If the gov't feels the need (which I don't agree with) to 'relate' to Americans through social media (again I'm really not convinced of the merits of that)- please limit access to specific employees charged with managing the information and its presentation on social media.

More businesses and workplaces should be BLOCKING access to "time-sucks" like social media rather than pretending that it's important for ALL employees to have access to the productivity black-holes like Facebook.

Maybe a few 'information' specialists should have access - but I imagine most productivity is inversely related to access to social media and even the internet.

Recent studies, which have been repeated again and again, show that blocking "time sucks" actually results in less productivity in the work place AND people doing less work at home off the clock. Blocking people from email and news just causes them to do something else when they need a break... and those other things take up more time.

More and more, blocking becomes a waste of resources as well since a whole lot of the people can simply use their phones. Using your time appropriately is a skill that we all need to cultivate. But for people who specifically work on .gov sites, blocking access to important professional educational channels is counter productive.

Agree the blocking needs to end. It's crazy when I see a new tool or link type somewhere and I click to see it, but am blocked. I then need to remember to check it from home or try to access it from my phone. We need someone to put out gov guidance to security folks telling them to let us in!

What's interesting is that access to tools is uneven. Some agencies -- like GSA -- generally don't block tools, and have figured out ways to mitigate/minimize security risks (tho' there will always be some level of risk). But other agencies block access. What can we do to ensure there's a consistent approach? Is it having the CIOs come together to address this issue head on and make a recommendation? Has that been done before? I'd love to hear an agency CIO weigh in on how we can address this govt-wide, not agency-by-agency.

@sheila, there may be mission reasons for agencies to apply different standards. I have frequently seen these discussions get wrapped around the least common-denominator (i.e. most restrictive use in national security). GSA is not DHS. #justsayin

@gwynne, yes absolutely agree, some agencies may specific needs. But wonder if at least some standard criteria could be developed for determining access, and then agencies can apply the criteria to their specific circumstances.

It's funny--threads like these do more to illuminate the problem than any survey ever could. @Jane, that idea is exactly what's wrong with government sites. People are not mindless automatons who should be grateful to have a job. Sounds like your fb'ers are underutilized, not given anything meaningful to do, have inadequate leadership and direction, or, just possibly, might be terrible employees with a noticeable effect on productivity metrics. So why hasn't someone (I don't necessarily mean you) done something to fix this? In all seriousness. Even the most casual look at the web shows that none of the smart, interesting, thought-leading people nowadays believe in the work model you reference. So what gives?

Before I started with the federal government this summer I came from a state government where we completed a year+ long project to assess social media and open access for employees. We went through a very long and thorough risk management process. At the end of the day, after we created basic policy, guidance and training, we opened things up.

And guess what blew up, even after 6 months of the new policy being in place, where every employee had access to Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and LinkedIn? Nothing happened. The network didn't crash, viruses didn't spread like wildfire, people didn't swear, lawyers didn't attack in flocks. Why? Because most of the risk turns out to be overblown, worth considering but low probability and magnitude at the end of the day.

Trust your employees and coworkers, make the workplace innovative, flexible and enjoyable. And encourage your technology, policy and PR folks to step into the 21st century. Control is an illusion.

I appreciate 'data' driven insights. I imagine good management that conveys the expectation of productivity and enforces limited use of Facebook type entertainment and games might make access 'ok'. Sadly, I don't see that too often in my neck of the woods.

I think this site could be considered a time-suck for govt non-website employees, but from a different perspective that input is valuable. Again, culture in govt needs to embrace input from all levels/sectors.

Blocking these websites doesn't work since everyone just uses their personal smart phone to access any time they want to. Leaders use these websites to communicate with citizens. Why not use them to communicate with employees?

@Sheila, I like your suggestions. I think there should be a consolidated effort to address risks with new technologies. It would relieve individual agency IT managers of having to mitigate these risks on their own (which they often do by denying access).

Censorship never works. If you block it, creative humans will find a workaround -- it's human ingenuity. Appropriate use of social media is a management issues, not a technology issue.

Here's an article about how social media can **increase** productivity at the workplace: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/09/increase_your_companys_productiv.html

As a federal employee I get my voice-recognition software from the Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program (CAP)sponsored by the Department of Defense. Within the last year CAP started posting on Facebook and send me regular e-mails telling me to check out their Facebook updates. Ironically, I cannot access Facebook from work.

Ed, thanks for posting that article on how social media can increase productivity if we select the right tools and create a culture led by example and training to use it effectively.