Ban the Internet @ Work
There’s been a lot of discussion recently about companies and government agencies banning the use of Facebook amid concerns employees will be too distracted. It’s produced two arguments:
1. Many employees, in fact, will be distracted and, as a result, far less productive;
2. You should trust your employees to be responsible for their Internet usage otherwise the entire employer-employee pact breaks down.
After much thought, I’ve come to the conclusion that Internet usage at work should be banned other than a small group of Web sites pertinent to someone’s job. It’s a radical stance but it’s only way to maintain productivity at a time when there are so many new online services that tempt employees to stop working.
Whether it’s social networking (Facebook, MySpace), e-commerce (Amazon.com) videos (YouTube), auctions (eBay), e-mail (GMail, Hotmail), blogging (Blogger, Wordpress), gossip (Perez Hilton, TMZ) or TV (Slingbox), the Web is a productivity-killer. It’s not that employees can’t be trusted, it’s just that the Web is simply too tempting for many people to resist. If you honestly think about how much time you spend online at work doing something not related to work, it’s impossible to refute this argument.
As a result, companies have two choices: they can leave the doors wide open and hope employees do the right thing (don’t count on it), or they can shut the doors really tight and watch productivity soar. To make sure you don’t cut people off entirely, companies should set up a small number of Internet kiosks where employees can check their e-mail during a break. You’ll probably get some flack from people who believe they have a right to waste time (or check their personal e-mail, watch a video, make an eBay bid, etc.) but they work for you; you don’t work for them.
While employers are at it, they should ban people from smoking outside their buildings. Talk about another huge productivity-killer if you figure the average smoker takes three or four, 15-minute breaks a day. As well, employers should ban personal calls on cell phones within the office, which are annoying and do nothing for corporate productivity.
For anyone who fool-hardedly believes my advice is radical/absurb, consider a recent study by Microsoft, AOL and Salary.com that suggests the average U.S. employee spend 45 hours at work but wastes 16 hours doing things such as surfing the Web, talking about last night’s TV shows, blogging, talking on the phone, etc. Steve Pavlina suggests we only work 1.5 hours a day, and the average worker doesn’t really start doing “real work” until 11 a.m.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:15 am
Exactly what companies/jobs would this apply too? Although I’d agree many employees tend to waste time on various sites; some occupations (computer technicians, programmers, researchers, need I mention web site designers and bloggers…) rely crucially on internet access and search engines to find information pertaining to their various jobs. You can’t simply limit them to a few ‘pertainint’ website as, I personally anyway, come across a variety of situations everyday that I must actively search solutions for. Limiting these people’s access would seriously harm their productivity. When you mention email, are you referring to all email or just non-work related? Work related email usually needs to be checked and responded to during all times of the day, at least from what I’ve deserved. It seems to be a more balanced solution needs to be found then an all-or-none attitude, even if I’m not exactly sure what that would be. Just a few thoughts anyway.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:53 am
what nonsense! You cannot increase productivity by reducing access to information. it’s like saying telephones will cause a major disruption because workers will only use them to call home ET.
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:01 am
Are you trolling, Mark? It is Sunday
Seriously though, I couldn’t disagree more. I think once you start down that road, it’s a slippery slope to complete workplace fascism.
Obviously, if your employees don’t need the Internet for any job-related reason, then by all means exclude it. But to restrict it to the extent that you’re describing is effectively treating your employees like children, or worse — is that the kind of relationship you want to have with your workers? Maybe it is, but you should be aware of the downside too.
While we’re at it, maybe we should ban looking out the window, or standing around the water-cooler talking about American Idol. Maybe we should ban doodling and day-dreaming too — or install keystroke loggers so that we can see who types the fastest and who is wasting time by pausing between letters.
If an employee is spending too much time on sites like Facebook, there are lots of ways of determining that and dealing with it — that’s what server logs are for. I don’t think there’s any reason to put virtual handcuffs on people, unless for some reason you *want* to have an adversarial relationship with your employees.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Mathew,
You’ve raised some other excellent ideas to increase productivity. Maybe we should get rid of the water coolers as well!
So maybe banning all Web usage is a bit extreme but I do believe making sure people use the Web at the right time in the right way will become more of a challenge as things such as social networking sites become more a part of our daily lives.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:34 pm
I’ll just say these ideas would have worked well in 2002 when unemployment was high and people were desperate for jobs. Now that the unemployment rates are low and hiring is back in silicon valley, you certainly wouldn’t attract many tech employees with these limitations.
Ultimately while you have a point about wasteful internet usage at work it’s about who has the upper hand. When it’s hard to hire people companies have to start pulling out the perks (of which net usage is undoubtedly one) in order to attract employees - or keep their current ones from jumping ship to a company that will treat them more kindly.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Why does everyone always point their finger at the internet as being the primary cause for wasted time?
Mark, you quoted a recent study as saying that employees waste their time “surfing the Web, talking about last night’s TV shows, blogging, talking on the phone, etc.”.
Maybe we should also ban TV, blogging, and every other form of basic communication, not just at work, but also while you are employed by anyone to avoid you coming to work with something other than work related to talk about.
Doesn’t this study - on which you are basing your assumption - show that the internet is only one of the many channels by which the average employee wastes his time?
If you take the internet away, people will find another way to access it or another way to waste their time. And when that happens, history shows us that is will most likely be more rampant and prevalent than prior.
You saw what happened with Digg and the AACS key, and don’t get me started on the true effect of killing Napster many years ago.
