I was just reading that Google offered to buy the social-commerce site Groupon.com for around $6 Billion...at first I swore the number must have been a typo. Google must be crazy to pay that much. Then I came across another article reporting that Groupon was going to reject the Google bid and remain an independent company. Right now my head is spinning. I can't decide who's crazier. $6 Billion seems like way too much money for a website/company whose sole source of revenue is derived from small business. Furthermore, according to nearly all reports I've read (which I will freely admit is not a comprehensive sample), nearly half of the businesses that have tried Groupon say they will not use the service again.
There is a fundamental issue with Groupon from the perspective of a small business. While the exposure and influx of new customers might seem like a positive in the short-term, one must consider the long-term cost. First off all, the business is discounting their respective product or service by 50% or more. On top of that, they need to pay Groupon 50% of the revenue they earn from the promotion. In essence, the company is giving up 75% of their revenue, destroying margins and eliminating profitability (except in a few select industries with extraordinary mark-ups).
Now, you could argue that it's ok to lose money on a promotion as long as the company is gaining customers and setting the stage for long-term growth and profitability. Unfortunately, that is not what happens in an overwhelming majority of the cases. As has been demonstrated by academic theory and real-world study, price-promotions generally harm long-term brand value (see here). In short, value consumers rarely become brand loyal consumers. They will hop from one phenomenal deal to the next seeking steep discounts along the way. These are not the kinds of consumers on whom you want to base your business.
Groupon is currently enjoying extraordinary success. The founders should be extremely proud of the business they have built and of the impact they have had on group buying and social media. Each day more and more consumers sign-up and take part in the daily Groupon. However, Google must recognize that the customers that Groupon needs to worry about are the small businesses. As the group coupon/group buying space matures competitors will emerge and small business will get smarter. I have serious doubts that the business can scale enough to cover a $6 Billion purchase price. I'd love to hear other thoughts.
Good Talk,
Tom
Friday, December 3, 2010
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Electric Cars and Electric Rates - What Policy/Rate Changes Are Coming?
I've spent a lot of time thinking about the future of our electric grid and how it will change with the advent of a truly smart grid as well as the widespread adoption of electric cars. One of the biggest constraints of electricity generation and delivery is that we can not (to date) effectively store electricity. We either use it or lose it.
We're currently working on a smart grid that will allow energy to flow from the utility company to the consumer, and also the other way. This will allow those with wind mills or solar panels to sell energy back to the grid.
Electric cars rely on huge batteries to charge at night and then power the car during the daily commute. One of the really exciting things about widespread adoption (should it occur) is that we will have the largest collection of batteries in the history of man. If you charge your car fully over night (when electricity is cheaper), then drive a few miles to work you're not going to deplete the whole battery. There will be a lot of stored charge.
Imagine being able to plug-in at work and sell that electricity back to the utility at peak rates (after having paid off-peak rates to charge it over-night). For this to work, however, you will need a personal utility account (like a debit card). Otherwise, your employer would get the credit (since it's probably his plug).
There are, of course, other uses: What if you get to a friend's house for dinner and your car is running low? Should your friend have to pay for you to charge your car? Of course not!
We will need to separate the idea of a utility meter from a house/office. Currently utilities track premises. In general there is one premise per home. I think in the future it might look more like one premise per person.
There are also other options utility companies are looking at. According to a recent Wall St Journal article, some utilities are offering an "all you can eat" rate plan specifically for charging electric cars (Detroit-Edison), others are offering lower rates and free charging stations. This does not solve the problem of charging away from home, but it can provide incentive to move to an electric car. The same article suggests that someone driving a Nissan Leaf 100 miles a day (which admittedly seems like a lot) can save more $350 a month compared to driving a traditional internal combustion car getting 25 MPG.
I think the real interesting question is "how will governments respond to electric cars?" I imagine we'll see some free/heavily discounted public charging stations at least initially. Just as cities/states provide roads for our cars, I think it's reasonable that they will provide power to speed the adoption of electric vehicles (and by "free", of course I mean tax payer funded...)
I'll be interested to see what other policy changes emerge as a result of electric cars.
Good Talk,
Tom
[Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703882404575519641915241922.html]
We're currently working on a smart grid that will allow energy to flow from the utility company to the consumer, and also the other way. This will allow those with wind mills or solar panels to sell energy back to the grid.
Electric cars rely on huge batteries to charge at night and then power the car during the daily commute. One of the really exciting things about widespread adoption (should it occur) is that we will have the largest collection of batteries in the history of man. If you charge your car fully over night (when electricity is cheaper), then drive a few miles to work you're not going to deplete the whole battery. There will be a lot of stored charge.
