Some companies block employees’ access to social media, while others are more permissive. Social media access can foster productivity by facilitating efficient collaboration and communication. Organizations that allow workers to use social media rely on feedback to adapt their internal processes. Companies that permit workers to engage on social media can easily leverage the branding power of such networks. Access to social media gives employees a sense of autonomy, which increases overall satisfaction. Despite these benefits, employee social media access has been linked to negative repercussions such as low productivity and data privacy concerns. A company’s decision to restrict or allow its workers to use social media is based on factors such as organizational culture, vision, productivity goals, privacy considerations, industry standards, and legal implications.
Permitting Employee Access to Social Networks
Access to social media shows that a company trusts its workers to utilize autonomy responsibly. Organizations will allow workers to use social media if it increases morale and trust (Hartman, DesJardins, & MacDonald, 2011). Such companies believe that such access is justified since most customers spend their free time on social media. Therefore, allowing workers on platforms likely to engage with customers is reasonable. Social media access enhances work-life balance, increasing workers’ likelihood of sticking with the organization. Some organizations allow their employees to share their experiences on social media. This fosters a cooperative environment and sends the message that the company’s management is confident that its workers will not share information that could negatively affect the brand. As such, social media is considered a key tool for empowering workers and providing them the independence to express themselves.
Some companies consider social media a platform for recognizing and appreciating workers. This view deviates from the traditional perspective that social networks harm a company’s internal processes. The exposure benefits employees since their work is visible to internal and external parties. It makes it easier to land opportunities in the future as one’s portfolio is publicly accessible. The culture of recognition also challenges workers to engage in friendly competition, which fosters creativity. Actively sharing one’s professional journey turns social media networks into a space encouraging brainstorming and idea-sharing. For example, Slack uses social media networks for virtual brainstorming. It harnesses the creativity of the employees while providing transparency into internal operations. Some investors and clients value openness and will readily support such organizations. Overall, social media can be used as a creative space for employees.
Using social media for professional purposes aligns with some company’s working arrangements. Organizations such as GitLab rely on remote work to accomplish major projects (Choudhury et al., 2020). As such, they encourage their employees to stay connected through social media as it facilitates collaboration. Such workers use platforms like X and LinkedIn to showcase their professional engagements. This business model has become popular as more organizations embrace open-source projects that rely on sharing progress and remote contributions. Similarly, some traditional technology companies, such as IBM, encourage employees to engage on social media to stay up-to-date on the latest industry insights. They allow their workers to use social media to monitor developments and competitors’ direction. As such, some organizations let their employees use social media since they actively benefit from such networks.
Networking and collaboration have become exceedingly crucial with organizations seeking to partner rather than compete. Such companies allow workers to use social media networks for networking and knowledge acquisition (Von Muhlen & Ohno-Machado, 2012). Platforms such as LinkedIn provide industry forums, communities, and groups. These entities allow workers to share insights regarding common challenges. In some cases, the groups can be modified to facilitate cross-team collaborations. The arrangement is common among large organizations and conglomerates where projects have to be executed by cross-functional teams. Such structures allow employees to gain insight into the operations of other departments and divisions. The companies facilitate collaborations to inspire workers to consider additional options for internal transfers. Overall, social media allows workers to engage across organizations and company divisions.
Social media is one of the few platforms that allow all stakeholders to engage with each other. Companies whose brand is built on openness and transparency encourage their employees to use social media. Platforms such as Facebook create an opportunity for engagement with clients, partners, and external stakeholders (Li, Chen, & Popiel, 2015). It is common for clients to approach a company’s employees with customer requests instead of following the official channels and protocols. Many customers view interacting with employees as less intimidating and more efficient. Some organizations use social media to collect feedback in real-time. As such, they require their employees to be well-versed with the tools offered by different social media platforms. These include analytics, conversions, and engagement scores. Overall, some organizations permit the use of social media as it fosters their relations with different stakeholders.
Social Network Restriction and Indifference for Employees
Some companies restrict how employees use social media. They are concerned about workers using social media or openly engaging in online activities due to legal repercussions. A company that deals with client data may not want some key staff members on social media as it increases the risks of breaching data privacy laws (Hoofnagle, Van Der Sloot, & Borgesius, 2019). For example, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) protects clients’ private information. A company such as Facebook may require some employees to avoid social media. It decreases the risk of sharing confidential information and potentially attracting lawsuits. The avoidance of social networks may sometimes stem from industry-specific standards. For example, financial institutions are required to observe the principles of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. The entity prevents institutions like banks from sharing certain information on social media. Violations may attract fines and sanctions against the company. As such, companies concerned about legal, ethical, and industry repercussions are likely to restrict social media use among their employees.
Some organizations are indifferent about the relationship between their workers’ duties and social network use. In most cases, these companies are focused on specific outcomes. They are not interested in micromanaging their employees. Workers can freely utilize their time in ways they deem fit if they achieve the required project or task objectives. Organizations like Netflix employ a policy that fosters innovation and productivity through trusting the employees. As such, no restrictions or demands are placed on social media within the organizational context. The workers are free to seek innovative ways to handle their projects. The supervisors rarely concern themselves with the processes employees use to excel in their duties. Overall, indifference suggests that a company trusts its workers to manage time and resources effectively.
Conclusion
Companies can permit, restrict, or remain indifferent to their workers’ use of social media. Generally, most organizations do not restrict their employees from using social networks as long as they do not negatively impact productivity. Such companies cite benefits such as employee morale, trust-building, ease of recruitment, connecting diverse stakeholders, productivity boost, the need to network, and the cultivation of an open company culture. Organizations that restrict their workers’ use of social networks usually cite legal and industry compliance demands. Mostly, a company will only restrict a section of its employee base from using social networks due to the sensitive nature of their work. Indifference is common among performance-driven organizations. The rationale is that workers should be allowed to explore modern communication platforms as long as they meet their project goals.
References
Choudhury, P., Crowston, K., Dahlander, L., Minervini, M. S., & Raghuram, S. (2020). GitLab: work where you want, when you want. Journal of Organization Design, 9, 1-17. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41469-020-00087-8
Hartman, L. P., DesJardins, J., & MacDonald, C. (2011). Decision-making for personal integrity & social responsibility. Business Ethics, McGraw Hill International, New York, NY10020. https://www.academia.edu/download/49011909/1-buku-1-business-ethics-third-edition-laurap-140926035658-phpapp01.pdf
Hoofnagle, C. J., Van Der Sloot, B., & Borgesius, F. Z. (2019). The European Union general data protection regulation: what it is and what it means. Information & Communications Technology Law, 28(1), 65-98. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13600834.2019.1573501
Li, X., Chen, W., & Popiel, P. (2015). What happens on Facebook stays on Facebook? The implications of Facebook interaction for perceived, receiving, and giving social support. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 106-113. https://www.academia.edu/download/45630966/2015_CIHB_Li_Chen_Popiel_Facebook_and_social_support.pdf
Von Muhlen, M., & Ohno-Machado, L. (2012). Reviewing social media use by clinicians. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 19(5), 777-781. https://academic.oup.com/jamia/article/19/5/777/2909184
write