Unlock Internet or Risk Losing Staff? 519
Dan Warne writes "People don't want to work for employers who heavily restrict internet access, a senior Microsoft executive said in a keynote speech at the opening of Tech.Ed 2006 Sydney today. From the article: 'These kids are saying: forget it! I don't want to work with you. I don't want to work at a place where I can't be freely online during the day," said Microsoft Senior Design Anthropologist Ann Kiera. She dubbed internet-wary employers "digital immigrants" and said the new wave of younger workers were "digital natives".'"
Is that the real reason? (Score:5, Interesting)
Now this statement isn't true at all. Anyone who has ever worked in network security realizes what a complete nightmare this is and that "technology" is having a hell of a tough time keeping up. This article is completely dismissing security as the reason for blocked websites. Leaky browsers and constantly exploited new technologies have made security a serious priority. (I'm not even gonna go into the irony that these comments were made by Microsoft execs...)
A company I had worked for recently had systematically blocked most popular online services over the past couple years. Myspace, hotmail, AIM, gmail... And I see the reason behind it considering we were in a sensative compartmented information facility that restricted external communication (not even allowed to have a cell phone). The company couldn't afford to have a large-scale information leak caused by viruses and/or non-secure communication.
However, there were always ways around. I could still check my old college email through their website, which was not on the restricted list. There were endless forums that were also left unrestricted (they left slashdot alone, thank god). And there was recently an incident within the company recently where someone was fired for pornography. So the general frustration stemmed from the fact that people could still spend all day on forums and looking up porn, but I wasn't even allowed to check my gmail, update my myspace, or send an IM. However, I'm sure the company would've like to block every forum, porn site, and web-based email site if they could. It's just not something that is in any way possible.
At any rate, I don't think most companies are blocking these sites because they are seen as unproductive, but rather for the risks that they pose.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He answers that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
So phones too? (Score:2, Interesting)
Tough (Score:5, Interesting)
Would be nice for a change... (Score:3, Interesting)
On the other hand, unfettered internet access is frequently not a good idea, especially for security reasons - people downloading malware, etc.
I Concur.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Uh huh.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Uh huh.
I work in IT (as people probably know) consulting and service a 911 dispatch call center.
The workstations are restricted from using the Internet, with the exception of a (very) few government and/or explicitly job related sites - through a proxy server (squid).
Also, in the same government complex, 5 of the computers in the jail are also restricted in the same way (different site list, though).
Why?
Because having free and unrestricted access to the Internet only ends up with people downloading games/spyware/junk/explicit content. Intentionally or not. And when you rebuild a machine (that you're on-call for 24/7) in the middle of the night a few times, you'll also lobby the management to allow the restriction.
That's right. I recommended and implemented the almost total Internet ban on those machines.
And no, the computers do not run with Administrator users (they DO have to be Power Users, for the applications that are used) - but some of the nasty malware bypasses the Windows security models....
Re:What is the right browsing? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's like free coffee. (Score:3, Interesting)
I think you're actually agreeing with the Microsoft person here. That's exactly what they're saying.
Open internet access is a perk, and it's one that young employees value. So if you want to recruit and retain people, it's something that as an employer, you should consider. Someone might be willing to work for $35k a year at a place with unrestricted internet, but wouldn't touch a locked-off place for less than $40k. (I'm pulling those numbers out of my ass, admittedly, but you see my point I hope.)
I know people who work in informationally secure environments, and they get paid more than I do. But they need to be, because I wouldn't work there without being paid a lot extra -- I value having access to GMail, being able to keep my cellphone on me, being able to read Slashdot during slow periods, etc. Although I find it distracting and don't do it, other people even keep AIM running from work, to talk to their spouses/kids/whatevers at home, and this isn't a problem.
If I was considering a move to a workplace like theirs, where the computers are totally firewalled and nobody has install rights on them, I wouldn't do it unless there was a substantial increase in some other form of compensation, to offset the loss of these niceities.
That's all anyone is saying; you don't have to provide your workers with Internet access, but a growing number of young, educated people expect it, and probably won't take kindly to not having it around. If you want to compete, you'll either give people what they want, or you'll make it up in some other way (probably with pay).
