Posts Tagged facebook
I’m on a train as I write this. From Montreal to Quebec and @via_rail is taking the strain as I head north. At the same time, my mum and I are messaging each other in real time on Facebook, I’m iMessaging a colleague, tweeting and also checking my email.
Every now and then I stop and think how much technology has adapted to,our mobile life and how lost we’d be without it. Certainly the lithium Batteries might be awning all lithium battery devic on planes, following a series of fires, caused a moments thought. I can’t take my cell phone or my laptop with me?? Wow, the providers of collaboration platforms will be rubbing their hands in glee if this one spreads. I can’t imagine that. I can’t even check my laptop or cell phone… That’s going one further than the travel restrictions after 911.
Mobile access to technology that we see for both our personal, and our professional lives has become ubiquitous. Who, for example watched, hero Felix Bumgartner’s Space Jump historic jump from space? My sister in law was visiting at the time. We don’t have a TV here in the USA, so we were watching on the Internet, from laptops. Until we decided that we needed to get a move on and head out – we wanted to catch the tide as we were planning an afternoon sailing in the bay.
No problem. As my husband drove, I watched the proceedings on my iPhone and the relies watched in the back seat of the car on the iPad as we drove to the marina.
There’s also news today that Bank of America is adding 10,000 mobile users a day. Wow. Time and money stand still for no one!!
Today happens to be a vacation for me, but my use of mobile continues, as the applications, the tools that I use in my professional and personal life morph into one, the devices that I carry for the business meetings I’ll be at later in the week, become my communications tools for catching up with the family, for checking out the hotel in Quebec and planning where I might eat a late lunch, or sharing the photos’s from the train and comparing my experiences with Via Rail and Amtrak (Amtrak increased my Klout by using my Amtrak from the California Zephyr on their Facebook page!!).
What would I miss the most if I didn’t have mobile? I think I’d miss the “share” – and that’s not just me sharing, it’s others sharing too.. I’d not see the updates from fellow travelers, or be getting real time suggestions as to what to see and do.
What about you? What would you miss the most if your mobile access was curtailed?
At the recent FS Forum seminar on “Will your social media strategy get you fired?” one of the overwhelming themes from the audience was how to get sponsorship from senior management who have two questions upper most in their minds – “what’s the benefit?” and “what’s the risk?”
One of the key benefits of social is engaging with an audience that doesn’t regularly use traditional communications methods. Look at your target demographics. If it’s under 34 and you’re not on social, you’re not talking to your prospects and customers. In the UK for example, the largest and fastest growing age group on Facebook is 25-34 with nearly 9 million users, followed by 18-24 years olds (source Socialbakers). As most of them grew up using text and instant messaging not email, social is just another communication tool.
If you’re not talking to your audience, your competitors soon will be. Whilst a survey from Assetinum earlier in the year found that only half of the top 50 private banks actively replied to tweets despite nearly all of them having a Twitter account, it is not a trend likely to continue. Particularly as it starts to dawn just how much additional engagement Visa gained with its Olympic social media campaign.
Depending on how you deploy social media usage, engaging with customers leads to an increase in revenue, reduces contact centre calls and potentially lowers customer acquisition costs. Some organisations have even found it useful as a general employee communication tool in times where other methods are too slow. During the London riots, BNP Paribas used it to help staff move safely around the capital.
The benefits aren’t just related to increased sales and improved customer service either. Over time, engaging directly with your customers, prospects and even your aggressors provides the type of in-depth data that can be used to enhance and develop future products and services.
The risks for any organisation engaging in social media shouldn’t be ignored, but neither should it be an inhibitor. Letting staff “loose” on social media doesn’t mean giving up an organisation’s hard won reputation or its squeaky clean compliance record. Understand the threat landscape from data leakage, malware and user behaviour and how it fits into compliance concerns is key to mitigating the risk. Once you have a better understanding about the risks, it’s easier to see the steps required to ensure your organisation remains safe.
But as my colleague Victor Gaxiola says – it’s not “why’ we should be using social senior management need to ask, it’s how.
Facebook Blue is spreading.
