Instant Messaging: Its Impact on and Recommendations for Student Affairs

Kevin R. Guidry
ResNet Coordinator
Department of Housing and Residence Life
University of West Florida
KGuidry@uwf.edu

Posted: November, 2004     Student Affairs Online, vol. 5 no. 4 - Fall 2004

Abstract

Although several years old, Instant Messaging (IM) remains fairly new to many student affairs professionals. Its implications in the workplace, for the supervision of employees, and communication with students have begun to emerge from experience and research. Policy recommendations based on the security, social, and productivity issues raised by IM use are included to help student affairs professionals safely and securely embrace this technology.

Instant Messaging (IM) has become firmly entrenched in the social lives of teenagers and computer enthusiasts. They have brought IM into higher education and the American workplace. They use it to enhance both their social lives and their productivity at work. Student affairs professionals must understand the impact this technology is having on not only their students but also their employees.

A Brief Description of IM

Instant Messaging allows one to hold a text conversation with others in realtime. In the language of communications specialists, it is a form of synchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) (Tidwell & Walther, 2002). Although enterprise-level IM solutions exist, most companies, including universities, do not use them and continue to use freely available but relatively insecure IM software (Germain, 2004). The most popular of these programs are available for free from the manufacturer, typically America Online, Microsoft, or Yahoo!, and are not interoperable with one another.

A typical IM session begins when one logs into the program using a username unique to that service. Other users who have included this user in their "Buddy List" or other list of frequent contacts often receive a notification that this user is now online and available. Once logged in, the user can send and receive text messages with other users who are logged in using the same software. These conversations typically take place between two participants although some software supports "chat rooms" or other methods of easily communicating with multiple persons at the same time. After a predefined period of idleness, many IM software packages will automatically log off the user or respond to further messages with an "away" message (Grinter & Palen, 2002; Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2004; Whittaker & Bradner, 2000).

Typical Uses

At Home

Most research on non-work related use of IM has been directed towards teenagers and adolescents. This segment of the population has been observed to be an "early adaptor" of this and other technologies and seems to be a reliable measure of how others will embrace and use new technologies. In particular, teens have embraced IM in part because it exists "under the radar" of their parents (Grinter & Palen, 2002, p. 26). From the perspective of a parent or other household member, a teen's use of IM is unobtrusive, particularly when compared to the traditional alternative of the telephone. This unobtrusiveness allows teens to use IM at times when they would otherwise be unable to socialize. Further, the nature of IM ensures that users are only listed as logged in or available before communication is even attempted (Grinter & Palen, 2002).

Some research has been performed on college students' use of IM. Their use does not differ significantly from their younger counterparts. Where their usage patterns differ is in the times when they use IM and the reasons for which they use IM. A college student's schedule differs significantly from the regimented schedule of most teens which causes a much more erratic usage pattern. College students' autonomy also affects their use of IM in that their conversations are more likely to be shorter and used to set up other social events (Grinter & Palen, 2002).

For all groups which have been studied, social interaction is the main use of IM in non-work environments. The nature of these 2-person communications and the "buddy list" system used by most software ensures that the social network encompassed by one's use of IM remains small (Grinter & Palen, 2002; Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2004). In addition to socialization, teen and college student uses of IM also include event planning and schoolwork collaboration (Grinter & Palen, 2002). Even among teens and college students, few users report meaningful interactions with strangers, although some users customize their publicly-viewable profile to include their location and encourage this contact (Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2004). So although IM is of significant value in maintaining relationships its value in building new ones, an issue of significant concern to those interested in the social growth of college students, remains an open question.

At Work

Significantly more research has been conducted on the use of IM in the workplace. The threat of lost productivity, the promise of increased productivity, or the security concerns provided by IM have driven this research. Those factors have also brought IM under the spotlight as it is increasingly the target of regulations and policies (Germain, 2004). Despite misgivings and misperceptions, the characteristics of unobtrusiveness and known availability which ensured the success of IM in social settings have resulted in similar success in the workplace as well.

