Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Communications Technology

Managing Personal Electronics and Software In the Workplace 387

Posted by timothy
from the sterility-vs.-chaos dept.
darien writes "Last night Symantec hosted a round-table discussion on the topic of consumer devices in the workplace. John Brigden, Symantec's senior VP for EMEA, pointed out that regardless of the policies businesses may lay down, individuals will always try to use their favorite gadgets and websites at work. Reminds me of when I worked in IT support: no matter how many times we told users they weren't allowed to install ICQ, or to connect their personal laptops to the corporate network, they insisted on doing it. Frequently they even asked us to help them do it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Managing Personal Electronics and Software In the Workplace

Comments Filter:
  • Generous Companies (Score:1, Informative)

    by TheFarrMan (927799) on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @12:11PM (#25205685)
    Wouldn't it be a good idea if companies bought licences of AV/Security software for their employees to use at home. It would generally be in the companies interest and would work for the good of all Internet users if more people had better protection. If a company knew that the home/personal pc was protected to the same level as the work PC's the security risk would be reduced and the chance of a user bringing in a virus from home would be reduced
  • Re:Not a problem (Score:4, Informative)

    by smooth wombat (796938) on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @12:36PM (#25206057) Homepage Journal

    if employees are visiting porn sites on company time, they should be fired.

    Absolutely agree. However, working for the government, the union will not let you just fire someone. You have to document everything from now til Tuesday, give them a warning, note it in their file, THEN bring action at which point the union makes all kinds of excuses for why the person shouldn't be fired.

    I know for a fact that there was someone who, every day, was trying to get to dozens of different adult sites for 20 minutes at a time. Supposedly it was all documented and set on to the higher ups but the guy still has a job. Whether it wasn't pursued or the union found an excuse to keep the guy, I don't know. If it were up to me, anyone trying for more than five minutes should get auto-fired. No appeal.

    It's one thing to accidentally type in a wrong address or click a link without looking (I did that recently) but the logs will clearly show you left the link quickly once you realized your mistake. It's another to see the same person day after day trying to get to slutsrus.com.

    if small things like checking the sports scores, or stocks, or news is what keeps them happy at work,

    We don't block those kind of sites. SI, MarketWatch, CNN are all perfectly accessible. Even overseas web sites are accessible. I look at two Japanese sites and the BBC and there is someone here who checks a Chinese-language site daily. The only ones we do block are what are considered time wasters (games, chat rooms, etc).

    Some places are more strict, others more permissive. It all depends on the agency. I think the policy in place here strikes a good balance between letting people check news and such while limiting time wasters.

  • Re:Works for me. (Score:3, Informative)

    by stewbacca (1033764) on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @01:52PM (#25207095)

    Now, if they'd be willing to take a pay cut so IT could afford a few more employees who would handle iTunes problems and such ... say ... $100 a month ... each.

    Nah. I'd rather just be given the appropriate access to fix that stuff myself and get rid of IT altogether.

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Working...