Check out Vincos Blog tracking world map of social networks. It shows a trend over the past few years that Facebook is becoming THE de facto social network globally. The only countries where Facebook is not the number one social network by activity are places where geo-political issues prevent the open network access like China, Iran, and Russia.
Another exception? South Korea. Will South Korea be the harbinger of life after Facebook?
What does this mean to the enterprise?
It means that the enterprise must get ready to provide Facebook-like collaboration networks. Thanks to how Facebook has educated 1 billion social networking users, friending to subscribe to status updates, liking a page to keep up with product updates, and commenting on a post in real-time have all become the fabric of how we network with our friends all over the world.
Unlike previous generations trained to work with email, tomorrow’s workers will demand a way to collaborate in real-time while on the move, just as they have come to expect from the Facebook user experience. They know what it feels like to use the right tool to communicate without getting bogged down by multiple copies of the same data.
But I don’t see Facebook replacing other forms of communication like email or IM, especially for professional communication. Why? That’s because Facebook is primarily used as a personal social network.
Although Facebook would like to maximize users’ sharing of their updates, people still think of Facebook as a personal messaging network. Even though Facebook offers features that can be used for business purposes, social norms influence how users are actually using Facebook. People just don’t use it for professional networking and business collaboration. I am sure Facebook is well aware of this, and think Facebook has an option to branch into the a lucrative enterprise collaboration space under another brand.
Another point to ponder is whether or not Facebook is at its peak. It’s difficult to imagine the geo-political situation changing in China, Iran, or Russia anytime soon. That means Facebook has claimed the number one spot in most countries. This leaves only one possibility for Facebook: a diminishing active user base.
If you look at the Vincos’ world map of social networks, you’ll notice that there is one notable exception to the increasing influence of Facebook. It is South Korea, where Facebook ceded its number one spot to QZone. (I can’t explain why Chinese QZone will generate the most activity; perhaps some South Korean readers can shed some light on this?) So Facebook may have to battle other social networks to stay relevant.
Last week the head of internet security at the Cabinet Office, Andy Smith, was quoted as having said that users should give fake details to websites to protect their identity. Putting aside the fact that this violates sites such as Facebook’s usage policy, it demonstrates a lack of understanding about how these identities will evolve in the future and how social media functionality and privacy settings should be used to control misuse.
As social becomes more interwoven into our everyday lives, it starts to make sense to use real information in interactions. Most people don’t pretend to be someone else when they’re out on a Friday night meeting new people face to face, so why should it be any different online?
However, offline we are more careful with what information we tell people and question what we are told in return. It’s that instinct that needs to be developed when using social and that’s where privacy settings can help. As Actiance’s Chris Mannon says in Social Media Scammers – New Frontiers of Aggravation – The goal should be to make sure that your information is not accessible without your explicit knowledge.
Ironically for Andy Smith, the UK Government is soon to launch its ID Assurance scheme that enables people to interact with Government services using login from third parties, one of which is rumoured to be a social network as I mentioned in a recent blog post. Whether this will happen is yet to be seen, but it is expected that companies such as Paypal will sit alongside the Post Office and BT.
But using third parties does give people a choice as to who they trust with their identify and force those organisations that don’t come up to scratch or offer the right privacy settings out of the picture or to up their game.
What is required is an education programme in the same way that we were all advised to shred or burn personal information such as credit card bills that we no longer require to keep. Helping people understand the implications of different privacy settings and the best use of features such as Facebook’s lists and Google+’s circles, will do far more for everyone’s protection than fake identities.
Whilst one could argue that trusting Facebook et al with your date of birth and mobile phone number sounds alarming, when you consider the vast number of data loss and theft incidents incurred by the UK Government in the last year alone it doesn’t seem that bad.
Today’s post comes from David Oates, Vice President, International.
Later this month the Department for Work and Pensions will be revealing the first suppliers of the UK Government’s proposed Identity Assurance programme (IDA), which will allow people to access public services using third party logins. Described on a gov.uk blog as being less about identity and more about trust, this could well prove to be right if rumours of Facebook being included prove to be true.
