Toby,
I completely agree about the superfluous nature of IM in an internal corporate setting. It makes perfect sense for real-time communication when one person is in Canada and another in Botswana, but when two people are in the same building, it just doesn't make sense — financially or logically.
Besides idle gossip to be kept on the downlow (when phone conversations can be heard by neighbours), I can't think of any good reason for it…
I think IM is just another one of those IT acronyms that companies feel the need to include in their arsenal of communications tools simply to say, “Yeah, we've got that” as opposed to any real need.
Some ex-colleagues used to IM each other everyday from about 20-feet away simply to say “It's lunchtime”… I got fed-up one day when I heard the blink-blink of their IM client and shouted over the partions “LUNCHTIME!!!”. They don't talk to me anymore… I wonder why.
Anonymous
Thanks for making the point I was reluctant to drive home: IM is almost exclusively social. And at that price, employees can use other mediums for socializing.
Anonymous
Maybe that's the case for small and medium sized companies, but in my experience IM is a great tool to support business and communication (social and non-social) in larger corporations – even if you are at the same location or at the same room.
Anonymous
Thanks for the comment Martin. But I've not seen any proof. I'd love to see some proof. Anything you can share with us?
Anonymous
I must agree with Toby on this one. I've found limited benefit from internal IM. The payoff seems too small in comparison to the cost of implementation and ongoing operation.
In my experience, the only useful application of IM within the same building is in the context of a larger collaboration package (where IM is a component) such as Webex, used for synchronous e-learning or e-meetings. IM can be used by participates to communicate with each other, or the presenter, in a less “invasive” manner.
In this case, however, you're paying for, and managing, a larger suite of collaboration tools in which IM is already included.
Anonymous
Heya all.
In my previous place of employment, IM was mandatory. It actually proved a great source of teambuilding and communication.
Several of us had workplaces at home, and therefore we used the IM as a cost efficient substitute for the Phone. Our IM communication helped us share knowledge, and make workflow faster.
Several of our work situations made a software handover necesarry, several times a day. for this task IM was a godsend.
IM is first and foremost a social tool, but the tool provides a possibility for socializing, at the same time while maintaining your work.
Anonymous
Very nice indeed – thanks for the feedback!
Anonymous
We use corporate IM on semi-weekly production rollouts of code. Especially when you have a WebSphere guy, a DBA and a MainFrame guy all deploying their piece of the puzzle and a few developers and QA testers waiting to verify that it “really works in production”. We all connect from home and update each other as it progresses and then everyone knows when it is declared “finished”. Just one opinion in one environment.
Anonymous
Well put Ronnie, thanks for the feedback. I gather though its probably not “mission critical” but nice to have in communicating with other members of your team. I use IM sometimes too with people in the office. I just cringe though when I see the prices of enterprise IM given the direct value to the organization. But… to each his own. Thanks, Toby
Toby,
I completely agree about the superfluous nature of IM in an internal corporate setting. It makes perfect sense for real-time communication when one person is in Canada and another in Botswana, but when two people are in the same building, it just doesn't make sense — financially or logically.
Besides idle gossip to be kept on the downlow (when phone conversations can be heard by neighbours), I can't think of any good reason for it…
I think IM is just another one of those IT acronyms that companies feel the need to include in their arsenal of communications tools simply to say, “Yeah, we've got that” as opposed to any real need.
Some ex-colleagues used to IM each other everyday from about 20-feet away simply to say “It's lunchtime”… I got fed-up one day when I heard the blink-blink of their IM client and shouted over the partions “LUNCHTIME!!!”. They don't talk to me anymore… I wonder why.
Thanks for making the point I was reluctant to drive home: IM is almost exclusively social. And at that price, employees can use other mediums for socializing.
Maybe that's the case for small and medium sized companies, but in my experience IM is a great tool to support business and communication (social and non-social) in larger corporations – even if you are at the same location or at the same room.
Thanks for the comment Martin. But I've not seen any proof. I'd love to see some proof. Anything you can share with us?
I must agree with Toby on this one. I've found limited benefit from internal IM. The payoff seems too small in comparison to the cost of implementation and ongoing operation.
In my experience, the only useful application of IM within the same building is in the context of a larger collaboration package (where IM is a component) such as Webex, used for synchronous e-learning or e-meetings. IM can be used by participates to communicate with each other, or the presenter, in a less “invasive” manner.
In this case, however, you're paying for, and managing, a larger suite of collaboration tools in which IM is already included.
Heya all.
In my previous place of employment, IM was mandatory. It actually proved a great source of teambuilding and communication.
Several of us had workplaces at home, and therefore we used the IM as a cost efficient substitute for the Phone. Our IM communication helped us share knowledge, and make workflow faster.
Several of our work situations made a software handover necesarry, several times a day. for this task IM was a godsend.
IM is first and foremost a social tool, but the tool provides a possibility for socializing, at the same time while maintaining your work.
Very nice indeed – thanks for the feedback!
We use corporate IM on semi-weekly production rollouts of code. Especially when you have a WebSphere guy, a DBA and a MainFrame guy all deploying their piece of the puzzle and a few developers and QA testers waiting to verify that it “really works in production”. We all connect from home and update each other as it progresses and then everyone knows when it is declared “finished”. Just one opinion in one environment.
Well put Ronnie, thanks for the feedback. I gather though its probably not “mission critical” but nice to have in communicating with other members of your team. I use IM sometimes too with people in the office. I just cringe though when I see the prices of enterprise IM given the direct value to the organization. But… to each his own. Thanks, Toby