When employees misuse IM, how should the company respond?

Dear Bob …

For some time, my current employer allowed the use of chat programs. Quite a few of us in IT, including management, were using the Google Talk desktop client. Then came the new VP of Compliance and Security, and out went the chat programs on the grounds that there was no control over what was sent or received by such programs.

[ Get sage IT career and workplace advice from Bob Lewis’ Advice Line newsletter. ]

So, clever dude that I am, I cobbled together in my spare time a simple client and server chat program using TCP sockets. I figured it would be fine, security-wise, since it only operated within our network domain. And it was quite a hit with the several coworkers to whom I distributed it.

But, then, one day with several clients connected, I was having problems with the server component, which was responsible for accepting socket connections, and distributing messages among clients. Occasionally, message blocks were incomplete for some reason. So I ran WireShark, a network protocol analyzer to see what the deal was.

What I got was an eyeful. These people, with whom I’m nurturing personal and professional relationships and on whom the company relies for technical solutions, were using my program to gossip among themselves, critique the arrival and departure times of coworkers, and gosh knows what else outside the short time I analyzed the traffic.

I was totally aghast. I shut down the whole thing, citing that it might show up on the Imperva (network security) scans, and I’d get in trouble for deploying a rogue program.

The security guy has since deployed a sanctioned Jabber server. I told him it was a mistake, revealing and citing my brief experience with my chat program. He assured me he knew people use chat in such ways, but the benefits were still worth deploying it.

I do use Spark in the most professional sense I can, but am tempered by my experience. So am I a nut or what? Has anyone else cited these downfalls of chat utilities? Could there be a net loss of productivity, when instead, we can literally get off our butt, walk a few steps, and have a meaningful conversation?

– Disheartened

Dear Disheartened …

One of Lewis’ Laws is that if people can exhibit the same undesirable behavior without using the technology, the issue isn’t the technology.

So: Windows ships with some solitaire programs. Employees use them to waste time playing solitaire. Is it Windows’ fault? Of course not: Employees could achieve the same result with a physical deck of cards.

That employees gossiped using your chat program isn’t relevant to the business value of chat, any more than employees gossiping in a conference room is relevant to the business value of having a conference room.

Employees gossip because they’re people, and people gossip. Substitute “schmooze” for “gossip” and it’s even healthy, because people have to trust each other in order to work together effectively, and random talk about non-work-related subjects is one of the ways people get to know each other well enough to trust each other.

So feel no guilt and have no worries. Of course chat introduces risks. That’s OK: Allowing employees to communicate with each other and with customers always adds risk. Compare that risk to the risk a company takes on by preventing employees from communicating with each other and with customers and you’ll see that it really isn’t much of an issue.

– Bob