BNET Insight

Business Hacks

Technology tips, tricks, and hacks to make your workday work better.

Does Instant Messaging Make You More Productive?

November 21st, 2007 @ 9:00 am

Categories: Time-Savers, Web Tools

Tags: IM, Rick Broida

im.jpgA recent Web Worker Daily post suggested that instant messaging is a workplace-productivity killer to be avoided (but then went on to offer 17 tips for making better use of it). A follow-up post argues that IM can actually improve your productivity by minimizing interruptions and improving communications. The source of that argument is a recent study reported in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, which concludes thusly:

Our study of computer-using workers indicates that instant messaging in the workplace simultaneously promotes more frequent communications and reduces interruptions. We have argued that this occurs because workers are using IM technology to manage interruptions, postponing work-related communications until they are more relevant or less disruptive, and integrating communication with friends and family into the ebbs and flows of work. In some instances, work-related instant messaging also enhances employees’ interactions with colleagues by offering an efficient mode of rapid communication and information exchange. 

What do you think? Personally, I adore IM, as it allows me to get urgent questions answered immediately. Plus, it lets me chat with editors and co-workers while continuing to work, which is impossible (or, at the very least, rude) on a phone call. Hit the Comments and let us know your thoughts on IM: productivity booster or productivity killer?

Got a tech dilemma? We're here to help.
 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    salmaanz

    11/21/07 | Report as spam

    Prod. booster, for sure

    As with many other forms of communication, its all about work ethic and how the employee manages his or her time. The phone and email can also be considered time wasters because some employees do waste time yapping away on the phone on non-company related conversations, or email chains of jokes and miscellaneous information that has nothing to do with the employee's job role or even the company itself.

    I'm in B2B sales at one of teh world's largest PC manufacturers, and prior to this job I spent five years, also in B2B sales, at one of the largest telecom companies in North America and in both cases, IM has been immensely helpful to boosting productivity - I can see if the users' online statuses, its faster than email in most cases, and as mentioned - I can keep working / multi-tasking with other apps at the same time.

    If I didn't know how to manage my time or if I didn't have a strong work ethic, then yes I suppose it would waste my time, but then again I'd probably be wasting my time anyways with phone and emails.

  •  
    2

    JaneHC

    11/21/07 | Report as spam

    RE: Does Instant Messaging Make You More Productive?

    In our business 14 of our staff work from home due to the voice-over IP technology available. Instant Messaging is a complete LIFESAVER allowing us instant communication, instant answers to training questions, and to visually see who is available or not. We have created specific policies and procedures for our Instant Messaging which has made it's use invaluable.

  •  
    3

    Dgoldenberg

    11/21/07 | Report as spam

    Can't Do It

    I've tried several times to integrate IMs into my workday, and I just can't do it. I'll use G-talk for a few days and then just shut it down after I get frustrated with all the distractions from it.

  •  
    4

    rgrayling

    11/22/07 | Report as spam

    Our internal IM helps promote teamwork!

    We have been using Pandion IM (www.pandion.be) for over a year now and it has become well and truly integrated into our way of working.

    I am in the IT Dept and have noticed an almost 50% decrease in internal email traffic - reducing strain on our Exchange server and making the backup job smaller (Seriously, all those "Thanks", "No Problem", "OK" etc mails do add up over time).

    We also put our telephone extensions and our TMS Major Roles (Explorer-Promoter, Creator-Innovator etc) underneath our names so people don't have to check the phone list or remember how to 'pace' each other when they do decide to converse 'properly'.

    We even use the 'conference' function to take the bacon sandwich order on a Friday morning! Seriously, we have had brief and to the point online 'meetings' using Pandion's conference rooms - something we can never seem to achieve when face-to-face.

    We wouldn't be without IM - no matter what flavour you choose.

    RG

  •  
    5

    ptiseo

    11/26/07 | Report as spam

    Studies: A Dime A Dozen

    Ah! The beauty of studies. You can find one to support any viewpoint. happy I've also read some studies that "definitively show" IM is "bad". Example:

    http://research.microsoft.com/~marycz/ozchi2000.pdf

    From Microsoft, no less! happy I think one serious potential problem with the above study is that it measures user's perceptions, not so much *actual productivity effects*.

    Most people love IM because it helps them get answers quickly. Look at the above four comments. Everyone thought it boosted their productivity because *they* got answers fast, not because they saw it had no interruptive effect on the *recepient*. People get warm fuzzies from the immediate attention, which helps keep a positive attitude towards IM, and getting an answer fast in many cases will boost the sender's productivity (you didn't have to waste time on it). But, often ignored is the fact that you may have cost someone else's time.

    IM is fundamentally interruptive. In fact, it traditionally has been more intrusive than email. However, I would argue that the difference between your typical modern enterprise IM client and your modern enterprise email client is negligeable these days.

    These technologies alert/notify that someone needs your attention. The distinction from phone or walk-ups is that these electronic interruptions are user-deferrable and user-controllable. Most people usually don't tell the walk-up to come back later for fear of offending. Thus, you have better control over the *length and timing* of the interruption.

    But, you have been interrupted, and if you are in the middle of the wrong type of task, that will cost the receipient of the alert.

    IMO, the nutshell version is that IM is useful for supporting live, collaborative, interactive and/or real-time work, but bad for anything else in the workplace. For example, it's good for meeting replacements, brainstorming sessions (if your IM supports more interactive whiteboards or video), etc. Especially if it helps control loss of time due to travel, room setup, etc. It's bad when you are in the middle of understanding/sorting/collating a big data report, etc.

    PS: The key to good IM in the workplace is that everyone masters status marking and that the business IM stays for business. Don't let the family and friends in.

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

Blogger Profiles

  • Blogger Thumbnail Rick Broida A technology writer for more than 15 years, Rick Broida is a regular contributor to CNET, Popular Science, Wired and other publications. He's also the author of numerous books, including How to Do Everything with Your Zune. When he's not chained to his keyboard, he's usually shooting hoops or watching quality television. more »

advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here