The ability to access the Internet at work has become as commonplace as having a phone on your desk.

Being able to surf on the employer’s time is now considered a right and not a privilege. The costs to the employer are huge. A 2006 study showed that on average, productivity losses are about $6,250 per employee, per year. The numbers from recent studies (conducted by Salary.com) are actually higher and estimate losses closer to $7,000 per employee. This assumes that the average employee spends approximately 90 minutes of time online on non-work related Internet activity.

The survey also showed about six out of ten employees in North America acknowledged wasting time at work. About 34 percent listed personal Internet use as the leading time-wasting activity in the workplace. Employees said they did so because they were bored, worked too many hours, were underpaid or were unchallenged at work.

If you think that this data seems over exaggerated, you’d be wrong. In many cases, the real numbers are very likely worse. As the “Big Brother” for a large government organization, I was witness to many abuses of online resources. It happens everywhere, no company is immune. Especially with the huge popularity of social networking websites like Facebook (which I discussed recently), employees are having a much more difficult time getting their real work done.

I’m not saying that all employees are cyberslackers. In fact, in most organizations, there are many employees that probably never go online at all. Still, companies all over the world are justifiably concerned about the potentially harmful effects of surfing that they deem to be inappropriate, and may have on their company's image. Many firms rely on computer software to monitor Web activity and block certain sites or servers.

So here comes the debate. Should employers block access to the sites that they know employees love so much (like Facebook, Myspace, Youtube etc.) or should they allow their employees to visit any site they like, knowing full well that their access is being monitored and that repercussions are possible for improper use?

My personal view is that blocking sites employees love is a great way to make workers dislike their employer, especially when that website is a must-use Gen Y social tool affording people the opportunity to express themselves. I believe that carte blanche blocking and filtering is not the way to go because it makes employees believe that they are essentially being proven guilty, and not given a chance. Best to let employees’ consciences guide them, and if they happen to spend too much time on Facebook or visit an online sex site, they do so fully acknowledging the consequences. Where do you stand on this issue? Email me at mark@triadsecurityconsulting.com and let me know!

There is a huge need for better education and for encouraging responsible usage of the Internet, email, instant messaging and other resources. It all starts with having a well-written information security policy outlining acceptable use of computer resources, including online access. Companies have the right to monitor and report on the use of their company assets, but should do so in an open and honest way with their workforce. This way, they create a harmonious environment—not to mention a pleasant increase in productivity!