- Nobody is sitting there waiting for their news feed to update.
- Nobody is posting information there as they would with friends because THEY ARE AT WORK, they worry their boss will see something stupid. This is why memes and other things rarely get posted on work networks.
- Nobody wants to seem like they are slacking off talking on social networks instead of working (even on the work one).
- No memes and other fun related things, nobody cares and nobody checks.
Slack on the other hand was a huge hit. We have a few groups of like minded people who just chat it up. Usually for short bursts. Everyone prefers it over the social network tools. And everyone stays active in it.
A major feature is the notification that someone sent you a direct message (might be important) or sent a message to a room (meh) or sent a message to a muted room (probably not important).
As for some of your specific points:
> Nobody is sitting there waiting for their news feed to update.
I check the feed in the morning and usually again in the afternoon. It's not expected to be something you stare at for eight hours a day.
> Nobody wants to seem like they are slacking off talking on social networks instead of working (even on the work one).
Think that's more of a company culture issue - our use of it is appreciated/encouraged.
> No memes and other fun related things, nobody cares and nobody checks.
The vast majority of posts are work-related but we have plenty of groups strictly for non-work/fun purposes (e.g. we have a group for discussing video games).
The first thing that happens when joining a new company is that everyone sends me Fb friend requests.
That said, it looks like Slack is doing a great job of replacing email for in-office communication.
It seems very customary to add at least everyone on your direct team to Fb though.
We joined Facebook in the early days when you needed a .edu email address to join, so I've got a lot of college partying photos up there. I've always seen it more of a private space. Not sure if the time you join and your original perception of the service changes your use.
Wise choice, although I'm sure she has other ways of seeing what you get up to.
I see my coworkers for approximately 1/3 of my entire week. If I have a question for them it can wait until tomorrow/Monday. I have nothing to gain by them having access to photos of me at a bar with friends or pictures of me at a half marathon or something.
That said, I've long since resigned myself to the fact that I'm probably a rather poor representative of this generational group in which my birthday happens to fall.
This seems like an often repeated claim that has never really been proven in any meaningful way.
Slack is not positioned as a social network but as a productivity and collaboration tool, a role it fulfils really well.
If I had to choose I would pick Slack over Facebook at Work any day of the week.
Slack is great for quick-reaction and coordinated team org, but not suggest features, walk people through non-trivial decision, structure posts and comments.
At VMware we use SocialCast[1] (not sure if we used it before we bought them or not, that was before my time) and it's certainly used in a "meaningful way". Not everyone in the company uses it regularly but certainly more than enough for a sufficient critical mass that if you have a question you can ask it in the appropriate group(s) and you'll most likely have an answer within hours (and often minutes).
The thing is, the biggest component of enterprise collaboration is information and knowledge management. If Facebook is leveraging its existing information management feature set this platform would be a no-go for me, because their whole set-up is designed to push new information at you and bury anything else as soon as possible. As well, chat or groups without file/information/data management features is a quarter-measure.
1: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/august24/multitask-resear...
2: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201209/the-t...
That being said...this is potentially scary news for companies that are in the HR 2.0 business for lack of a better word. Typically their solutions have alumni management, stay in contact etc. that they tout. Well if your company has FB work and they later add the option to integrate private FB accounts of ex employees or something that's interesting. I know they say for now those are separate but I wouldn't be shocked if that changes eventually.
Edit: If they want to segment this they should have given it an entirely different name imo. I'm sure there are marketing people at FB that are way more brilliant than me but this seems like a typical positioning mistake. You think you need to rely on your powerful main brand when you really want to create a new brand because you're attacking a different positioning slot in customer's heads. Don't have my Ries/Trout book at hand but it sounds familiar enough that I'll browse through it at home.