Digital Native Vs Digital Immigrant (Score:5, Interesting)
Apparently, the fundamental difference between us old-fart teachers (I'm 25, by the way) and today's kids is that they have grown up surrounded by technology to such an extent that their methods of working and interacting with others are totally different to ours.
For example, today's children are likely to be much better multi-taskers. They are used to an environment where the television is on, they are typing to friends using IM, chatting to other friends on the phone whilst simultaneously using Wikipedia to research that night's homework. That feeds back into today's classrom environments, because some kids can't cope without a busy, multi-tasking environment. Their idea of hell is to be sat in silence for an hour trying to revise, or working solidly on a piece of coursework without taking time-out to do something else every other minute.
All in all it was an interesting presentation, but I felt the speaker's idea that the dividing line is purely age based was nonsense. I'd consider myself (and I' d imagine a lot of the
Re:Stolen Data (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not about "Fascist company" but about "protecting YOUR money that you trust us to keep safe for you".
If you'd like your bank tellers to start browsing the internet unfiltered and unprotected from the same terminals they check your accounts with, that's your choice- but I'd prefer to keep the systems that hold my money slightly more restrictive, thanks.
I totally understand the need to use the internet as a wide-ranging contact system, research tool, promotional space, and everything else that we know and love. I couldn't do my job without it. But there's limitations on what you can allow people to do, particularly when sensitive data and money are involved.
Bad practices lead to lost money, lost customers, and lawsuits.
But really, in the financial world, if you need access to specific information you already probably have it via any number of trusted private information delivery systems, so the need to "surf the web" is a bit less. We pay big $$$ for realtime accurate data, so it's not like you need to go hit finance.yahoo.com all day long.
Something makes me think we work in very different environments. Where are you at? An ad agency? Marketing? I can see the need there for less filtering. But not from where I am standing.
my 2 cents.
Do desktops need complete access? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The workday is 24 hours (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is why I am doing consulting. And every once in a while I end up in a gig where I cannot connect my own notebook to the company internal network, or where I cannot contact my companies online support because outgoing openvpn and ssh are restricted, and where I cannot contact my company email because a stupid security policy is forcing me on webmail instead of dimap.
Well, I am much less effective that way, but the price is just the same.
Just give them more work...seriously (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm in the Business Analysis Dept, which really just writes software specs. I would say in a given day I do a solid hours work if any at all. There were days where I had more, but not many. I aksed around to some friends I've made here and it appears no one does much work.
Basically, I surf the web all day or bring a book and read it. My cube is back in a little cubby hole all by itself, and no one comes back here ever. I often wonder why I even come in here most days. I would do work if I had it. I actually go ask my manager for assignments every few days and he never has any. So he gives me some BS work like "get familiar with this spec" which involves reading a 600 page spec that I will never need to work with.
They have decently strict filters here and it makes people mad. I think the general idea is that if we have nothign to do at least let us surf the web a bit more freely. Anyways the whole point of this post is that if I had stuff to do the filters wouldn't really make me mad. I wouldn't be online too much and might not notice. But with nothign to do I bump into them constantly and get annoyed and try to bypass them.
Re:So phones too? (Score:3, Interesting)
Okay. But don't forget that people are human. Everybody has intellectual curiosities about something, and often those are related to the career they're involved in. I work with a bunch of artists. As a result, there's a lot of traffic headed towards CG forums. Sometimes there are informative articles there, sometimes there are arguments about who was the best starship captain. The thing is, work can be mind-numbingly dull. Sometimes you're waiting for a file to save. Sometimes you're doing something tedious. It's good to have a break here and there, and if one learns a new trick of the trade in the process, bonus.
My point? Don't be so harsh. Don't give people shit about their browsing habits if they're getting their work done. In return, the people browsing should show some common sense. Got a big deadline coming up? Don't have your browser open. Don't give your superiors the impression that you don't care. These dudes are paying you a lot of money (regardless of whether you think your salary is high or not) and they're paying a bunch of money for internet access. Don't make them uncomfortable.
If both sides worked on this, there'd be no need for filtering and all that other crap. It was mentioned before that the internet is not to blame. That's absolutely true.
