fact that time-wasting means exactly that, ie, it is still time-wasting regardless if it is 2 minutes or 3 minutes twice a day, etc.
It is often talked about here (including TechCrunch and other tech blogs) the advantages of using Twitter, etc in a work environment, such as corporates , etc. I don't see any advantage really, as if the corporate want everyone in the company to communicate to others, they should get an internal system (something like a knowledge-management system (KMS)). In this way, the KMS stores all past communications, where the knowledge/facts from those are already extracted and stored in a knowledge-retrieval system which is then ready to be made available instantly to workers as the volume of communications keeps growing (it is a continual process). The advantage is that your company retains the knowledge internally (captured by the KMS) even if some of those knowlegeable workers leave the company, but also the security of those info are protected from outsiders.
Twitter, Facebook and all those are not KMS at all. You don't retain knowledge by using these platforms for company communications. Note there is a difference of retaining the unintelligent text messages involve in Twitter , Facebook , etc, and knowledge that are stored extracted from those social networking unintelligent message exchanges. KMS uses inference mechanism while Twitter & Facebook don't. What's the big deal? KMS is more like an expert senior colleague of yours that sits beside you and guides you (worker) all day of how to do things more efficient. Social networkings? If your networks don't know the answer, then you're on your own. The user has to do a lot of inferring about the info right in front of him/her in order for him/her to understand what they are.
Managers who advocates for their workers to use social networking during work hours, should be examined closely by their superiors, because either they themselves are infatuated with using social networking sites which makes them bias, or otherwise, they're just one of those fad bandwagon who misleadingly promote it for no reasons other than, oh, we love using social networking during work hours because so and so use them....
There is a use for social networking (journalists, etc), no doubt about it, but using them during work hours, is not one of them and anyone who claims (including those in management positions) that social networking alleviates boredom, that (or those ) worker/s should be sacked, because they're a drain on the use of the company's productive resources.
Thank you for this article and on-going discussion about Facebook in the workplace.
We also posted early this year (May 2009) on the same topic:
http://www.impactmedialtd.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/does-social-media-have-a-place-in-the-workplace/
What researchers aren't considering is the benefit Facebook has for businesses. Through it, they can develop relationships with existing customers and attract new ones. Instead of looking at Facebook as a time-waster, empower employees to help strengthen the corporate brand.
And besides, smoke breaks and stops at the water cooler to discuss the the plot to a favorite show or replay the game from the night before are no different to a person's increased or decreased productivity. It's still social networking - just not on-line.
Susan said...
And besides, smoke breaks and stops at the water cooler to discuss the the plot to a favorite show or replay the game from the night before are no different to a person's increased or decreased productivity.
No, wrong comparison Susan. The difference is that when you go for a smoke break or stop at the water cooler to fill up your water bottle, is that the worker is subconsciously aware that he/she can't just hang around at that spot longer than necessary after the cigarette or after filling up the bottle (even if there are other people there that he/she chats to initially) because they know that mostly everyone can see what they're doing.
Using a computer to log on to the internet for doing time-wasting things like posting to social networks, etc,... is hidden from everyone, so the worker can get distracted and keep clicking on links here & there. Since he/she is aware that no one is watching, there is no pressure to get back to work, similar to what you would have done when re-filling your water bottle. The danger of lost productivity comes from right there.
Put it this way, if a company tells its workers that they have a monitoring systems that tracks what each person is loggin on during work hours, I bet you that workers would not be wasting much time on the internet. It doesn't mean that it stops them from going online to use the internet, because I doubt that any company will do that in banning internet use during work hours, but because the user will be aware that someone is watching (ie, automated monitoring service), exactly in the same situation as when the user stops at the water cooler for a re-fill and a chat. The user will just get in & then get out from whichever site they logged into. This may lift their productivity, which is not a bad thing, but the situations that are worse where some workers will get distracted in logging in to one site and ended wasting an hour or so in his/her engagement in those social networking sites.
It is just human nature. When someone is being watched, that person is very careful in conducting whatever task he/she is doing.
I’m missing the logic here. Is the point of the article to say that employees goof off anyway so why not let them have access to Facebook? Should we also provide a playroom and sandbox with toys?
The point of the research is to quantify the percent of time spent on Facebook when a company allows access. Although 1.5% may seem small, it’s very significant given the thin margins and layoffs many companies face today. It’s also significant to note that over 80% of the respondents said there was no business use for Facebook. So lets take the industry pundit and blogger claims of a utopian social networking future with a grain of salt. The users don’t think it’s there today.
More shocking when I reviewed the raw data was that 1 out of 33 people have created their entire Facebook presence on work time. I’m not sure there’s any company that would, or should, tolerate that behavior.
What the data provides is an estimate of the cost side of the ROI equation. Use it to balance against the expected benefits of Facebook rather than blindly assuming access to Facebook is a good thing for the company. Let’s take a measured approach and weigh the benefits against the costs.
Ian Campbell
CEO
Nucleus Research, Inc.
Facebook is not designed to serve the needs of a knowledge worker today...it doesn't solve the problem of information overload and clutter...rather increases it...workplaces will require a different take at social computing wherein the platform is designed to harness the collective intelligence and facilitate collaborative learning.
Many companies restricted facebook in their offices, Because they dont want their employers to used it on office time. But its really great to release some pressure by using facebook and keep you mind fresh. Nice info. Thanks
People like to connect with people, wherever they are. That's human nature, and no amount of organizational blindfolding can make 'workers' focus 100 percent on work to the exclusion of everything else. The availability of a new breed of 'people-friendly' channels like FaceBook and Twitter just makes the process easier.
Do companies monitor each individual phone call and email to ensure that the content is 'sterile' and free of personal chatter? It's no different with these new channels. Once the novelty of 'social networking' at work cools off, this whole debate will be mothballed.
This is really a great idea I am surprised it's not in wider use already.
Don't Facebook Friend Your Boss. Or if you do, try to keep that in mind when you're status-updating about your job.
I think social bookmark is useful for marketing tools. At last, thats human nature, and no one can make 'workers' focus hundred percent on work to the exclusion of everything else.