Thu 28 Sep 2006
Corporate Instant Messaging: The Pros and Cons
Posted by Jake Carey-Rand under IM, IV General Posts, Productivity, Security, Software, Technology Planning
This scenario isn’t complicated, especially when managed all from one device and broken down to only three programs (Trillian, Firefox, my email client (managing all accounts)) and one phone (with all lines forwarded). But in the corporate environment, where productivity and security have become major concerns, how do we effectively manage this environment?
Let’s review a fairly common scenario: Currently you may be pushing anywhere from three to 10 software programs out to your desktops. These might include: Internal and external email communication, customer order processing, customer management, vendor/distribution management, marketing and sales tracking, etc. Most of our clients are looking more and more to consolidate their operations, expenses and the associated infrastructure. How does one effectively minimize the number of applications while continuing to adopt innovative and useful technology advances? Is a corporate Instant Messaging policy required to help manage this process and how do you properly implement such a plan?
Let’s review with a little history lesson: IM in the workplace started a number of years ago with proprietary messaging systems built into specific software programs for specific tasks in order to speed up inter/intradepartmental communication and increase order accuracy and speed. During the years of the tech boom, employees started downloading AOL, ICQ or MSN onto their work machines to keep in touch with family and friends during work hours. I was one of the first in my office at that time to load an IM client onto my machine, but I rarely used it due to its lack of popularity at the time. It’s no fun breaking the rules and using company time for personal reasons if you can’t share it with anyone! However, as the number of IM users increased, the functionality increased exponentially as well.
As with many technology innovations, the creative uses and innovation spread faster than the practical. This is a very good thing, don’t get me wrong, but there comes a time when it’s necessary to take a much closer look at your business and technology practices to ensure efficient, productive and secure technology growth in line with your business goals.
AOL threw its hat into the ring just recently, hoping perhaps a piece of the corporate IM pie would be sent its way. However, like all of their competition in this space, they are willing to provide this service, without much of a solution involved. How are they really working with you to ensure security? What about possible productivity losses or gains for that matter? IM can be a very valuable tool, but it has to be rolled out, trained and monitored on many levels. Which companies out there are stepping up to the plate to actually provide some value to their customers? That has yet to be determined, but if you have any feedback we’d love to hear from you!
I have an old friend whose primary responsibility is IM security software development and the way we see it is that this is one of the most important subjects for your next budget meeting, fiscal year and possibly the next five years.
One Response to “ Corporate Instant Messaging: The Pros and Cons ”
Comments:
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

November 10th, 2006 at 1:21 pm
The 3 biggest hurdles to IM taking its place beside email as one of the dominant forms of internet communication are: standardization, standardization and standardization. One of the strong points for email is the open standards for SMTP, POP3 and IMAP. This means that whether you are a CEO/Sales/Engineer/Consumer you can send an email message that someone else will be able to receieve and read.
3rd party products like Trillian make it possible to share contact lists in a common interface, however this really doesn’t solve the problem. An analogy to emphasize this would be if you couldn’t place a cell phone call to anyone outside of your network. So everyone would have to maintain accounts on each of the cell phone networks in order to communicate, and everyone would have to know 3+ phone number’s (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, etc) for each contact. Products like Trillian would make it possible to access each cell network from a single phone but don’t change the underlying problem of being able to have a single contact point for a single contact.
Each of the big IM providers (obviously) are very resistant to this because it reduces the revenue that they gain from having independent networks however if IM is going to become a big player in internet communication these problems will need to be addressed.
The big positive out of all of this is that the demand for this technology is so large that there is no alternative but to come up with a solution.