On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 7:41 PM, [Dr. Matt_Mca]
<drmattmca@gmail.com> wrote:
I beg to disagree.Policies are made by people for people to follow.
Some policies are ammended - My believe as long as ones actions do not interfere with WORK/service levels/operations I have no issues.
Mathews, when company policies are defined, by management, it's not upto you to decide how flexiblly you can implement them.
However, if "you are yourself the policy", then no problem;-)
Policies must be acceptable to both parties employer and employee. A middle ground MUST be sort otherwise policies become useless hence the MOU - acceptable principles to use of technology.
When you join the company and sign the contract, it simply means you have agreed to adhere to company policies. It's at that point that you should ask for them, read them and if you don't agree with some, you simply fail to sign the contract, and you know what that means.
I have never seen any organization where management negotiates on company policies with employees. I know people negotiate their terms of employment (remuneration), and not company policies.
A employee works best when motivated the understanding is to have defined and acceptable modes of availing "company set guidelines" for services.
I hear you, but I still insist you are simply missing the point: We are talking company policy, not employee motivation.
In this case in point FB is a marketing too if well used, the company policy needs to be flexible to address the needs of the users lets they come up with other means of doing stuff;
You can say that, but from a different perspective, not company policy that has been defined and which requires that FB is banned.
The OP did not ask us to advise him on what is good or bad for the company.