Analogous to the early days of the World Wide Web, a common misperception has emerged that IM is primarily used in the workplace for socializing. Research indicates that this is a gross misperception and that the vast majority of IM is work-related. Another common misperception is that employees use IM primarily to ask quick, short questions of one another. Although this is a common use of IM in the workplace, research indicates the majority of IM use in the workplace is used either for in-depth collaboration or for scheduling and event coordination (Isaccs, Walendowski, Whittaker, Schiano, & Kamm, 2002).

Implications

Although IM software is becoming more complex and offering more features, it primarily remains a text-based medium. The absence of non-verbal cues such as body language and facial expression make it easy for misunderstandings to occur in IM conversations. The perception of IM as "more casual" with "relaxed grammar and spelling...the norm" has led many to believe that relationships formed or sustained via IM are less substantial and genuine than other relationships (Nardi, Whittaker & Bradner, 2000, p. 81). Tidwell and Walther have discovered that although such relationships are formed differently the resulting relationships are very similar to those formed and maintained offline (2002).

The lack of non-verbal cues has led to the well-known phenomena of hyperpersonalization. Users of IM report that they are more open in this medium than they would be in another medium. In addition, comments made via IM are analyzed more deeply than similar comments made in person or over the telephone. The medium-term retention (the ability to scroll up in a current conversation) and long-term retention (automatic logging or manual saving of conversations) of instant messages makes such behavior very easy. This also enables users to (unconsciously) attempt to compensate for the lack of non-verbal cues by providing personal and more intimate details earlier in a relationship than if the conversation were held in a different medium (Tidwell & Walther, 2002).

The automatic advertising of availability also plays a key role in the adoption and continued use of IM. Coupled with the ability of instant messages to remain on-screen and able to responded to even after several minutes, this ensures that it is much more likely that someone who is sent an instant message will respond than someone called via the telephone (Isaacs, et al., 2002). In addition, those who use IM often believe they have a more intimate knowledge of their fellow IM users' schedules and habits due to this automatic monitoring and reporting (Whittaker & Bradner, 2000). As IM software continues to mature and allow users greater control of their online status (online, away, busy, etc.) this should have the net effect of increasing communication availability. This is viewed as undesirable by some and has led to IM gaining a reputation as an "Instant Annoyance" as users seek to hide their online presence from all or some other users.

Security and confidentiality are also at risk when using freely-available IM software. Even when used between offices on the same network, the most popular IM software routes IM traffic through servers and networks on the public Internet not under the control of the originating network. The usernames and passwords of IM users are also stored on proprietary servers owned by third-party corporations. It is even possible that the third-party corporation (or any other party between the IM sender and intended recipient) may log messages (Stone & Merrion, 2004). Although some laws and regulations such as the Freedom of Information Act and various Sunshine Laws may mandate that official communications be stored and archived, freely available IM software makes that difficult or impossible on a large scale (Germain, 2004). Finally, most IM software provides no encryption and allows anyone with the technical knowledge to eavesdrop on potentially sensitive conversations (Stone & Merrion, 2004).

Policy Recommendations

Corporations and businesses have been strongly advised to create and enforce policies regarding IM (Marshak, 2004; Stone & Merrion, 2004). Higher education faces the same problems and its own set of unique ones as educators and mentors of college students. It should be noted that the mandated use of an enterprise IM solution would eliminate the need for some of these recommendations, particularly those related to security.