As more and more services go online the Government wants to make it simpler and more user friendly for us to login. They haven’t mentioned that one of the largest expenditures in customer service support is often over password management and outsourcing it will save them money too, but as tax payer you won’t hear me complain about it in principle.
It’s not a new idea and is already used in Europe. In Sweden for example citizens can apply for an e-Identity online via their own bank, which enables them to alter their tax forms. This makes sense, the strict regulation around anti-money laundering etc means that banks have to know their customers.
But the rumoured inclusion of using social networking sites has me concerned. Using Facebook logins as a passport to other applications and services is becoming very popular, particularly with comment sections on websites. One of the reasons for this is its self policing and cuts down dramatically on the comment spam that many website owners have to deal with it. However, whilst Facebook strongly advocates real identities, it doesn’t have the same incentive as financial institutions to ensure you are who you claim to be.
Single sign-ons have always been looked upon with dubious eyes by security professionals. It provides a single point of failure and general advice has always been to use a different password for every login. This of course has led to password fatigue, but the point has become moot anyway. With so many sites offering the ability to login with third party identities all a criminal needs is one social media id to access any number of sites to impersonate you.
First in line for the IDA treatment is Universal Credit, a replacement for the current benefits system that will be launched next April. The Government has said that there will be “Levels of Assurance” that third party id providers must reach depending on the critical level of the government service being accessed. One can only hope, given that benefits is an enormous target for fraud, that the proposed IDA providers will be able to offer more of a guarantee of identity than a valid email address.
Sandra Bullock’s loss of identity in The Net always used to seem impossible. But now imagining your whole government identity circled around a Facebook login I’m not so sure – unless of course Facebook is about to reveal a new facet in its service.
Today’s post comes from Norv Leong, Director of Product Marketing at Actiance.
Reading the smart-ass comments to online articles, blogs, Facebook posts, and the like is often more enjoyable than reading the actual article, blog, or Facebook post itself. Everyone wants to be a David Letterman or Rush Limbaugh, quick with the wit or politically charged rant. Tempers flare, folks get offended, or others just plain embarrassed. At the end of the day though, most all of what’s “out there” is deemed free speech.
That’s the beauty of the First Amendment. You can say what you want (most of the time) without reprisal. The US government – author, guardian, and object of the First Amendment – knows it’s in a pickle. Loads of federal agencies have their own Facebook pages and they’re very wary of the fact that the public can and will use these pages as a sounding board for all kinds of commentary and preaching.
Exactly when those comments cross the line and become, say, threats to national security, that’s when things get murky. Where does that line get drawn? When is a comment “libelous”? When does a comment lose its First Amendment protection? I think you get the idea.
Having a comment policy in place is a good start. Making it very clear what is acceptable behavior for comments sets boundaries that apply to anyone and everyone. There’s no singling out one person over another. Doesn’t matter what color skin you’ve got; what your sexual preference is; what religion you practice; what football team you follow. The policy applies to everyone. If you violate it, your comment will be removed. Simple as that.
Even better is utilizing technology to assist in the enforcement of these types of policies. I’m not saying to take down every comment that drops an f-bomb or some other derogatory comment, but you can use technology as the helping hand in flagging potentially libelous or incendiary material and, if need be, remove it from the system.
I mean, c’mon, I’m sure our Founding Fathers bickered amongst themselves when they were laying the groundwork for the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Just think what it would’ve been like had they had Facebook at their disposal!?!? One of their Facebook conversations might’ve gone like this:
George Washington (GW): What do you think fellas… just make me the emperor and call it a day. No term limits. I’ll just pass the torch when I’m dead.
Benjamin Franklin (BF): Georgie baby, methinks you’ve been hittin’ the herbal remedy a bit too hard. How bout a ten-year max limit so you can spend some time with Martha and work on your garden?
James Madison (JM): Nah, I think George would get bored of ten years of emperor-ing. The guy’s got too many side interests. I think four years is just the right amount of time. Any longer than that and we’ll have another riot, like what happened in Boston a few years back….over tea fer crissakes!