Imagine being able to plug-in at work and sell that electricity back to the utility at peak rates (after having paid off-peak rates to charge it over-night). For this to work, however, you will need a personal utility account (like a debit card). Otherwise, your employer would get the credit (since it's probably his plug).
There are, of course, other uses: What if you get to a friend's house for dinner and your car is running low? Should your friend have to pay for you to charge your car? Of course not!
We will need to separate the idea of a utility meter from a house/office. Currently utilities track premises. In general there is one premise per home. I think in the future it might look more like one premise per person.
There are also other options utility companies are looking at. According to a recent Wall St Journal article, some utilities are offering an "all you can eat" rate plan specifically for charging electric cars (Detroit-Edison), others are offering lower rates and free charging stations. This does not solve the problem of charging away from home, but it can provide incentive to move to an electric car. The same article suggests that someone driving a Nissan Leaf 100 miles a day (which admittedly seems like a lot) can save more $350 a month compared to driving a traditional internal combustion car getting 25 MPG.
I think the real interesting question is "how will governments respond to electric cars?" I imagine we'll see some free/heavily discounted public charging stations at least initially. Just as cities/states provide roads for our cars, I think it's reasonable that they will provide power to speed the adoption of electric vehicles (and by "free", of course I mean tax payer funded...)
I'll be interested to see what other policy changes emerge as a result of electric cars.
Good Talk,
Tom
[Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703882404575519641915241922.html]
Monday, November 29, 2010
IT and Energy - Implications for Economics, Environment and National Security
The Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory estimates the cost of power outages in the United States at over $80,000,000,000 (that's $80 Billion) each year. The major outage in 2003 that blacked out large portions of the North East is estimated to have cost the city of New York over $1 Billion (or $36 Million per hour) and has an estimated overall cost of over $6 Billion (these figures include direct costs and indirect costs such as loss of inventory due to spoilages, lost business revenue etc). Clearly our aging power grid poses real risks to our economy. Given our reliance on computers (which require electricity) for everything from war fighting to financial transactions to public transportation, it's also easy to see that our aging infrastructure poses a real threat to national security. Our government has already discovered concrete plans by terrorist organizations to target our electricity grid.
So how can IT help? Broadband technologies coupled with cutting edge demand management software, outage monitoring sensors and improved data storage &a analysis can improve both the cost effectiveness and security of our energy grid. Currently the grid is a one way street. Energy flows from one of the thousands of utility companies to one of the millions of homes and business across the US. Each month the usage of that home or business is tabulated/read (either over a network or by a meter-reader) and a bill is prepared. When an outage happens, the utility is slow to find out and slow to respond.
In the future, a smart grid can help in all these areas. A smart grid turns our one way street into a two-way mutli-lane super highway. Electricity flows from the utility to the consumer, but also can flow from the consumer back to the grid (think solar panels, windmills, and electric car batteries) allowing for more effective peak demand management and creative revenue models.
Demand management software can keep the generation of electricity optimized. Currently, peak demand (or critical peak demand) requires utility companies to purchase expense electricity on the spot market or to fire up old, outdated, expensive, and heavily polluting plants that are kept only for emergencies. New software can help both customers and utilities manage demand by issuing load control commands (imagine the utility remotely turning off your air conditioner) and voluntary demand incentives (imagine getting a text message asking you to turn off your A/C in exchange for a credit on your bill). All of this can be automated and optimized.
Remote sensors along the grid can provide real-time information to the utilities companies about the health of the grid. The 2003 blackout was caused when one of the high-capacity lines in Ohio became over-taxed, causing it to heat up and sag (as the lines carry more power they get hotter which causes them to expand and sag). This particular line sagged too close to an untrimmed tree resulting in a "flashover" that cause and ambient surge. Ultimately the surge caused a cascading blackout affecting millions. A remote sensor on this part of the grid could have alerted the local utility (in this case FirstEnergy Corporation) and the line could have been shut down or throttled. (I'm intentionally ignoring the fact that better landscaping could also have prevented the blackout).
Finally, better data management through the smart grid can mitigate the effect of outages and reduce their overall impact and cost. Outage Management Systems (OMS) can proactively monitor a company's network and take action in the event of an outage. This will decrease response time and scope, leading to faster restoration of service.
