My company chose Workplace as a formal and only official channel for internal communication, including announcements from executives to all employees. It makes you have to actively on workplace to get information, knowing what's happening around. I think it's a wrong way to use, but it's already set by top c level.
CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
31–40 of 143 posts
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#32Corporate internal social networks are a concept that just doesn’t work because of the hierarchy involved. This is obvious to anyone who isn’t in the HR department.
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#33They only had 150 active users (despite 1000 signups), so choosing not to pay for the offering makes sense. I have the utmost respect for CERN as an institution — I want to make that clear. What I don’t love, however, is this trend that seems to be using a PR offensive of “price shaming” whenever contract or license terms change. I understand CERN is publicly funded and that it doesn’t have an unlimited budget. But I…
> They only had 150 active users
"roughly 150 active users of the platform per week."
This is a distinction with a difference, "per week", casts the active user count in a different light.
> passive-aggressive jab at the three-year free trial
That's exactly how I read this.
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#34They only had 150 active users (despite 1000 signups), so choosing not to pay for the offering makes sense. I have the utmost respect for CERN as an institution — I want to make that clear. What I don’t love, however, is this trend that seems to be using a PR offensive of “price shaming” whenever contract or license terms change. I understand CERN is publicly funded and that it doesn’t have an unlimited budget. But I…
I read this as an announcement of the 'why' they dropped it for their own 150 active users. There's nothing wrong with saying you stop something because it has become too expensive. It's not price shaming, it's saying that you're not willing to pay the price that has increased. It would've been price shaming if it said that it was so much money for so little services.
There's nothing wrong with dropping an internal tool because you don't want to pay for it. Posting about it publicly is a different story.
I'm not seeing why they would post about it publicly unless they wanted to put public pressure on Facebook to let them keep using it for free. To me, that's price shaming.
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#35> CERN was then given a choice of either paying to continue with the initially free set-up or downgrading to a free version that would remove administrative rights and CERN single sign-on access and send all data to Facebook
another example of paying with the data.
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#36They only had 150 active users (despite 1000 signups), so choosing not to pay for the offering makes sense. I have the utmost respect for CERN as an institution — I want to make that clear. What I don’t love, however, is this trend that seems to be using a PR offensive of “price shaming” whenever contract or license terms change. I understand CERN is publicly funded and that it doesn’t have an unlimited budget. But I…
> But I’m not sure how necessary the passive-aggressive jab at the three-year free trial now becoming paid is to the fact that CERN is dropping a tool only 150 people actively used.
I don't see any passive-aggressive jab in that post. It states the facts - namely that Facebook changes the conditions of their offering and the offering is no longer something worthwhile for CERN - and depending on your position this facts may look bad for Facebook. That's Facebooks problem, not CERNs.
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#37The thing I personally found difficulty about Workplace is that it uses the same dark patterns as Facebook to increase engagement. For a business tool this is a bad thing.
A tool that requires none of my time to get benefit out of is a better tool than one that requires some of my time. Workplace drained time with patterns like unnecessary notifications, email notifications without the actual content in and prompts to engage in activity on the platform in ways that weren’t productive.
Business tools should save time, not drain time. I think Workplace either has this wrong, or is designed for workplaces where people don’t have enough to do and spend their days on Facebook anyway.
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read this as an announcement of the 'why' they dropped it for their own 150 active users. There's nothing wrong with saying you stop something because it has become too expensive. It's not price shaming, it's saying that you're not willing to pay the price that has increased. It would've been price shaming if it said that it was so much money for so little services.
There's nothing wrong with dropping an internal tool because you don't want to pay for it. Posting about it publicly is a different story. I'm not seeing why they would post about it publicly unless they wanted to put public pressure on Facebook to let them keep using it for free. To me, that's price shaming.
Glance at the site: https://home.cern/news
(for example: https://home.cern/news/official-news/cern/staff-rules-and-re... )
It's basically an internal memo, except CERN posts them publicly.
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read this as an announcement of the 'why' they dropped it for their own 150 active users. There's nothing wrong with saying you stop something because it has become too expensive. It's not price shaming, it's saying that you're not willing to pay the price that has increased. It would've been price shaming if it said that it was so much money for so little services.
There's nothing wrong with dropping an internal tool because you don't want to pay for it. Posting about it publicly is a different story. I'm not seeing why they would post about it publicly unless they wanted to put public pressure on Facebook to let them keep using it for free. To me, that's price shaming.
Isn't this the open government many people ask for?
(CERN is an intergovernmental organisation, so it's similar to a government research department, except the funding and control is shared between several governments.)
Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace
#40They only had 150 active users (despite 1000 signups), so choosing not to pay for the offering makes sense. I have the utmost respect for CERN as an institution — I want to make that clear. What I don’t love, however, is this trend that seems to be using a PR offensive of “price shaming” whenever contract or license terms change. I understand CERN is publicly funded and that it doesn’t have an unlimited budget. But I…
I'm guessing you found the passive-agressive one here:
> Losing control of our data was unacceptable, as was paying for a tool that was not part of our core offering for the CERN community; therefore, we will end the trial of this platform.
I don't see it. The statement seems matter of fact and not relaying any opinion on the matter of Facebook choosing to end the free trial.
Were you referring to another part?