HOW CRISPY IS REALLY THE PRICE OF SOCIAL MEDIA?
Which is more scandalous: when a female employee posts a bikini photo of herself onto Facebook or when the employer sacks her for doing it? The topic is discussed below.
During yet another workshop whilst studying in London, I started a discussion with my British colleagues on a fairly intriguing subject. Namely, the HR Manager of a London-based company offering exclusive designer clothes for kids stated that social media usage among their employees is checked on regular basis, and indecent behavior always results in terminating the employment contract. "After all, each and everyone in our company is the face of the organization!" she added passionately. The rest of the group of Brits nodded along in solidarity with the statement made.
Whilst living myself in a country where the extensive usage of social media in professional sense compared to Brits is extremely liberal, then during this discussion I could not help but run through my head the fairly provocative photos of several of my acquaintances, among who are also top leaders. And I must admit that none of these photos have ever caused any furore among the Estonians, at least not publicly. Therefore, I decided to look for answers to the following questions: where is our borderline between decency and indecency? And do we have in Estonia any code of ethics for social media usage applied at all?
Fake boobs and “a little bit drunk”
In order to get a better understanding of the whole subject in regards to what is IN and what is OUT, I decided to share in London a few real life samples that I have just happened to witness. For instance, one employee decided to introduce to the public via social media her brand new and "oven warm" boobs in a tiny bikini (I still remember vividly the embarrassment and quiet whispers of the then colleagues:"Well, this is not really appropriate, is it?!"). Also another one, when a CEO of a large company considered it necessary to promote via Facebook his wild clubbing night, hugging his friend and having a "had- some-cocktails" look in his eyes whilst adding a title "In the club and a little bit drunk!". My British colleagues looked horrified and I got my answer: this is deadly indecent as far as one' s career and reputation are concerned, at least in England. I was explained right away that this does not mean at all that such things are not done in England, however promoting it publicly is a definite "no-no"! It was also added that it is absolutely acceptable to post nice photos of nature and food. Fair enough, pancakes in a marsh does not result in one being eternally stamped with the title of "indecent employee". I took a minute and thought intensively about my social media postings and sighed with relief once I realized that my job in England would not be in danger.
The employees' (silent?) code of ethics
Getting totally into the subject, I decided to dive into Internet and typed in English the terms referencing to the code of ethics, and -voila!- my search paid off. First I came across a large provider of construction products Wolseley PLC's subsidiary Wolseley UK Ltd that has a website with a code of ethics and this also entails a separate paragraph dedicated to the usage of social media. Additionally to all the usual (e.g. employees are expected to act with integrity towards the company as well as not distribute any confidential information via social networks), the company also asks its employees to pay more attention to their own privacy. Large UK corporations where corporate governance is highly valued, then for me this is nothing to be surprised about. I then carry on with my search having a look at UK's public sector institutions and I do not have to be disappointed there either - in 2012 a special manual for social media usage has been established for public servants where it has been very clearly highlighted: any content of a post that can be classified as inappropriate may result in a disciplinary for the individual who posted it. My foreign colleagues confirm that in smaller companies such rules are introduced to new employees during the induction programme and employees have to sign the code of ethics (which definitely entails also the rules applied for the social media usage). True, none of the found codes of ethics state directly that one has to keep their clothes on and act sober in public postings, but despite that, our moral thresholds cannot be so extremely different. Or can they? Practice shows that "around-the-corner" hints, later wagging one' s finger at the naughty one, and agonizing does not work. Therefore, you have to respect the Brits since they really are trying to clear it up (in their very own polite and diplomatic manner).
One of my colleagues who works in an executive position commented it as follows: "Guess some cultures then need it to be clarified more than others." But maybe we here, in Estonia, count way too much on people's natural intelligence and assume a common understanding of morality? Do we have a right to assume it at all since we have never expressed our expectations in that regard? What gives us as employers then the right to be silently shocked when we never address it? The main emphasis lies in the latter's case on the word "silently" as it must be said that I have personally never ever heard of any such reprimands or employment contracts being terminated due to it. If this is acceptable in our sociocultural picture, then this is just the way it is and the aim is not to lecture anyone, but rather understand whether we are really so different from some other cultures (e.g. Brits).
Grete Kempel, the postgraduate of Tartu University's social and educational science faculty, dedicated her this year's graduation paper to this very subject matter, and it appears that local companies applying instructions for social media usage are rather an exception than common practice. Estonian employers believe that an employer represents the company in their work as well as personal life, however only a few organizations have regulated this aspect officially or expressed their expectations to employees. At the same time, the employers who participated in this very research explained that they consider inappropriate behavior when an employee posts hardcore party pictures, photos with sexual reference, intra-company work data, strong political statements, and vulgarities on social media. EUREKA! – our principles in regards to what is indecent and what is not are actually very similar to the ones shared by Brits, but we just communicate it differently (read: do not communicate at all), and therefore the outcome is also different (read: usually non-existent)!
Is “trust, but check” limiting one's personal freedom?
When my British colleagues find the checking of their employees' social media networks to be a norm, then discussing this very same matter with several local employers, the latter found that this is an extreme restriction of one's personal freedom.
Where is then this "golden middle road" that would not restrict the individual to an extreme, but at the same time would not cause embarrassment to the organization, employers and the person themselves? Unfortunately, there is no single answer to it, and this is why one has to count on their own rational mind as well as responsibilities derived from their profession. Everyone must know themselves what kind of (self-) branding is expected from them and how they want to be seen in the eyes of the public. Coming to that conclusion, I have another quick look at my social media sites and get a feeling that I have created my brand as a leader, employer, and individual in a way that does not make my Estonian colleagues blush nor British colleagues pass out. And that does not mean at all as if my life is boring - far from that!