If you want more productivity, give employees a reason to feel the need to be more productive. When you’re motivated, you’re less likely to lose focus of your priorities.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:50 pm
The thing is, I work in uneven bursts. Sometimes it’ll look like I wasted the entire day surfing the net and other days I do an insane amount of work.
As a developer, I would not be happy if the company assumes I cannot get my work done and decides to shut off internet access. That would just be asanine.
If I’m not delivering my work on time, then we can talk. Otherwise, I should be able to surf the net all I want.
Seriously, some days I may work for 6 hours and I’m not productive. Other days I work for an hour and invent something phenomenal.
June 4th, 2007 at 7:44 am
The only question I’ve got is how is vital information like this going to get into the workplace?
June 4th, 2007 at 11:46 am
I have to agree with Mathew’s comment - draw the line in the sand by banning access to online social media outlets, and you run the risk of creating a workplace culture which is stagnant, paranoid and lacks the imagination and creativity to keep your company ahead of the curve.
The debate around banning sites like Facebook and MySpace does in part revolve around productivity issues. However, its also the derogatory comments which has raised concerns in both the public and private sectors.
I believe that we are still in a reactionary phase when it comes to turning to workplace policies to correct some of the issues related to productivity and trash-talking. I look at it similarly to the wave of deucing that was occurring when people were getting fired merely for having a blog.
In an article describing some of the risks associated to “Free Web Apps”, I touched on how workplace policies and guidelines are a good starting point. Extreme policies which ban outright participation on a social networking sites, or for even having a blog is not the solution. Some companies expect their employees to be using their time at work performing the duties for which they are being paid - however, employers ought not assume that they don’t need to put together guidelines clearly defining the parameters of use, nor should the employee assume that if there isn’t a policy, that its safe to blog or spend time on Facebook or MySpace.
I believe a balance might be struck by openly discussing online Internet usage at work with staff. Extreme approaches of outright banning will have some fallout. Aside from the aforementioned cultural backlash, you will get folks questioning banning policies when they discover that Ned (the tech geek whose job duties rely heavily on internet usage) is always online, alluding to the possibility that the policy may be treating some staff with preference.
And although your position is an extreme one, outright banning is one of the main views which is informing business with more conservative leanings. Asking your employer and being well-informed of the existence of any workplace guidelines is always a good idea and can save you from the awkwardness and embarrassment of being terminated for having a livejournal or blogger account. Or worse, for starting a “water-cooler” or “company” themed group on Facebook or MySpace for your co-workers.
June 4th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
I see both sides, and it’s a tough call. I’ve seen a lot of employees waste lots of time surfing the web, and the assumption is that they do work outside of normal hours as well, so it’s hard to get too upset.
As for me, I’m relied upon to come up with new ideas and things to do at work, and a big part of that for me is reading blog entries, checking out new “cool” sites, and interacting with my peers. If my company were to limit access to the internet for me, it would either severely limit the ability for me to do my job, or cause me to push those activities into my free time at home (in which case, I’d be changing jobs rather quickly).
It’s a tough call.
June 4th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Duane,
I think there are people who legitimately need to have unfettered Web access (well, almost unfettered access!) so they can do their jobs properly. Clearly, you fall into that camp.
June 4th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
What you propose is total garbage. You do realize that probably a good majority of those who read your blogs and those associated with b5 media participate during work hours right? If we were going to ban access it would punch a hole right into the blogosphere.
Secondly, some of the greatest ideas companies have capitalized on were discovered during a browsing session online from the workplace. My company always finds great products to make our business grow because we started with something like “What is google inc up to today?” or “Oh look what Mark Evans is talking about… that sounds like a great company, lets see what they are doing”
There will always be time wasted no matter what is banned. For all the efficiency that the Internet has given us and the ever increasing work load people have to face in their every day lives, give them a break and let them surf!
June 6th, 2007 at 9:07 am
Mark,
As an employer, I truly appreciate the sentiment here. I know that our team, myself included loses time surfing (one would argue that I’m doing just that now). The issue in my view is that the lines between work and personal life are blurry. Until companies can promise not to ask their people to carry laptops & blackberrys, and not to work from home, etc. they are on shaky ground asking their people not to have some personal activity spill into their time at the office.
Mark
June 22nd, 2007 at 2:40 am
I’d rather have no internet at my workplace if the IT department and company policy is paranoid about what sites I access. If you’re going to have internet access for your employees you might as well have minimal blocked sites or restrictions. Websense and similar programs are like the anti christ, and dont even work properly, often blocking useful sites for work place productivity. So wasting 7 hours a day on the net is probably a problem but as long as an productive then why the worry if someone checks their gmail account???
July 7th, 2007 at 3:53 am
I think the solution for this, is using a webfiltering application like websense or webwasher that will block all non-bussines related sites.
January 10th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
I completely agree with the author. Who are we kidding, for most jobs internet access isn’t required and should be completely disabled.
Checking sports scores from the night before, the news and weather all day are a waste of my time, and my company shouldn’t (and isn’t) paying me to do those things.
May 9th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
I just ran into this article while researching Internet access policies. I agree with the “idea” behind it, though we’re going to do something different. The Internet is necessary for many workers who need it to do their jobs. If they don’t need it, then tough luck. For those who think that it doesn’t cost a company time and money to keep idle staff happily enjoying YouTube or Facebook think again. In today’s world choking off the Internet doesn’t make sense for those who depend on it to keep the company competitive. But there’s absolutely no reason why the receptionist should be on MSN chat just because there’s nobody in reception.