Shared assets: Who owns your LinkedIn network?
One of the greatest assets an employee creates working for a company is their social network: the names, contact information, and goodwill of relationships that they build — often, on behalf of their employer.
When employment ends, who owns the business relationships?
For many businesses, the idea that employees can extract their network of business contacts and leverage it to work for a competitor is frightening. During a recent case in the UK, an employee was forced to surrender a portion of his LinkedIn network (the portion built during employment) to his former employer. The employer in the case (like many employers) actively encouraged the defendent to use LinkedIn as a business networking resource during employment. When employment ended, the employer wanted its social network back.
With the help of British courts, they got it. This supports the argument that a database of contacts that an employee builds up as part of their job role will belong to their employer at the time.
However, there are equally-compelling arguments that support individual ownership. An individual’s LinkedIn network contains a mixture of personal and professional relationships built throughout their career during at-work and off-work hours. And, companies often recruit successful account managers, business development leaders and salespeople based (atleast in part) on the quality of their network.
In reality, NO ONE “owns” a contact — or perhaps EVERYONE does.
Companies should employ CRM systems (controlled by the company) and require its employees to use, maintain and build its contact database as part of their job. Employers also need to recognize that personal relationships extend beyond employment. Employees should use CRM systems actively. Doing so increases their value to the company. It also prevent an employer from reaching into their personal social networking account.
Employers also need to recognize the value that an employee’s LinkedIn account adds to their company. Unlike traditional CRM tools, LinkedIn doesn’t just store information about business contacts. It also stores information about each business contact’s business network. This is a powerful tool that employees can use to make them more effective at work.
The trick is in the transitions. Is it possible for LinkedIn support a tagging mechanism that enables employers/employees to appropriately share relationships? Probably. If it doesn’t happen on LinkedIn, it’ll happen in the courtroom.
Let’s wait and see.
How Linkedin Works
A video overview explaining what LinkedIn is and how it works. The HOW IT WORKS part is VERY IMPORTANT. Many people who think they know how to use LinkedIn, really don’t. To unleash the full power of LinkedIn, you’ve got to leverage more than your contacts — you need to leverage your contacts’ contacts to get things done. This is why employers should be ENCOURAGING employees to leverage LinkedIn on their behalf.
This type of issue never occured to me with regard to LinkedIn. I always viewed LinkedIn as my contacts, not the company’s. Prior to reading this, I viewed LinkedIn as a way to expand and use networking more effectively, but I view it the same as if I had a Roll-a-dex of phone numbers for my network. The company wouldn’t own my personal Roll-a-dex, why would they own my LinkedIn contacts? This is definitely food for thought.
It will be interesting to see if/when this hits the U.S. court system how this is handled. I tend to believe the user owns the network, not the employer. But companies that get out in front of this situation set themselves up for better experiences when replacing well-networked employees.
I cannot find any reference of this court case. Do you have any links to stories about it?
Thanks,
Daryl Mather
@daryl I first learned about the UK case at Bombay Crow — although I’ve seen several other references…including mashable.
Here’s the original URL:
http://www.bombaycrow.com/web/who_owns_your_online_networking_contacts/
Great article. This very same topic was discussed a few years ago when LinkedIn was identified as the social media tool both I and the Company wanted to use. No case law existed on who owned the network and it was assumed the network went with the person. Today, most people I talk with feel the network goes with the person.
It will be interesting what the US Courts will decide when faced with this type of case.
Take care
Scott