The adoption of the new social media platforms by many employees is of great concern to IT leadership across the country.  New technologies can be easily utilized by employees most usually at the expense of the enterprise security, but that is very often not spoken about.  I read continuously about the smarter employee, the better employee, etc… yet find little information discussing the enterprise effect of such adoption.  Social media though important does not offer the large benefit or measureable ROI that most experts would like to see.  Continuous improvement of the platforms and the leverage of their contacts are key, but best practices are yet to be established in a traditional business environment.  Many strategists see the impact for already well branded companies only, providing little impact on direct sales for new brands.  So why is the need so important for all business?

Our current employee environment is going through a demographic shift in terms of age and technology.  Older employees being replaced by younger and more ambitious professionals with a more fluid work methodology that is strongly inclusive and dependant on various technologies.  Social media being one of the newest, however one of the most debated has been adopted with concern yet everyone believes it is here to stay.  The most recent article I read spoke of the smarter employee defined as one, that adopts these social media platforms despite company policy and leverages them for the workplace, but to what end?  Most staff members that take the time to engage in Facebook, MySpace, etc are used to doing so for the benefit of the personal network, not the professional.  LinkedIn has proven a strong aid to the sales professional and certain recruiting environments, however with all transparency and available information comes the risk of competition. 

So are the professionals that see these technologies as a benefit really smarter than the leadership of their companies or are they inpatient in not allowing a true discovery of their potential, good and bad, to be adequately uncovered.  I think back to the DOT COM days, the overzealous nature and adoption of these must have technologies sites, and other web enabled services.  Most turned bust while a small few changed the way we do business today.  This came with a large amount of pain through the process, seeing companies fall, stock markets crash, and people elevated and ruined in their careers over night.  So why rush?  Do we fear being beat out by competition?  If that is the case, there are methodologies for safe adoption quickly that allow for limited network access.  Test cases specific businesses could show the strongest return given what we understand about the technology now. 

Smarter employee or impatient brat?  I go with that latter, professionals rarely understand their business at a level that is truly holistic or global.  They see their small world, the specific business area, but not that of the enterprise.  To conform to simply appease the smaller adoption friendly group is not the correct choice.  However, neither is to avoid them nor not give them audience.  Companies need to listen more closely to their employees and leverage their best assets, yet employees must follow policy and understand the impact of technology is much larger than many of them realize.

Read more content like this at workfanatic