Hello People,
The problem may be wrong technology. Perhaps in many instances IM
should be used rather than email.
At the last company I worked we had a situation where an email was sent
rather than an instant message.
Two problems were:
- email with a very long threads and something "embarrassing" way down
would be sent
- short, casual, unfiltered [can't think of a better work] emails
We set up training program that, first of all, encouraged using Instant
Messages and, second, discussed email etiquette.
Follow up showed the training worked.
Best,
teacher1st
On 1/18/2011 12:57 PM, David Kovar wrote:
Greetings,
This policy is becoming standard in a lot of corporations. I think the
powers that be have more market research for their point of view than
you can drum up for yours.
-David
On Jan 18, 2011, at 10:19 AM, Craig Freyman wrote:
I agree that the policy is very bad and Bugbear is 100% correct. They
don't understand the technology piece at all. However, we've fought
it HARD and lost. I'm going to bring all these points up though, much
thanks for your insight.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Jack Daniel <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Bill Swearingen
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I dont understand why you wouldnt want to comply with policy?
> The reason the lawyers have made this decision is because of
ediscovery. If
> their is a policy (and technical restraints) to not keep stuff
past 60 days,
> then they cant be requested to discover email and documents
older than that.
> Sounds like you are looking for a good way of being fired!
> $0.02
>
Good point Bill, but I interpreted the request as trying to cover all
the bases to help enforce the policy, and framed answers as such.
That said, this is such a bad policy that it will be defeated.
People
are going to do their jobs, in spite of policy- you are much more
likely to be disciplined or fired for not doing your job than you are
to be disciplined for not following policy (at least in almost every
biz I've ever dealt with)
This shows it isn't just us security types who ignore the
realities of
business when crafting policy. The dangers of e-discovery damage
would
have to be insanely high for this to be in the best interest of the
company as a whole. But, we security types ask for dumb stuff
all the
time, too.
Jack
_______________________________________________
Pauldotcom mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
_______________________________________________
Pauldotcom mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
_______________________________________________
Pauldotcom mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
_______________________________________________
Pauldotcom mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
