My company’s use of technology is pretty good for as much as I understand. I know that I personally don’t receive computer programs unless I need them and the same goes for upgrades in speed and capacity.

One thing that my company has done since I started working there 3 years ago was install a website blocker on the network. I believe this was done for two reasons. 1, It limits the sites that each employee has access to ensure that they’re not viewing or reading inappropriate content and 2, It should cut down on the total time that is spent surfing by employees.

I’m in favor of the web-site blocker for all companies. I can see the value for managers and employees. Managers want to make sure their employees aren’t spending too much time surfing so that they can remain productive (aside from a short break or during lunch), and as an employee it’s difficult to resist the temptation (especially during slow periods). Website blockers help in both of those areas.

Recent studies show that the average employee spends anywhere from 1-3 hours a day on non-work related surfing. And close to 2/3 of all employers are now using some kind of website blocking software. (http://humanresources.about.com/od/technology/a/surfing_web.htm)

One Response to “”

  1. Vicki Sauter Says:

    How is the website blocking process working? In other words, what does it cost to do this? In order for the process to work, sites need to be updated regularly and that costs money. Are the tradeoffs working? Are there some jobs where it works better or less? Industries? What kinds of sites are blocked? What are the implications?

Leave a comment