If you have a fast-growing team that is on the same training journey, it allows you to see who is and who is not engaged. I carefully measure who participates in consistent recognition and discussions, and my findings so far are that there is a correlation between recognition and engagement. Most of my least engaged employees when it comes to Preciate recognition assignments or suggestions tend to also be the lowest-performing reps when it comes to metrics or results. I am currently measuring the top users to see what affects recognition has on morale and enthusiasm.
I think Workplace by Facebook is a great communication vehicle for any mid-sized to large company. (Since it's more groups-oriented than "regular" Facebook, it might not work well for smaller companies.) I also don't have any idea what the cost is for having it, but that also be a reason that it wouldn't be worth the expense for smaller companies. For larger companies, I think it's a terrific way for folks to communicate with one another and for "the powers that be" to communicate with employees. Facebook Live is only suitable when you have a limited number of people who need to be on screen and it wouldn't really be suitable as a vehicle for instructor-led online training -- it's really most suitable for presentations (although, via the comments area, does allow for questions to be asked in writing)
It is so easy to introduce to employees because it has the same look and feel as Facebook, which the majority of our employees are already familiar with.
It's a communications, collaboration, and file/document sharing tool all rolled up into one. It eliminates the need for other software.
Our HR team uses it constantly to keep employees up to date on company news and for polling to get feedback on new initiatives.
Limited project management options - no good way to track tasks or projects, so other tools are needed.
Easy to dismiss for people who don't see the value - the Facebook-like nature of the tool can be a liability when it comes to wanting management to take it seriously.
Chat interface has downsides - the standalone chat applications can be a bit buggy, and the chat interface within the web view is not ideal.
No intuitive way to message a group - chat options like Slack are better at easily messaging a group or department, where in Workplace you have to be a member of a group to start a conversation.
Having to download multiple apps just to use the tool is very cumbersome. Facebook would have make this better by wrapping it in as a main feature within their app, but having to use multiple apps to see discussions and walls is so frustrating.
Preciate is always ready to help with questions or problems. They are good at follow up and also being proactive when new versions or upgrades are released. They also do a great job putting useful information on social media like LinkedIn and Twitter, that information is useful when we have an issue. Additionally, they have been really good at taking our suggestions and incorporating them into future builds and versions.
Workplace by Facebook is an excellent fit in respect of support and documentation. It has excellent tutorials and documentation, as well. The UI and UX are already great as it is developed and maintained by Facebook, so most of the times, there is no need for any support or documentation.
I don't like using LinkedIn because it is too personal and not private enough, also recognition gets lost after you post it. With Preciate, the employee or person can take the recognition along with them at their next role or job. I also think that the company stands for some amazing things.
We can compare Workplace in general from email communication (we use Bananatag tool for this). Our email communication and Workplace communication are sometimes competitors. RIght now, we have much higher analytics of email read rate/open rate than on Workplace activity. It may be connected with the fact that there is a lot of communication going on on Workplace. And with the emails we have a dedicated unit to monitor and balance the daily/weekly official email load on the associate. Workplace is a live network. Of course, we as admins balance the posts in official groups. But there are lots of other groups where people post whatever they want (like local communities or communities by interest). Why we keep focus on increasing Workplace engagement instead of email communication is definitely because of this instant feedback that we can get with posting. Email communication cannot create this feeling - it's always a one-way communication in our case.
Workplace offers a free version and a more enhanced, and really enhanced, paid version. The free version is a nice place to test the waters out and see if you can get it working at your company. We have only had a positive return on investment, measured in time.
The on-boarding is where you will see the greatest positive gain. You will quickly be up and running and so will the staff. This will decrease the training and implementation period and for many that means a substantial cost savings.
The only negative return that might be realized is if too much time is spent monitoring and policing the content. If trust is there, then employees can share and enhance the use of this tool to be a positive force. As with any communication tool, set guidelines and let the community police itself to some extent.