IT is needed every step of the way to bring about a future smart grid. With over 3,000 utility companies in the United States interoperability standards will need to be developed (my guess is IP, but it could be something entirely different). Additionally, technologies for the consumer will need to be developed. I've had the privilege of testing some of the most cutting edge load control devices, thermostats, and in-home displays, and the information they provide will truly change consumer behavior. This provides a win for our economy, a win for the environment and a win for national security.
The National Broadband Plan, the 2008 stimulus bill, and other legislation has already highlighted the benefits of a smart grid and provided some early funding. Large scale programs are underway in TX, CA, FL and other states and soon, the technologies will be deployed in CT. The future is uncertain, the potential is great.
Good Talk,
Tom
[Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Blackout_of_2003, http://www.elcon.org/Documents/EconomicImpactsOfAugust2003Blackout.pdf, http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/EETD-power-interruptions.html ]
So how can IT help? Broadband technologies coupled with cutting edge demand management software, outage monitoring sensors and improved data storage &a analysis can improve both the cost effectiveness and security of our energy grid. Currently the grid is a one way street. Energy flows from one of the thousands of utility companies to one of the millions of homes and business across the US. Each month the usage of that home or business is tabulated/read (either over a network or by a meter-reader) and a bill is prepared. When an outage happens, the utility is slow to find out and slow to respond.
In the future, a smart grid can help in all these areas. A smart grid turns our one way street into a two-way mutli-lane super highway. Electricity flows from the utility to the consumer, but also can flow from the consumer back to the grid (think solar panels, windmills, and electric car batteries) allowing for more effective peak demand management and creative revenue models.
Demand management software can keep the generation of electricity optimized. Currently, peak demand (or critical peak demand) requires utility companies to purchase expense electricity on the spot market or to fire up old, outdated, expensive, and heavily polluting plants that are kept only for emergencies. New software can help both customers and utilities manage demand by issuing load control commands (imagine the utility remotely turning off your air conditioner) and voluntary demand incentives (imagine getting a text message asking you to turn off your A/C in exchange for a credit on your bill). All of this can be automated and optimized.
Remote sensors along the grid can provide real-time information to the utilities companies about the health of the grid. The 2003 blackout was caused when one of the high-capacity lines in Ohio became over-taxed, causing it to heat up and sag (as the lines carry more power they get hotter which causes them to expand and sag). This particular line sagged too close to an untrimmed tree resulting in a "flashover" that cause and ambient surge. Ultimately the surge caused a cascading blackout affecting millions. A remote sensor on this part of the grid could have alerted the local utility (in this case FirstEnergy Corporation) and the line could have been shut down or throttled. (I'm intentionally ignoring the fact that better landscaping could also have prevented the blackout).
Finally, better data management through the smart grid can mitigate the effect of outages and reduce their overall impact and cost. Outage Management Systems (OMS) can proactively monitor a company's network and take action in the event of an outage. This will decrease response time and scope, leading to faster restoration of service.
IT is needed every step of the way to bring about a future smart grid. With over 3,000 utility companies in the United States interoperability standards will need to be developed (my guess is IP, but it could be something entirely different). Additionally, technologies for the consumer will need to be developed. I've had the privilege of testing some of the most cutting edge load control devices, thermostats, and in-home displays, and the information they provide will truly change consumer behavior. This provides a win for our economy, a win for the environment and a win for national security.
The National Broadband Plan, the 2008 stimulus bill, and other legislation has already highlighted the benefits of a smart grid and provided some early funding. Large scale programs are underway in TX, CA, FL and other states and soon, the technologies will be deployed in CT. The future is uncertain, the potential is great.
Good Talk,
Tom
[Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Blackout_of_2003, http://www.elcon.org/Documents/EconomicImpactsOfAugust2003Blackout.pdf, http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/EETD-power-interruptions.html ]
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Health Care and IT - National Broadband Plan
Recently the federal government released something called the National Broadband Plan that lays out the framework for a national effort to ensure that, as a country, we are making the most of available broadband technology. One of the challenges the National Broadband Plan hopes to tackle is the synergies between health care and IT. The plan is comprehensive in nature and lays out 5 key elements that will allow our health care providers to utilize current and future IT trends to provide better, cheaper, and more efficient care.
Ensure Access to Affordable Broadband by Rural Health Care Providers - the plan suggests that the FCC make use around $400Million in annual funds already authorized. The concern is that commercially available broadband is often priced too high to be affordable, or is simply insufficient to support modern health care needs.
