Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Planning Office Version To Rival LinkedIn, Google
An anonymous reader points out a report that Facebook may be coming out with an office version to take on LinkedIn. Facebook at Work would “allow users to chat with colleagues, connect with professional contacts and collaborate over documents.” "Facebook is reportedly gearing up to take on LinkedIn, Google's Drive and services, Microsoft's Outlook and Yammer with a workplace-friendly version of the social networking site, but such a dream is unlikely to appeal to the enterprise. As reported last week by the Financial Times, "Facebook at Work" is a new product designed to allow professional users to message colleagues, connect with professional contacts and collaborate over documents. The website will have the same look as standard Facebook — including a news feed and groups — but according to people familiar with the matter, the idea is to keep work and personal accounts separate. It makes sense for the social networking giant. Launching a professional version can boost ad revenue, keep engagement up and give the company a valuable new market to tap. But in application, cracking the corporate world won't be easy."
Not just no, but fuck no.
Having internal company correspondence, communication between groups and corporate offices will have valuable company information in Facebook's hands. We've had people walked out, fired, for using Evernote in meetings.
Remember what Zuckerman said.
"They trust me — dumb fucks," says Zuckerberg in one of the instant messages, first published by former Valleywag Nicholas Carlson at Silicon Alley Insider, and now confirmed by Zuckerberg himself in Jose Antonio Vargas's New Yorker piece. Zuckerberg now tells Vargas, "I think I've grown and learned a lot" since those instant messages.
[John]
Shit better not happen!
In most fields, trying to do business networking through Facebook is a career-ending move. The brand is forever poisoned.
It sounds pretty fascist to shitcan someone like that, especially if the policy they were fired under wasn't fairly specific about Evernote-type services.
Depends on the company and who their customers are. If your customer is the defense department (for example) then they might be pretty sensitive about you posting information to Evernote.
Most managers I've dealt with think of Facebook as a time-waster. It's hard to see a brand acceptance of a Facebook-related service that's "for work".
I think most users associate it with their personal social lives and I would just about guarantee that Facebook would mandate linking your work profile to your social profile and most people would reject that.
For better or for worse, I think LinkedIn already is seen as the "work" social networking site and has the network effect going for it.
I've seen several companies with a successful Yammer network, meaning it added real business value. Rolling out things like wikis, microblogging tools or discussion forums in a company requires more than just installing the software and announcing the new service; you need active champions, community managers, and a strategy to nurture the community continuously. That means you also need to understand the role you want these things to play in your business. . Those who perceive them as mere tools to be rolled out will most likely fail.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
you need active champions, community managers, and a strategy to nurture the community continuously.
Spot on. Every single failure I've seen of an internal communications tool that wasn't Email or IM failed because of a lack of one of the three things you mentioned. They are tools, but they need to much more help to grow than something that everyone has to use, like a case system or a CRM.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
If you look at all those technologies, the real advantage to the employer is that they allow you to make your employees work when they aren't at work. Knowing employees had phones at home was great because you could call them up at a moment's notice and get them to come in after hours. Personal computers aren't really necessary at the office. A mainframe would work just as well in many cases, but having employees with computers at home meant you could ask them to work from home, connecting to the mainframe if necessary. Email and Internet allowed employees to all be in touch and communicate when they were working at home. Cellular/Smart phones allowed people to be contacted even when they weren't home, but were out shopping, out on a date, or at the park with their kids. Having social networking at the office is just another way for employers to demand even more of our free time, without explicitly writing it out in the contract.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
. Hardly anyone I know under the age of 30 uses it unless they're foreign or looking for a new job.
Well yes, that is the point of LInked-in, to find jobs, and to keep in touch with people you know from work, but don't necessarily want to hear about their new puppy.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."