Force Skype for Business to remain signed in..
-
@Dashrender said:
@DustinB3403 said:
@JaredBusch said:
@DustinB3403 said:
Yeah @Mike-Davis I totally get that, the big issue is I have is I'm a leg it guy. I get shit done.
Completely not relevant. It is not your problem to solve. you give it to their management or HR as directed. This is not a technology issue.
True... if management would enforce the tools we've been told to provide.
Why do you care if they use it or not?
I'll tell you why, because they are still bitching about it!
I have the same problem - the phones suck, why aren't people answering the phone? Why, because they are choosing not to, either because they see who is calling, or because they choose to be away from their desk doing something else, instead of answering the phone.
This is not a technology problem, this is definitely an HR problem.
Sadly, management just can't seem to see that and instead just keeps bitching, making us a bunch of nervous wrecks.
I am available for hire if you want someone to come in and write a bunch of reports on phone usage highlighting the actual time.
-
When we got SFB our boss told us he expected us to be online with an appropriate status. We're in different states so it's especially important. We also use the mobile app.
It's pretty annoying when you see someone offline for days and days but they're working, or someone that's available but doesn't answer IM's or calls because they walked away from their desk and didn't change status.
-
@quicky2g said:
When we got SFB our boss told us he expected us to be online with an appropriate status. We're in different states so it's especially important. We also use the mobile app.
It's pretty annoying when you see someone offline for days and days but they're working, or someone that's available but doesn't answer IM's or calls because they walked away from their desk and didn't change status.
I can definitely understand the changing status thing.
If the status can be tied to something like the screensaver being active (MS messenger did that) and then set the screensaver to something like 2-3 mins, at least you'll show up as away from desk when you're not actively using the computer. Can't make a user login when they are there though... that's straight up HR issue.
-
@Dashrender said:
@quicky2g said:
When we got SFB our boss told us he expected us to be online with an appropriate status. We're in different states so it's especially important. We also use the mobile app.
It's pretty annoying when you see someone offline for days and days but they're working, or someone that's available but doesn't answer IM's or calls because they walked away from their desk and didn't change status.
I can definitely understand the changing status thing.
If the status can be tied to something like the screensaver being active (MS messenger did that) and then set the screensaver to something like 2-3 mins, at least you'll show up as away from desk when you're not actively using the computer. Can't make a user login when they are there though... that's straight up HR issue.
I've had companies do that and it was bad. The screensaver is disruptive to work and very misleading as to status. If I'm at my desk working but not working on the computer, which was really common, I'd be marked as away while sitting right there able to get a message. Even when I had multiple devices being watched for messages it would tell people that I was away. Very frustrating when people would constantly complain about me being away from work while I'm sitting at my effing desk working but they used an algorithm based on things like mouse movement to determine if I was "around."
-
I can see what you are saying - but why would the person who wants to talk to you not just send a note anyway? this way you can respond when you return.
I've never not sent a note when I've seen AFK - I post anyway, and when they return they answer me. It's what makes messaging so awesome.
By that same token, is one to assume that just because your client doesn't report you at AFK that you are sitting their idly waiting for them to talk to you? Of course I'm being melodramatic on purpose, but you get my point. Just because I'm not listed at AFK doesn't mean I'm going to respond to you the moment you message me.
-
@Dashrender said:
I can see what you are saying - but why would the person who wants to talk to you not just send a note anyway? this way you can respond when you return.
One has to wonder, but my guess is because they are looking for excuses to not work and it is a convenient one. Why have the status at all if they were going to be practical and use email? The status only exists because they are unwilling to use email.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
I can see what you are saying - but why would the person who wants to talk to you not just send a note anyway? this way you can respond when you return.
One has to wonder, but my guess is because they are looking for excuses to not work and it is a convenient one. Why have the status at all if they were going to be practical and use email? The status only exists because they are unwilling to use email.
Well, I hate email - I understand the nice things about it.. but the live'ish nature of chat can make conversations a bit more meaningful sometimes.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
I can see what you are saying - but why would the person who wants to talk to you not just send a note anyway? this way you can respond when you return.
One has to wonder, but my guess is because they are looking for excuses to not work and it is a convenient one. Why have the status at all if they were going to be practical and use email? The status only exists because they are unwilling to use email.
Well, I hate email - I understand the nice things about it.. but the live'ish nature of chat can make conversations a bit more meaningful sometimes.
That's fine, but it causes interruptions and problems like expectations of status. If people would use it like email it wouldn't have those problems, but it would act like email.
-
-
@anonymous said:
@DustinB3403 said:
employees who never login.
Fire the employee. Problem Solved.
That's really the only logical answer. Using technology to bypass or cover up insubordination never works out well.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
I can see what you are saying - but why would the person who wants to talk to you not just send a note anyway? this way you can respond when you return.
One has to wonder, but my guess is because they are looking for excuses to not work and it is a convenient one. Why have the status at all if they were going to be practical and use email? The status only exists because they are unwilling to use email.
Well, I hate email - I understand the nice things about it.. but the live'ish nature of chat can make conversations a bit more meaningful sometimes.
That's fine, but it causes interruptions and problems like expectations of status. If people would use it like email it wouldn't have those problems, but it would act like email.
So you don't have your email client with notifications enabled? Even OWA has notifications on by default. I hear pings and pops all day long as new messages pop into my email box. They are only slightly less interupting than the messenger app blinking in the tray and the audible tones.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
I can see what you are saying - but why would the person who wants to talk to you not just send a note anyway? this way you can respond when you return.
One has to wonder, but my guess is because they are looking for excuses to not work and it is a convenient one. Why have the status at all if they were going to be practical and use email? The status only exists because they are unwilling to use email.
Well, I hate email - I understand the nice things about it.. but the live'ish nature of chat can make conversations a bit more meaningful sometimes.
That's fine, but it causes interruptions and problems like expectations of status. If people would use it like email it wouldn't have those problems, but it would act like email.
So you don't have your email client with notifications enabled? Even OWA has notifications on by default. I hear pings and pops all day long as new messages pop into my email box. They are only slightly less interupting than the messenger app blinking in the tray and the audible tones.
I do, but people don't see it go yellow or whatever if you don't look at it right away. I see a note on the top of my screen and generally glance up and know if I need to look at it sometime in the near future. IM is more invasive because people expect a response faster than you can complete the sentence you are writing to someone else.
-
I realize that part of that is the expectation of the technology and not the technology itself and I have nothing against IM, I'm using it right now. It's just not a replacement for email, it is a supplement.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I realize that part of that is the expectation of the technology and not the technology itself and I have nothing against IM, I'm using it right now. It's just not a replacement for email, it is a supplement.
absolutely agree, it's an augment.