Create Economic Incentives to Encourage Broad Adoption of IT and IT innovation - this tenant of the plan aims to increase the use of innovative IT products to improve the overall health care system. It supports Electronic Health Records and E-care. This part of the pan recognizes that broadband connectivity alone is not sufficient to get the most out of the current and future IT environment.
Use New Techniques in Data Analytics - Given the mass amounts of data generated and stored by modern IT systems, a move to broader adoption of health care IT will allow providers to make use of advanced analytics techniques. Spotting patterns in data may lead to better treatment and new cures.
Revise Standards around Licensing, Credentialing and Privileging - Many of these rules were written in the 20th century in a time before broadband and the technology of today. The National Broadband Plan aims to re-write these rules to speed the adoption of E-Care.
Protect Privacy - This is probably the biggest issue in Health Care IT. We will not see widespread adoption of electronic health records, E-Care, or health care IT until providers and patients are comfortable with the standards of privacy. In a time when we expose more and more information about ourselves online, most people are still not willing to share their medical information with anyone other than their provider and their insurance company.
These are the five major points of the National Broadband Plan as it relates to Health Care IT. In other posts I will examine the plan as it relates to other areas of national interest.
Good Talk,
Tom
Ensure Access to Affordable Broadband by Rural Health Care Providers - the plan suggests that the FCC make use around $400Million in annual funds already authorized. The concern is that commercially available broadband is often priced too high to be affordable, or is simply insufficient to support modern health care needs.
Create Economic Incentives to Encourage Broad Adoption of IT and IT innovation - this tenant of the plan aims to increase the use of innovative IT products to improve the overall health care system. It supports Electronic Health Records and E-care. This part of the pan recognizes that broadband connectivity alone is not sufficient to get the most out of the current and future IT environment.
Use New Techniques in Data Analytics - Given the mass amounts of data generated and stored by modern IT systems, a move to broader adoption of health care IT will allow providers to make use of advanced analytics techniques. Spotting patterns in data may lead to better treatment and new cures.
Revise Standards around Licensing, Credentialing and Privileging - Many of these rules were written in the 20th century in a time before broadband and the technology of today. The National Broadband Plan aims to re-write these rules to speed the adoption of E-Care.
Protect Privacy - This is probably the biggest issue in Health Care IT. We will not see widespread adoption of electronic health records, E-Care, or health care IT until providers and patients are comfortable with the standards of privacy. In a time when we expose more and more information about ourselves online, most people are still not willing to share their medical information with anyone other than their provider and their insurance company.
These are the five major points of the National Broadband Plan as it relates to Health Care IT. In other posts I will examine the plan as it relates to other areas of national interest.
Good Talk,
Tom
IBM's Decision to Adopt Firefox as its Default Internal Browser
If you read my recent post about corporate IT policy (and my employers refusal to allow Chrome) you'll know that I'm not a big fan of Microsoft Internet Explorer. I find it to be slow and somewhat prone to security holes. I found it interesting that back in July IBM made the decision to use Mozilla's Firefox as its default web browser for employee computer. In the announcement Bob Suter, IBM's vice president of Linux and open source software, called out five key reasons for the move:
The move seems to make sense for IBM, but what does it mean to the larger business community? In other words, why is this important?
First, it means approximately 400,000 employees of IBM will now automatically have Firefox installed on their machines. This is a fairly significant number of users and demonstrates that Firefox can be an appropriate enterprise-wide solution for web browsing (and that there are alternatives to IE).
Secondly, it is a big win for open source standards. Mozilla has kept Firefox steadfastly open-sourced with excellent documentation and wonderful security. As more and more applications move to the cloud we are all going to come to rely on open source standards both for security as well as interoperability and ease of use. IBM's adoption of Firefox is a big step in that direction.
Ultimately this move should benefit IBM employees with faster browsing and a better online experience. But, I think the move benefits all of us as this "endorsement" should spur interest and faith in open source solutions for other enterprise tools.
Good Talk,
Tom
Source: http://www.sutor.com/c/2010/07/ibm-moving-to-firefox-as-default-browser/
- Firefox is stunningly standards compliant, and interoperability via open standards is key to IBM’s strategy.
- Firefox is open source and its development schedule is managed by a development community not beholden to one commercial entity.
- Firefox is secure and an international community of experts continues to develop and maintain it.
- Firefox is extensible and can be customized for particular applications and organizations, like IBM.
- Firefox is innovative and has forced the hand of browsers that came before and after it to add and improve speed and function.
The move seems to make sense for IBM, but what does it mean to the larger business community? In other words, why is this important?
