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."

Comments

Fun

[Anonymous Coward]

Just in time, I was just thinking that I don't share enough already. What I'm just wondering now is if they are going to allow selfies and if I am going to be cyberbullied.

Haven't we shared enough already. Isn't this just another avenue into your boss requesting access to your FB account to check what is posted on your FB work page. Or one step away from FB charging money for a "Premium" membership where you can read your employees posts etc.

Bob just liked that you have a new office chair! yea FB can go F themselves. Never was a part of it and all I see is people trying to impress each other with what they did.

Nope

[Bigbutt]

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]

Re:Nope

[Lunix Nutcase]

That would actually be the opposite. You're thinking states with at-will employment.

Re:Nope

[kilfarsnar]

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]

I thought the same thing when I read TFS. My company deals with secret stuff and wouldn't want their data flowing through Facebook's servers. We block cloud storage as it is.

Re:Nope

[Bigbutt]

It was a combination of similar events. He'd been caught taking video inside the company, walking around with his iPad up and recording. Evernote was the well known trigger. And he was a manager (still is just somewhere else). We are pretty picky about electronics. The sign at the front entrance says we're not allowed to bring in USB keys and other personal electronics (like laptops or wireless only tablets). But again, that is more to the "don't let personal devices access the corporate wired/wireless network" and "don't plug personal USB keys into your laptop or the servers". The company supplies hardened USB keys if necessary. Heck, we're not permitted to take pictures of servers in the data center. I have access to the data center archives so can use company approved server images (helps when we have remote hands out and we don't want the wrong server powered off).

I will say that the company deals with human lives in the US and Canada on a daily basis. We were even the subject of a recent Slashdot article :)

[John]

Re:Nope

[drolli]

Fascist? Nope.

Your Employer provides with tools and guidelines. if something is not explicitly allowed, then it is your responsibility to check if it is according to the rules of the company. Giving up the control over data usually is not acceptable.

If you use tools which essentially give up the control over the data to any third party (as you do in evernote), possibly even with terms and conditions which have zero accountability of the service provider, just because you like a service because it is "practical and free".

These "practical and free" services would be where i as attacker would start targeted attacks.

Facebook does not get it

[sinij]

In most fields, trying to do business networking through Facebook is a career-ending move. The brand is forever poisoned.

Re:This article is useless

[MachineShedFred]

Just like the product.

The company I used to work for implemented Microsoft's Yammer, and it was a vast wasteland devoid of any content whatsoever. Just people wasting time with "shout outs."

This is Facebook being led down a path to nowhere because other companies decided to go there. Unfortunately for all of them, these are solutions to a question that nobody asked.

No way businesses will allow this

[Bearhouse]

Let me see, who's going to go an explain to the boss that we should (a) allow users access to FB on work boxen, then (b) encourage them to share business documents on it?

Not me, thanks.

Re:This article is useless

[nucrash]

History seems to repeat itself with every new technology.

1. is new fangled and confusing, only used by a few.
2. hits mass acceptance.
3. is not perceived as useful at work because people will not actually get work done, they will just screw off.
4. starts to become useful and appealing as a way to get work done faster.
5. becomes the status quo for work environment and getting work done becomes impossible without the .

In the place of you can place:

a. Telephone
b. Personal Computer
c. Email
d. Internet
e. Instant Messenger
f. Social Networking
g. Cloud Services
h. Cellular Phones
i. Smart Phones

This is literally the same story over and over and over.

My company is one that blocks Facebook, but there are a select few who are allowed through because... "They can't get their job done without it."
I can tell you that at one time or another access to each of these resources was limited by my company and that slowly over the years, there has been a transition for each and every one of these.

Depends on the security needs

[sjbe]

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.

Re:Depends on the security needs

[swb]

I'm not opposed to a draconian security policy, but I would imagine that one of the major training and education components of working somewhere like that IS training and education about what you can and can't do and what the consequences of doing the wrong thing.

I would expect that having a security clearance would mean I would be subjected to hours (days?) of training in dealing with secrets, where you can put them, where you can't, etc, and the consequences of violating these rules. Using Evernote would be totally unambiguous.

I guess I would also expect that they wouldn't just rely on soft compliance, that there would be technology designed to block access to it and serious (and again, well disseminated) rules about using non-compliant technology for work purposes (ie, you're not going to get away with using your LTE personal iPad in a company meeting because it is basically a circumvention device).

I just don't know how you get to the point where somebody is literally walked out of a building from a meeting after being "discovered" using Evernote. Either they were poorly informed or they were actively interested in obtaining secrets.

Re:Depends on the security needs

[penix1]

It isn't just secrets but any PII. Medical or financial for example. I work in state government and can tell you they have locked down many of these type of sites and track every keystroke and mouse click to include what sites you tried to get to even if it was blocked. It may be that they were fired at the meeting for a previous transgression (not necessarily transgressing at the meeting).

This setting 'asn't got much in it

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Great. Just what I need, another 30 spams a day.

Hard to see it accepted

[swb]

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.

Re:This article is useless

[JaredOfEuropa]

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.

Re:This article is useless

[nine-times]

Hardly anyone I know under the age of 30 uses it unless they're foreign or looking for a new job. I doubt Facebook will have a problem with market penetration like the author of the linked article thinks they will.

So assuming what you're saying is right, it seems like Facebook will run into a completely different problem: they're fighting over a failing market. If nobody wants to use LinkedIn, then who's going to use Facebook's version of LinkedIn?

Re:This article is useless

[Z00L00K]

I don't do Facebook at all and I don't see any reason to either.

I do use Linkedin, but mostly as an address book.

Re:This article is useless

[NeutronCowboy]

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.

Re:All tech companies move on each other

[frank_adrian314159]

However I doubt that I would like my colleagues and Linkedin business contacts to know about my: racing hamster, gunpowder musket and jedi religion hobbies.

But that means you aren't being authentic! And how can you be passionate about your work if you're not authentically passionate? Once Facebook enters the workplace, it's only a matter of time until your social and work life will be entwined even more! And you'll be able to tell all of your "real world" friends about how awesomes your workspace is! And HOW MUCH YOU LOVE YOUR JOB! And to make sure, the company will put out guidelines as to how many posts you output per week (on your "own" time, if there's any left) you need to post to show your dedication to social interaction within the company! Show your authentic selfie! ON! FACEBOOK AT WORK!!!

OK. Sarcasm mode off. How did we get to a point where companies are actually talking about stuff like passion as a requirement for work? I have passion for women and my music and the skilled craft I pursue. But for a job? Well, let's just say it's fine to put in a day and a half's work for a day's pay, huh? Why ask us to fake passion for you, too? But I guess that's what whores always get asked for. And in the end, all of us who trade labor for money are that. Maybe we could look for a better economic system that didn't allow some to make unreasonable demands on others? But I guess that's just me...

Re:This article is useless

[CastrTroy]

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.

Re:This article is useless

[phantomfive]

. 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.

So people can post pictures of corporate lunches?

[toonces33]

Or maybe lolcats with motivational messages from the CEO?

Seriously - F***erberg is just trying to blow more smoke up the backsides of people on Wall Street and try and convince them that he has a plan for "growth". If they were to admit that they have maxed out the number of people, the stock price would plummet.