BF: Yeah, good point. This land seems to have a bunch of rabble rousers. Which brings up another point. We better come up with a system that deals with these hooligan punks should they act up. Maybe some kind of judicial or trial system where we can put the hammer down on them, if they do something bad.
GW: Y’all crack me up. I was just kidding about the emperor bit. Let’s go with four years and call ‘em President. Well, I’m spent, fellas. Anyone fancy a beer….or 5?
And a country was born…
Today’s post comes from Norv Leong, Director of Product Marketing at Actiance.
As social software becomes entrenched on the enterprise scene, now would be a good time to put to rest some common misperceptions and myths that have hung ominously over the space. The Jive IPO and Microsoft’s acquisition of Yammer speak to the validation and adoption of social software as a viable means to enhance productivity and foster engagement.
So, with that as a backdrop, let’s take a look at some common misperceptions and see how we can’t allay these concerns:
Myth #1: Social software isn’t subject to regulatory guidelines
Social media and social software may be new forms of communication, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be logged and archived for regulatory compliance purposes. In the eyes of the regulatory bodies (think SEC, FINRA, FERC, and similar), social software is just another form of electronic communication to be treated no differently than email. That means that content posted to social software platforms needs to be supervised, logged, and archived to ensure compliance with applicable recordkeeping and monitoring provisions. Since social software greatly facilitates collaboration, it’s very easy for individuals to bounce ideas (sometimes sensitive or unauthorized information) off each other and exchange files. That’s why the regulators are interested.
Myth #2: No one cares about social software eDiscovery
Anyone who’s lived in the US for any length of time will quickly and vigorously nod their head when asked, “Do you think the US is a litigious society?” That’s like asking the Pope if he’s religious. People do care about social software eDiscovery, and over the last few years, we’ve begun to see several cases emerge involving social. Lester v Allied and Crispin v Audigier come to mind as particularly relevant cases involving social media eDiscovery.
In fact, Duke University conducted a comprehensive study and found that the number of eDiscovery cases jumped from 7 in 2003 to 111 in 2009. The study cited that the #1 reason for courts issuing sanctions was a failure to produce electronic evidence (social software included). And, like litigation in general, there seems to be no end in sight.
Myth #3: Corporate governance has nothing to do with social software
Au contraire. Social software has everything to do with corporate governance, especially in an era where news travels lightning fast via social channels. You needn’t look further than the Arab Spring to see the speed and power of social in action.
Good corporate governance entails having the appropriate policies and procedures in place for records retention, information governance, and conflict management. It’s wide-ranging with the objective of instilling a sense of accountability throughout the company. And this includes social software communications. People use social software to brainstorm, debate, and even vent. Say or write the wrong thing, and all of a sudden, it becomes a corporate governance issue.
Myth #4: Plain ol’ capture is sufficient
Well, not exactly. Following on from the discussion above, responding in a timely fashion to discovery requests sounds easy but comes with some challenges. When you think about the volume of data floating around out there (emails, social software content, Facebook posts, Skype IMs, etc.), you’ll get a headache right quick. Those headaches are compounded by the manner in which this content is logged and archived.
Many of today’s archiving systems just capture the content without regard to context. We all know that people like to respond to blogs or other posts on social media. When you’ve got a couple dozen people chiming in with their thoughts, feedback, even deleted comments, it’s easy to see the importance of capturing conversations in context. There are just too many regulatory, legal, and corporate governance issues at stake to risk a substantial sanction or fine.
Off my soapbox now…
So there you have it – this author’s version of Mythbusters. Like with most things social, it’s all quite fluid and dynamic. What I just wrote today may be old hat tomorrow. But, given that old-school concepts such as law and compliance still hold valid today, I gotta believe that the myths debunked above has some legs.
What kinds of myths are you seeing in your enterprise?
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- April 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- Application Filtering
- Electronically Stored Information (ESI)
- Employee Behavior
- Enterprise 2.0
- Enterprise IM
- Financial Services
- Guest Post
- New Internet
- personal v professional
- Product Announcements
- Public IM
- Retail banking
- RSA Conference
- Securities and Exchange Commission
- Social Networking
- Unified Communications
- Web 2.0
- Web Security