First, it means approximately 400,000 employees of IBM will now automatically have Firefox installed on their machines. This is a fairly significant number of users and demonstrates that Firefox can be an appropriate enterprise-wide solution for web browsing (and that there are alternatives to IE).
Secondly, it is a big win for open source standards. Mozilla has kept Firefox steadfastly open-sourced with excellent documentation and wonderful security. As more and more applications move to the cloud we are all going to come to rely on open source standards both for security as well as interoperability and ease of use. IBM's adoption of Firefox is a big step in that direction.
Ultimately this move should benefit IBM employees with faster browsing and a better online experience. But, I think the move benefits all of us as this "endorsement" should spur interest and faith in open source solutions for other enterprise tools.
Good Talk,
Tom
Source: http://www.sutor.com/c/2010/07/ibm-moving-to-firefox-as-default-browser/
Monday, November 22, 2010
New IT policy for the United States Army
The Army is rarely thought of as an organization relying on IT. We're more apt to associate the Army with mortars and guns and basic training, but the truth is that today's Army is a huge purchaser and user of Information Technology. Whether it's campaign coordination by the generals or real-time data updates to the soldiers on the ground, the increasing use of IT has become a definite advantage in the Army's war fighting ability.
Recently the LT. Gen Jeff Sorenson, the Army's Chief Information Officer, put out a memo announcing the Army's new policy on procurement and implementation of software solutions. The focus is around ensuring compatibility of systems across all Army units. The memo spells out a Common Operating Environment (COE) for the entire US Army. The memo states "Implementation of COE will decrease the time it takes to deliver relevant applications to the war fighters who need them, and decrease the cost of doing so."
The COE policy is part of a larger Army policy called Army Software Transformation (AST) that aims to move the Army's software procurement, implementation and management policies to the cutting edge and make our war fighters even more effective. Other aspects of AST include improved email (a move to Exchange Server), Active Directory, Enterprise Network Operations, Data Center Consolidation, and a move toward Agile development.
From General George Casey, US Army Chief of Staff: "We're building an Army that is a versatile mix of tailorable and networked organizations operating on a rational basis...to provide a sustained flow of trained and ready forces for full spectrum operations...and to hedge against unexpected contingencies...at a tempo that is predictable and and sustainable for our all-volunteer forces".
The new IT policies are helping to improve today's Army and make our soldiers more effective in fighting the new kinds of conflicts we're seeing in Afghanistan, Iraq and around the world. I'm confident our soldiers can rise to the occasion and create a world class IT organization.
Good Talk,
Tom
Sources:
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/index.php?nid=35&sid=2116410
http://ciog6.army.mil/ArmyEnterpriseNetworkVision/tabid/79/Default.aspx
http://ciog6.army.mil/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=j4DkCajsfGQ%3d&tabid=79
Recently the LT. Gen Jeff Sorenson, the Army's Chief Information Officer, put out a memo announcing the Army's new policy on procurement and implementation of software solutions. The focus is around ensuring compatibility of systems across all Army units. The memo spells out a Common Operating Environment (COE) for the entire US Army. The memo states "Implementation of COE will decrease the time it takes to deliver relevant applications to the war fighters who need them, and decrease the cost of doing so."
The COE policy is part of a larger Army policy called Army Software Transformation (AST) that aims to move the Army's software procurement, implementation and management policies to the cutting edge and make our war fighters even more effective. Other aspects of AST include improved email (a move to Exchange Server), Active Directory, Enterprise Network Operations, Data Center Consolidation, and a move toward Agile development.
From General George Casey, US Army Chief of Staff: "We're building an Army that is a versatile mix of tailorable and networked organizations operating on a rational basis...to provide a sustained flow of trained and ready forces for full spectrum operations...and to hedge against unexpected contingencies...at a tempo that is predictable and and sustainable for our all-volunteer forces".
The new IT policies are helping to improve today's Army and make our soldiers more effective in fighting the new kinds of conflicts we're seeing in Afghanistan, Iraq and around the world. I'm confident our soldiers can rise to the occasion and create a world class IT organization.
Good Talk,
Tom
Sources:
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/index.php?nid=35&sid=2116410
http://ciog6.army.mil/ArmyEnterpriseNetworkVision/tabid/79/Default.aspx
http://ciog6.army.mil/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=j4DkCajsfGQ%3d&tabid=79
Are Mobile Devices Creating a Problem for IT and HR?