• Use of IM for Employee Supervision & Conflict Resolution
  The lack of non-verbal cues makes IM unsuitable for use as a communications tool for anything but the simplest of supervisory messages. Supervisors should practice extreme caution when using IM to communicate with subordinates or supervisors. In particular, supervisors should never chastise subordinates or hold other emotional conversations through IM which require subtlety and rely on the ability of the communicants to read each others' non-verbal language. Similarly and for the same reasons, employees and students alike should be strongly discouraged from using IM as a primary tool for conflict resolution as the impersonal nature of it may encourage conflict avoidance rather than resolution.
• Use of IM to Communicate with Students
  Language used in IM communications should be very carefully chosen to be clear and concise. The potentially negative effects of hyperpersonalization should always be foremost in the mind of any university representative who communicates with students via IM.
• Confidentiality
  Confidential data, including information protected by FERPA, should not be sent via unencrypted IM communications. The possibility that the information could be intercepted or stored, intentionally or inadvertently, is too great.
• Appropriate Content
  Messages, user names, and away messages should be professional and suitable for anyone in the public to read without potential embarrassment for the institution.
• Institutional vs. Personal Usernames
  If free IM software is used in a work environment, serious consideration should be given to establishing separate usernames which are only used at work. This not only helps reduce the chance of unnecessary personal use and interruptions but also ensures that institutional usernames and accounts remain with the institution instead of leaving with individual employees. This also prevents persons from representing the institution after leaving it.
• Response Time
  A maximum length of time between responses, including an initial greeting, should be set to prevent one party waiting an indeterminate amount of time for a response from another party who has forgotten to log out or is otherwise online but unable to respond.
• Availability Expectations
  If IM is embraced as an official means of communication then the requirement to log in and be available when not otherwise engaged must be established and enforced.
• Personal Use
  Appropriate guidelines should be communicated regarding personal use of IM during business hours.
• Security and Client Standardization
  As with e-mail, employees should never open attachments from unknown persons received via IM. In addition, institutions without an enterprise IM solution should standardize on a particular IM client to help minimize unknown security risks.

Conclusion

Yesterday's teens are today's college students who will be tomorrow's work force. Instant Messaging has become firmly entrenched in the social and schoolwork practices of teens and has been brought to college and work. In addition, IM is beginning to prove its worth as a valuable coordinating and collaborating tool with potential uses to communicate directly with students. Student affairs professionals must understand the impact of this technology on their students as well their employees.

References

Germain, J.M. (2004, September 21). E-Mail and Instant Messaging face compliance challenges. TechNews World. Retrieved October 18, 2004, from http://www.technewsworld.com/story/E-Mail-and-Instant-Messaging-Face-Compliance-Challenges-36797.html.

Grinter, R., & Palen, L. (2002). Instant Messaging in teen life. Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Retrieved October 15, 2004, from http://portal.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=587082&type=pdf&coll=Portal&dl=ACM&CFID=29733676&CFTOKEN=51420973.

Isaacs, E., Walendowski, A., Whittaker, S., Schiano, D., & Kamm, C. (2002). The character, functions, and styles of Instant Messaging in the workplace. Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Retrieved October 15, 2004, from http://portal.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=587081&type=pdf&coll=Portal&dl=ACM&CFID=29733676&CFTOKEN=51420973.

Marshak, D. (2004, January 22). Instant Messaging at work. Retrieved October 14, 2004, from http://interruptions.net/literature/Marshak-PSGP1-22-04CC.pdf.

Nardi, A., Whittaker, S., & Bradner, E. (2000). Interaction and outeraction: Instant Messaging in action. Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Retrieved October 15, 2004, from http://portal.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=358975&type=pdf&coll=Portal&dl=ACM&CFID=29733676&CFTOKEN=51420973.

Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2004, September 1). How Americans use Instant Messaging. Retrieved October 15, 2004, from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Instantmessage_Report.pdf.

Stone, J., & Merrion, S. (2004). Instant Messaging or instant headache?. Queue, 2(2). Retrieved October 15, 2004, from http://portal.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=988410&type=pdf&coll=Portal&dl=ACM&CFID=29733676&CFTOKEN=51420973.

Tidwell, L., & Walther, J. (2002). Computer-Mediated Communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations. Human Communications Research, 28(3), 317 - 348. Retrieved October 15, 2004, from http://hcr.oupjournals.org/cgi/reprint/28/3/317?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=1&title=computer-mediated+communication+effects+on+disclosure&andorexacttitle=and&andorexacttitleabs=and&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1098240150763_143&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&journalcode=humcom.