Re:What is the right browsing? (Score:2, Interesting)
Email usage (especially if you're allowed to attach documents) would presumably leak a whole lot more than browsing the internet (which afaik doesn't leak anything), especially considering that sometimes there's not much you can do to control what servers the email passes through before getting to the recipient, yet I don't see many organisations that are "internet unfriendly" prohibiting email usage.
Personally, I think that the "security concern" is just a handy excuse for employers who would rather have their employees working non stop as opposed to taking "browsing breaks"
here at the office... (Score:4, Interesting)
I've quit a job over this issue before (Score:4, Interesting)
I really had no problem with the "normal" filters they had on most of the time, but once in a while, they put the Uber-Super-Anal filters on that would restrict your access to basically read-only Internet. During these "outages" you couldn't go to any online shops, incl. tech bookstores like Bookpool.com (Amazon.com was blocked as well). Some tech resources were also restricted for some reason. The "super siikrit probations" were never announced in advance, nor were we told when they ended. You just noticed, all of a sudden, that half the Internet is gone. And then hours or days later, it was back.
It was definitely one of the reasons why I quit that job.
Re:What is the right browsing? (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, you get far enough and make enough money and then you start to slow down and goof off. There is nothing written in stone that says that we have to work 8 hours a day for our whole lives. I think that most people agree that 30 min. of goof off time is o.k. for the younger set, the older you get though and the closer that you get to retirement the more 2 hours of goof off time looks o.k. If you've worked in an agency that this was considered normal for the past 15-20 years, why change because of a handful of young ones want everyone rushing around "doing something" all the time? You'll get old and become a Wally at one point in life as well.
Re:What is the right browsing? (Score:3, Interesting)
if I were an employer, I'd not pay the faster worker any more than the slow worker if the former didn't actually do more work in total than the latter. I'd pay people by the amount of useful work they did, if i could, not by their appearance of being busy!
however, I work for an organisation which is very wasteful of money and time, such that it's like swimming in treacle to achieve things, so eventually you learn to "go with the flow" and learn to work in bursts and waste, er, enjoy the slack time that it gives you.
Re:Stolen Data (Score:5, Interesting)
You do not get to use company equipment, company internet access, company phone calls, or company time for your own personal needs.
That kind of attitude from an employer only works if you're paying by the hour for unskilled labor.
Personally, I take home the same pay if I work 30 hours or 70 hours a week. I get projects assigned and I have deadlines, and those things come due no matter where I am. If I have to leave in the middle of the day to take care of something personal, I might work from home that night or over the weekend to make sure my projects get done. The end result? I probably work more hours a week (and am more productive) than someone who works straight from 9 to 5 but never a second over. Plus, I'm happy doing it.
From a business point of view, company equipment, company internet access and company phone lines are dirt cheap compared to an employee. For a medium sized company, those other expenses wouldn't even comprise 1/10th of a single employee's salary. (I know; I pay all of those bills for a medium sized company) As long as that employee is getting their work done on time it doesn't matter if they're sitting on IM all day talking to their wife, occasionally unwinding on slashdot, or calling their doctor.
Already addressed... (Score:3, Interesting)
My solution was to set up an Apache-SSL server on one of my machines, hook a CGI proxy software into it, and run an SSH server on a high port. That then allows me to browse the web and still get into my systems at work. Avoiding the stupidity of remote evesdropping is also alleviated by plugging my laptop into the network and faking to the Windows domain controller.
I know just what they feel (Score:1, Interesting)
I'm a 'computer native' finding myself more and more amongst 'computer immigrants'. As far as I consider it, most of you will be gone again when AOL goes out of business. Just a blip on the radar.
Having worked for a huge multinational bank, I can see limiting net access for security reasons. We had enough thieves robbing the place blind already, we didn't need to give them the ability to cut and paste the credit-card numbers database directly onto craiglist. In cases where employee theft of tangible company assets (I don't mean Internet resources, I mean stock-in-trade) is not a concern, I would consider Internet access not only a valuable perk but an outright necessity.
Chester and Lester (Score:3, Interesting)
Chester and Lester are your employees. What Chester does in 8 hours Lester can do in 2 hours and at the same level of quality, but Lester can work only for 2 hours per day. I take it you would pay both employees the same rate per day, right? If so, that was Brushfireb's point. And I agree with your point that it's a good idea for Lester to "look busy" in order to maintain group morale.