Mobile smart phones are clearly one of the fastest growing technologies of the last decade. The ubiquitousness of Blackberries, iPhones, Droids, Evos and others have, in many ways, made life easier for everyone. We are now in near constant contact with clients, colleagues, friends, and family. From a productivity point of view this is a very good thing (we'll leave the psychological and emotional discussion until another time). We can be much responsive to the needs of those around us and we can be much better informed than at any time in the past. However, there is one issue that is beginning to creep up in companies around the world.
Most IT departments, especially at large companies, have a fairly well defined policy about the use of the companies' network resources and what types of behavior are permissible and what are prohibited. These policies vary from company to company and are enforced to vary degrees of effectiveness. I've worked with companies allow Facebook and YouTube at work, recognizing the needs of employees to take a mental break every now and then. I've worked at a company that allows only a predefined list sites necessary to conduct business (even sites like NYTIMES.com and Yahoo.com were blocked). And then I've worked at companies that fall somewhere in the middle (i.e. no business use for YouTube, but you might want to buy a gift for a boss/coworker on yahoo shopping). In all of these cases, my conversations with IT managers have made clear the policies are well thought out and consistent with the culture and values of the company. All offensive content is blocked at 99% of the companies I've worked with (1 had no web-filter at all and a very open culture).
But how do you deal with the little computers in our pockets that run on a cell phone signal? When employees can bring their own network to work, the risk to companies is much higher. Clearly, IT can manage the risk of viruses/malware to the network (after all, my Droid does not interact with my clients network very often). This risk is fairly straightforward and familiar to IT managers. But what about the risk of displaying offensive content? IT can't filter the browser on a privately owned smart phone. I'm sure we all know colleagues that have called up the latest YouTube sensation at lunch or on a break. I'm a sure a couple people even know colleagues that have shown pornography at work (thankfully, I've never been in that situation). From an HR point of view the risk of a sexual harassment claim or a hostile work environment claim (think offensive jokes, videos, etc) is increased by the increasing presence of our smart phones. Additionally, most of these smart phones have cameras. There is a real risk of employees photographing confidential information.
So what is the answer? Honestly, there is no easy answer. I know a couple employers that ban cell phones inside all their buildings (mostly employers involved with classified government work). This seems like an extreme measure and for some industries (sales and consulting come to mind) would cripple your work force. If there is a simple technology solution, I'm not aware of it. I think the solution will be a mix of carefully enforced policy and a culture of respect in the workplace. I, for one, will be interested to see how it plays out in the future.
Good Talk,
Tom
Most IT departments, especially at large companies, have a fairly well defined policy about the use of the companies' network resources and what types of behavior are permissible and what are prohibited. These policies vary from company to company and are enforced to vary degrees of effectiveness. I've worked with companies allow Facebook and YouTube at work, recognizing the needs of employees to take a mental break every now and then. I've worked at a company that allows only a predefined list sites necessary to conduct business (even sites like NYTIMES.com and Yahoo.com were blocked). And then I've worked at companies that fall somewhere in the middle (i.e. no business use for YouTube, but you might want to buy a gift for a boss/coworker on yahoo shopping). In all of these cases, my conversations with IT managers have made clear the policies are well thought out and consistent with the culture and values of the company. All offensive content is blocked at 99% of the companies I've worked with (1 had no web-filter at all and a very open culture).
But how do you deal with the little computers in our pockets that run on a cell phone signal? When employees can bring their own network to work, the risk to companies is much higher. Clearly, IT can manage the risk of viruses/malware to the network (after all, my Droid does not interact with my clients network very often). This risk is fairly straightforward and familiar to IT managers. But what about the risk of displaying offensive content? IT can't filter the browser on a privately owned smart phone. I'm sure we all know colleagues that have called up the latest YouTube sensation at lunch or on a break. I'm a sure a couple people even know colleagues that have shown pornography at work (thankfully, I've never been in that situation). From an HR point of view the risk of a sexual harassment claim or a hostile work environment claim (think offensive jokes, videos, etc) is increased by the increasing presence of our smart phones. Additionally, most of these smart phones have cameras. There is a real risk of employees photographing confidential information.
So what is the answer? Honestly, there is no easy answer. I know a couple employers that ban cell phones inside all their buildings (mostly employers involved with classified government work). This seems like an extreme measure and for some industries (sales and consulting come to mind) would cripple your work force. If there is a simple technology solution, I'm not aware of it. I think the solution will be a mix of carefully enforced policy and a culture of respect in the workplace. I, for one, will be interested to see how it plays out in the future.
Good Talk,
Tom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)