Employment in the Internet Age

Everyone knows how the internet is changing the way business is being done. But one very important change that too often goes unnoticed is what goes on within business. In chapter 8 of Socialnomics, Qualmann writes about what it is like to hire employees from the "internet generation." This part especially stood out to me more than other part of his book because I found some relevance within my own job experiences. In the past, it seemed like the company held the majority of the cards, whereas the employee was bound to whatever whim the employer had. Loyalty to the company was expected. But today, the marketplace has become more competitive and loyalty to the employee has become crucial. I definitely relate to how people from my grandparents' generation look down on people from my generation as being lazy and having a strong sense of entitlement. I myself have often had to defend myself and my peers against assults from the aging. The good news is that the baby boomers are starting to retire, so there is now a shift occurring in the workforce.

Traditionally, profits have been paramount to all else. This is not to say that making money is no longer important. But I firmly believe, based on some of my recent job experiences, that there are still many companies who are not focusing enough on employee retention. Unfortunately, many people still feel as though they are expendable commodities, which really reduces their overall efficacy and as a result, costs the company a lot of money in lost produuctivity. Taking full advantage of the internet and the social media applications it brings will possibly be a make-or-break sort of deal in the near future. The possibilities are virtually limitless. Qualmann notes how it is possible for former employees to retain contact with their former employers through social media outlets like Facebook, which ultimately can lead to re-hiring. A personal example: I still "like" one of my former employers on Facebook because they regularly post job openings, many of which I've been interested in. Qualmann writes that re-hiring former employees saves money. This should be a no-brainer for any organization.

On a "lighter" note, I'd like to send my resume to this company:

Continued Thoughts on What It Means to Be Social in a Technological Society

In a blog post two weeks ago, I reflected upon the ways in which social networks are re-defining what it means to be "social." I talked about how I, myself a somewhat anti-social individual, has found an easy and fun way to be "social" without leaving home, essentially. But are social networks, and indeed technology in general, making more and more people anti social, or at least less social? Let's consider cell phones, which are now used far less for actual phone calls. Technology has advanced to an extent where phones can do just about anything the user wishes, especially when considering the cornucopia of web applications available for instant use. Recently I was people-watching at the local shopping mall on my lunch hour. At one moment, I observed four individuals using smart phones, but only one of them was actually using it as a phone. The others were texting or surfing the web. Caller ID came about years ago, enabling people to screen calls, mostly to avoid telemarketers. Now it seems that we are using this feature to ignore calls from close friends, even if we're available to talk. Why? This is a very good question, one for which I do not have a succinct answer. But it is a very curious phenomenon nonetheless.
The larger implication here seems to be that technology is allowing us to (very easily) avoid any sort of confrontation, both good and bad. This would be especially useful when conflict is involved. Discussing the popularity of text messaging, Kenichi Ishii, in "Implications of Mobility: The Uses of Personal Communication Media in Everyday Life" (2006), states "Japanese youth increasingly seek to avoid conflict and friendships with deep involvement." Also, these same youth display anxiety toward direct communication which prompts them to prefer text messaging over calling on the phone. "The asynchronous communication of text messaging means that both parties are not required to be present for contact to occur" (p. 349).
In addition to these phones (the term mobile device may be more appropriate today) reshaping our definition of social in a virtual sense, they are also at the center of reshaping social norms in a physical sense as well. I think just about everybody has, at one time or another, experienced someone using their mobile device to have a very personal discussion in a very public forum. Are these folks oblivious to their making others feel like boundaries are being crossed, or are they simply redefining social  norms? In the United States, it almost seems commonplace to see this sort of behavior, and indeed, many of us think little of it. But then again maybe this is because everyone today is more focused on their own lives and think little of what strangers are doing. Naomi Baron in her book "Always On" (2008) mentions how the Japanese have all but banned cell phones (keitai) on their public transportation (Ishii also addresses this same issue) because they felt that their use constituted a violation of personal space. Ishii notes that this is not a recent phenomenon: "[t]he widespread use of Walkman portable cassette players in trains also attracted strong criticism in Japan" (p. 348). Now I have the image in my head of a teenager bopping down the sidewalk with a loud boombox affixed to his shoulder!
So is technology inducing a sort of social avoidance within our society? Just by considering one's own observations and personal behavior, one could certainly argue that this is the case. I often wonder why I let certain calls go to voicemail when I have no reason not to talk to them. I even know someone who is trying to get a friend to join Facebook so they can keep in touch this way instead of over the phone. As technology continues to advance, it will be very interesting to see how this trend develops.

The Spy Who Snubbed Me

I suppose it's fairly well known by now that a lot of employers are checking out job applicants online to see what type of material they may have posted, blogs they may be maintaining, or political candidates they may be supporting. So I am sure that there have been many a qualified candidate that have been rejected because of a provocative profile picture or an inebriated entry on their blog. I can't really comment on whether this practice is right or wrong, but it does seem to be happening more and more these days. This brings up the topic of online privacy and trust. One could argue that 'online privacy' is somewhat of a contradiction in terms, but it is nonetheless a growing concern given the wildly popular social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace. Even with customizable privacy settings, there is still room for the photo of that frathouse frolic to become public. Just make sure you have your mom blocked from seeing your profile!

In their article, "Privacy, Trust, and Disclosure Online," Carina B. Paine Schofield and Adam N. Joinson distinguish between actual privacy and perceived privacy. "For example, a person's perceived privacy may be high when they have control over disclosing their personal information to an online store. However, their actual privacy may be low due to the unobtrusive (automatic) collection of their online behavior" (p. 15). The authors go on to make the point out the fact that most people attach a high level of importance to privacy, even though there may not be a standard definition of the concept. Still, though, most of us tend to get careless with this issue as it is easy to take it for granted. Many people feel comfortable shopping online and giving out personal information (including credit card numbers) because most sites have a padlock logo near the bottom or at the top of the screen ensuring that all information is secure. This is a privacy measure that most people (including myself) take for granted by assuming it is legit.

But personal information security issues do not stop with online shopping. Since sites like Facebook have had very public disputes over their privacy policies, it really makes one wonder how much of our personal information is actually within our control. Personal information such as credit card and social security numbers are big targets online, but this growing trend of companies lurking in the proverbial shadows, ready to find the slightest bit of incriminating evidence is a genuine threat to the millions of folks currently out of work, desperately trying to find employment. Even though they may be the most qualified candidate, one errant beer bong photo could take you out of the running for that job. (And just for the record, I am NOT referring to myself in this example!) And even if your privacy settings are secure or you have deleted embarassing posts or pics, they are never actually deleted, thanks to the cavernous morass that somehow keeps a record of everything.

In the Albrechtslund article "Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance," a correlation between actual space and cyberspace is made with regard to the fact that information online is in effect floating in a sort of space, which is perhaps why data never seems to completely go away. It is interesting how words like "desktop" and "windows" are used as analagous to their internet counterparts.