Comments on Companies and law firms blocking use of social media : Insanity is rampant | Real Lawyers Have Blogs

nblack@nicoleblackesq.com (Nicole Black) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:31:18 -0800

Not to mention the fact that employees can access the very same sites being blocked via their smart phones. They'll access the websites one way or another. I agree--it's simply silly to limit access. Perhaps imposing rules regarding the amount of time spent on social networking sites might be reasonable, but clocking access altogether is pointless.

mike.mcbride@gmail.com (Mike McBride) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:45:04 -0800

Kevin, I think the comparison to the way we're all encouraged to network in person, yet blocked online, really hits the nail on the head. Also, and I wrote about this last week on my own blog, it's the lack of good management that fuels this. We simply don't see enough managers who are capable of setting the expectations, and holding people accountable for meeting and exceeding them. I went on for a few paragraphs about it on my site, I won't do the same here, but anyone who's interested can follow the link to my blog. ;-)

doug@compliancebuilding.com (Doug Cornelius) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:01:29 -0800

Kevin -

Those are not the right percentages for blocking from my survey.

On the survey 45% said their firms blocked access to some social networking sites. Of those that blocked, 85% blocked Facebook, etc. The graphic is Law Practice Magazine did not make this clear.

There are still a staggering number of firms blocking access. Which is completely ineffective anyhow. Anyone can pick up their blackberry, iphone or smart phone of choice and access social media sites. Never mind home access.

krisaquino@gmail.com (kris) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:12:40 -0800

We shouldn't run away from it or close ourselves to the real world. It's there no matter what we do.
We should be looking for ways on how to use it productively. =) Adapting to changes, not closing ourselves from the inevitable change. =)

kevin@lexblog.com (Kevin OKeefe) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:41:25 -0800

Changed the phrasing Doug. Pulled summary of your survey from another's blog post on it - they had the figures wrong. ;)

thughes@beankinney.com (Timothy R. Hughes) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:57:14 -0800

Your post is giving me painful flashbacks of the Kiwanis patriotic songs ... great work they do, but updating the means is a big bonus and a taste we apparently share.

edolet@gmail.com (Ed Ouellette) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:29:40 -0800

I can see at least two defenses for employers blocking their employees' social media access (or making efforts to).

First of all is the productivity question. It seems clear that a worker (whether she is an attorney or not) could logically be restrained from watching cable television at work. The worker could get important news from CNN or another channel, but management's decision to give up that potential gain in the face of likely overall productivity loss makes sense. While cable television is merely one way (receipt) of data, and social media allow more two-way interaction, that does not alleviate the risk.

Secondly, while it is true that workers can almost certainly access many of the same sites and applications on their phones than they can on their employer-provided machines, it seems reasonable that an employer's liability for tortious acts may be reduced if the employee used his own hardware and internet access--similarly to an employee using a personal automobile, rather than a company car.

This is not to say that blocking (or attempting to block) access is wise or a good business decision, but while there certainly appear to be opportunities for forward-looking firms and companies to allow (or encourage) unfettered access to social media, a more cautious approach (once the legal landscape has become known and risks become more clear) does not seem irrational.

victorwcng@gmail.com (Victor Ng) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:57:23 -0800

I don't really buy the productivity loss reasoning, especially in terms of professional staff. I'm sure many firms have other ways to encourage productivity - budgets and billing targets perhaps?

emilywilkes88@gmail.com (Emily Wilkes) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:47:19 -0800

Using social networking sites for work might actually boost production over all because you can connect with co-workers from all over and use them in productive ways.

gerkmana@gmail.com (Alli Gerkman) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:03:19 -0800

I agree with Victor. I'm not sure I'll ever understand the "loss of productivity" argument in the legal setting. Whether your work is hourly or project-based, it is measurable. Why does it seem firms don't feel comfortable measuring it?

But on another note, I have several friends on Facebook who are law firm associates and I am often surprised by the randomness of the comments they make during the day.

I think law firms would be wise to step up and train associates on how these tools can be used to build business before they get completely away from them.

edolet@gmail.com (Ed Ouellette) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:47:32 -0800

At the risk of revealing my lack of passion about either side (interest? Yes. Certainty in advocacy on either side? No.) I'd like to point out this article from Fast Company on Monday:

http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/cliff-kuang/design-innovation/hard-works-over-rated-it-could-even-be-detrimental

The gist of it is that neuroscience has found evidence of what many of us have long suspected: breakthroughs often happen not in the middle of a long session of hard work, but when one's brain has a chance to decompress and process things at another level. A night of sleep/in the shower/during the commute... things pop into our heads. New perspectives, follow-up questions, and solutions occur to us.

Does this extend to cigarette breaks (do people still do those?)? Or to lighthearted Facebook or Twitter checks? I'm not sure, but it certainly seems possible to me that even IF there is a direct productivity hit with attorneys/workers spending less time working, the breaks the brain is getting could make that time more productive both marginally and in absolute terms.