Article published in Estonian under the title of "Kui krõbe on tegelikult sotsiaalmeedia hind?" in a leadership magazine Director (December 2014).
During yet another workshop whilst studying in London, I started a discussion with my British colleagues on a fairly intriguing subject. Namely, the HR Manager of a London-based company offering exclusive designer clothes for kids stated that social media usage among their employees is checked on regular basis, and indecent behavior always results in terminating the employment contract. "After all, each and everyone in our company is the face of the organization!" she added passionately. The rest of the group of Brits nodded along in solidarity with the statement made.
Whilst living myself in a country where the extensive usage of social media in professional sense compared to Brits is extremely liberal, then during this discussion I could not help but run through my head the fairly provocative photos of several of my acquaintances, among who are also top leaders. And I must admit that none of these photos have ever caused any furore among the Estonians, at least not publicly. Therefore, I decided to look for answers to the following questions: where is our borderline between decency and indecency? And do we have in Estonia any code of ethics for social media usage applied at all?
Fake boobs and “a little bit drunk”
In order to get a better understanding of the whole subject in regards to what is IN and what is OUT, I decided to share in London a few real life samples that I have just happened to witness. For instance, one employee decided to introduce to the public via social media her brand new and "oven warm" boobs in a tiny bikini (I still remember vividly the embarrassment and quiet whispers of the then colleagues:"Well, this is not really appropriate, is it?!"). Also another one, when a CEO of a large company considered it necessary to promote via Facebook his wild clubbing night, hugging his friend and having a "had- some-cocktails" look in his eyes whilst adding a title "In the club and a little bit drunk!". My British colleagues looked horrified and I got my answer: this is deadly indecent as far as one' s career and reputation are concerned, at least in England. I was explained right away that this does not mean at all that such things are not done in England, however promoting it publicly is a definite "no-no"! It was also added that it is absolutely acceptable to post nice photos of nature and food. Fair enough, pancakes in a marsh does not result in one being eternally stamped with the title of "indecent employee". I took a minute and thought intensively about my social media postings and sighed with relief once I realized that my job in England would not be in danger.
The employees' (silent?) code of ethics
Getting totally into the subject, I decided to dive into Internet and typed in English the terms referencing to the code of ethics, and -voila!- my search paid off. First I came across a large provider of construction products Wolseley PLC's subsidiary Wolseley UK Ltd that has a website with a code of ethics and this also entails a separate paragraph dedicated to the usage of social media. Additionally to all the usual (e.g. employees are expected to act with integrity towards the company as well as not distribute any confidential information via social networks), the company also asks its employees to pay more attention to their own privacy. Large UK corporations where corporate governance is highly valued, then for me this is nothing to be surprised about. I then carry on with my search having a look at UK's public sector institutions and I do not have to be disappointed there either - in 2012 a special manual for social media usage has been established for public servants where it has been very clearly highlighted: any content of a post that can be classified as inappropriate may result in a disciplinary for the individual who posted it. My foreign colleagues confirm that in smaller companies such rules are introduced to new employees during the induction programme and employees have to sign the code of ethics (which definitely entails also the rules applied for the social media usage). True, none of the found codes of ethics state directly that one has to keep their clothes on and act sober in public postings, but despite that, our moral thresholds cannot be so extremely different. Or can they? Practice shows that "around-the-corner" hints, later wagging one' s finger at the naughty one, and agonizing does not work. Therefore, you have to respect the Brits since they really are trying to clear it up (in their very own polite and diplomatic manner).
One of my colleagues who works in an executive position commented it as follows: "Guess some cultures then need it to be clarified more than others." But maybe we here, in Estonia, count way too much on people's natural intelligence and assume a common understanding of morality? Do we have a right to assume it at all since we have never expressed our expectations in that regard? What gives us as employers then the right to be silently shocked when we never address it? The main emphasis lies in the latter's case on the word "silently" as it must be said that I have personally never ever heard of any such reprimands or employment contracts being terminated due to it. If this is acceptable in our sociocultural picture, then this is just the way it is and the aim is not to lecture anyone, but rather understand whether we are really so different from some other cultures (e.g. Brits).
Grete Kempel, the postgraduate of Tartu University's social and educational science faculty, dedicated her this year's graduation paper to this very subject matter, and it appears that local companies applying instructions for social media usage are rather an exception than common practice. Estonian employers believe that an employer represents the company in their work as well as personal life, however only a few organizations have regulated this aspect officially or expressed their expectations to employees. At the same time, the employers who participated in this very research explained that they consider inappropriate behavior when an employee posts hardcore party pictures, photos with sexual reference, intra-company work data, strong political statements, and vulgarities on social media. EUREKA! – our principles in regards to what is indecent and what is not are actually very similar to the ones shared by Brits, but we just communicate it differently (read: do not communicate at all), and therefore the outcome is also different (read: usually non-existent)!
Is “trust, but check” limiting one's personal freedom?
When my British colleagues find the checking of their employees' social media networks to be a norm, then discussing this very same matter with several local employers, the latter found that this is an extreme restriction of one's personal freedom.
Where is then this "golden middle road" that would not restrict the individual to an extreme, but at the same time would not cause embarrassment to the organization, employers and the person themselves? Unfortunately, there is no single answer to it, and this is why one has to count on their own rational mind as well as responsibilities derived from their profession. Everyone must know themselves what kind of (self-) branding is expected from them and how they want to be seen in the eyes of the public. Coming to that conclusion, I have another quick look at my social media sites and get a feeling that I have created my brand as a leader, employer, and individual in a way that does not make my Estonian colleagues blush nor British colleagues pass out. And that does not mean at all as if my life is boring - far from that!
Article published in Estonian under the title of "Kui krõbe on tegelikult sotsiaalmeedia hind?" in a leadership magazine Director (December 2014).
