Yesterday's Daily Telegraph reported the case of John Flexman who has taken his employer to a tribunal for constructive dismissal. According to the report, Mr Flexman was disciplined for "inappropriate use of social media" after putting his CV onto LinkedIn and ticking the box saying that he is interested in career opportunities.
I do not want to dwell on the particulars of Mr Flexman's situation as we don't know the full story at this stage. The case as a whole, however, is a worrying, if inevitable, one.
LinkedIn has become increasingly popular in the business world, having grown from 55 million users worldwide in 2009 to more than 135 million by November 3rd 2011. It has become clear from the talks and workshops I have been running that the growth has not just been in numbers of users but in activity, with an increasing number of people taking the time to fill out their profiles, make connections, join groups and spend time on the site.
While LinkedIn is commonly seen as a social network to bring together job seekers with recruiters, there are many other business uses for the site, not least the ability to generate referrals and other sales leads. This has alerted many companies to the benefits of utilising LinkedIn. Most top companies have shifted their policy from banning use of LinkedIn to allowing it and, in an increasing number of cases, positively encouraging it. Many organisations also now have a company presence on LinkedIn, in addition to many of their senior management team having their own profiles.
The disconnect comes from the fact that each personal profile is that of a particular individual and not the company they work for. It moves with them when they change job and their presence on the site could possibly trigger new job opportunities naturally. There has already been some debate, and litigation over who owns the content of a LinkedIn profile and John Flexman's employers, BG Group, allegedly tried to dictate what he could say about the company in his profile. In heavily regulated sectors, such as financial services, this issue can be even more sensitive.
At present, many people tell me that they know when someone in their network is looking for a new job because they update their LinkedIn profile and add new connections. If people continue to simply see the site as a job search tool there will continue to be distrust between company and employer. We need to get to the point where individuals are using LinkedIn on a proactive basis throughout their careers, not just when a need arises.
My concern is that such disputes will deter both companies and individuals from using LinkedIn as they should, as a business tool which, at its best, can produce tremendous results both for individuals and for organisations.
Individuals should act responsibly and check their employer's guidelines for use of the site before building their profile. They should consider at all times the impact of what they say on the firm they represent, as well as the sensitivity of the information they are sharing.
Companies should accept that people do move jobs in their career and will build networks to help them do so. Instead of trying to restrict such activity by dictate, they should focus on reducing people's desire to leave by creating the best possible working environment for them.
Firms should also develop clear guidelines for social media use that are flexible enough to allow effective use of the site and robust enough to avoid damage to the firm or its reputation.
I don't know what lies behind the case between Mr. Flexman and his former employer but I certainly don't want to see a rush of similar cases. Employers and employees need to agree what works for both parties, perhaps we now need a standard of participation across all business.
After all, social networks are here to stay, in most cases for the good of business. It's up to us to make them work for all parties.