Wanton web surfing in the workplace can cost companies up to 6.25% of their annual wage costs

By Chen Bin

CONSIDER this: If an employee makes 60 photocopies for personal use per month, and each copy costs the firm 5 cents, the amount wasted by a company with 200 employees will be $600 monthly, or $7,200 annually. This wastage has prompted many organisations to implement procedures to control photocopying usage to prevent misuse by employees.

The key question: is there a similar need to prevent Internet misuse in corporate offices?

Look at Internet access, for instance. An employee with a monthly salary of $3,000 costs the company about $20.70 per hour. If he spends 30 minutes accessing the Internet on non-work related websites each day, the wastage to the company is $10.40 per employee daily - or $217.50 a month. For a company with 200 employees, the wastage will amount to $43,500 a month or $522,000 a year, representing up to 6.25 per cent of the company's annual wage costs.

Internet misuse is more costly to companies than photocopying, or most other office facilities. Yet, how many companies feel the need to control their employees' Internet usage?

According to a survey by Yankelovich Partners, 60 per cent of an average employee's Internet access in the office is non-work related; 62 per cent of the workforce in Internet-enabled offices surf the Net from the office at least once a day. The majority of the staff well know that it is wrong to access the Internet for personal purposes during office hours.

Do companies know to which sites their employees surf? Do they access pornographic sites? Do they play Internet games? Or do they day trade? According to one survey, up to 70 per cent of Charles Schwab & Company's customers engage in online trading from their office desks.

The Net has made information flow easier, cheaper, and more vulnerable. That is why many companies spend thousands of dollars on security solutions. However, most of the effort is geared towards preventing outsiders from intruding into their systems. Little effort is spent on controlling information leaks from within the company.

That can be a costly oversight. Chevron Corp, for instance, settled a US$2.2 million lawsuit with employees offended by an e-mail entitled, '25 reasons why beer is better than women'. And investment firm Salomon Smith Barney fired two senior investment analysts for inappropriate e-mail usage.

It is not just productivity loss and legal risks that matter. Internet misuse also reduces a company's business throughput, as bandwidth is consumed by non-work related surfing and e-mailing. When bandwidth is charged by volume, the loss is even higher.

Some advocate using education as a means of preventing corporate Internet misuse. However, that is not enough. An effective physical control measure is necessary.

The answer: internal monitoring tools. These can act as the most effective deterrent and are the ultimate shield against misuse. Is it legal for companies to monitor and control their employees' Internet usage? Yes. Office facilities belong to the company and it therefore has every right to safeguard them. Is it ethical for companies to do so? It is as ethical as it is for employees to use the Internet for personal reasons during office hours.

Of course, most companies may be reluctant to take a confrontational approach. One constructive way: develop a clearly-defined IAP (Internet Access Policy), one drafted preferably in collaboration with the employees. A team approach will help the employees cooperate with the company. Once an IAP is defined, it should be communicated to all staff - old and new. Transparency is vital to avoid misunderstanding and mistrust.

Internet misuse in corporations is a technological problem. And technology should be the solution that should help solve it, with appropriate education applied along the line.