Company Forces Employee to Delete LinkedIn Profile

I received a disturbing email from a friend of mine. I have changed the message and obscured any personal or employer reference for obvious reasons.

Due to the recent FINRA (the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc) ruling (see below) I will have to take down my LinkedIn profile. The finance industry is so far behind the curve on social media communications it may be a while before my profile is back. In the meantime, feel free to contact me via e-mail or on Facebook (while I can still use it!).

The FINRA has released it’s first member firm communication relative to regulatory treatment of social media communications. Regulatory Notice 10-06, emphasized that all broker-dealer business communications taking place through social networking Web sites such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and LinkedIn are indeed official communications with the public and are subject to all corresponding FINRA supervisory requirements. This Regulatory Notice confirmed that a profile page on LinkedIn is considered an individual registered representative web site

The FINRA does not make the rules. They provide guidance and the individual firms have to create rules based on those recommendations. There’s a lot of room for interpretation. It turns out that while some firms allow for individual representative websites some do not. My friend’s firm obviously does not. I asked another friend in the financial industry on their thoughts (also changed and held anonymously).

My opinion is simple, if you don’t have confidence in the people you hire to deliver the message and give people appropriate information whether on or off the clock then you have hired the wrong people. Our job is rather simple, but most advisers are too lazy to stay well read because all they see is money(commissions) thus it’s easier for companies to just control what their employee’s say.

I have read through the 10-06 document and can’t find any specific recommendations for Facebook vs. LinkedIn. I can only assume that my friends firm determined that LinkedIn is a more professional network and Facebook is more personal. It will be interesting to see how they react as our personal/professional lives continue to converge.

Ars Technica has a good post explaining more details on FINRA 10-06: Brokers must think twice before tweeting, Facebooking

The new guidelines have two broad effects on the way financial firms use social media. First, the new rules attempt to take the traditional distinction between marketing a brand and hawking specific investment products, and to enforce it in online venues that sport a constantly evolving slate of features and functionality, and where the lines between the personal and the professional—or, the personal and the promotional—aren’t always clear.

Has anyone else been effected by this new ruling? Let me know: tac [at] newcommbiz [dot] com.

I think it’s going to be really important to watch, especially as other regulated industries have yet to make up their minds. I’m afraid we’re beginning to see a general backlash against social media by companies unsure what to do with it.

Join the New Comm Biz Facebook Page or follow the Twitter account.

Popularity: 37% [?]

Share and Enjoy:
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • StumbleUpon
  • Tumblr
  • Diigo
  • Posterous
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Tagged with:
 
  • Brian Byrne
    linkedFA believes a purpose driven social network built specifically to address the unique needs of financial and insurance professionals as they work to strengthen existing client relationships and build new ones is the solution to this issue. linkedFA has created an innovative online social networking website (www.linkedFA.com) specifically intended to bridge a void within the financial and insurance industries. We believe that the ability for FAs to connect and share information throughout their client network is not being maximized. linkedFA has full document retention features that assist in meeting FINRA's compliance requirements.

    linkedFA supports financial and insurance industry professionals in the most comprehensive manner available today, blending best-of-breed social networking with role-specific features: First, linkedFA gives its financial and insurance industry professionals approval authority over any comments made on any of their shared content prior to the system posting it, which gives these members full control over what their entire networks of colleagues and investors can see about them. Secondly, linkedFA provides recording and storage of all communications and content, supporting financial professional’s unique requirements in meeting regulatory bodies’ legal mandates. The linkedFA professional can run a communications export under the Compliance feature at any time. There are many other unique features designed specifically with the FA in mind. Please check us out at www.linkedfa.com
  • This is absolutely crazy, but completely believable unfortunately. FINRA recently also decreed that a group of FINRA licensed professionals who had created a fan group on Facebook would have to remove that to!

    These guys are so 20th century!

    -- follow me on twitter -- @brettking
  • Well there is "some" evidence that the senior managers in the financial industry are not be the brightest kids on the block (although they think they are) . The statements are further evidence of group think and lack of personal accountability in the financial industry that has gotten us into this mess. FWIW I was a Senior banker with several large financial companies.
  • itgevangelist
    I am a long-time user of LinkedIN and I have been using Twitter for about 1 year. Please consider me a fan of both.

    I am certain the majority of responses will be against the firms decision to forbid the use LinkedIN. I winced when I first saw the Tweet.

    After reading your post, I can sum up the firm's response: Risk Management.

    Yes, the firm (as other firms must do) could have taken other steps to mitigate the risk. But risk mitigation costs money and unless the risk is transferred, all the mitigation in the world does not necessarily eliminate the risk.

    This firms approach eliminates the risk. Now it is a matter of the impact and cost of the resulting or residual problems fostered by their decision. I hope they are monitoring and measuring the fallout.

    Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist
    http://community.ca.com/blogs/theitgovernanceev...
  • It's easy to blame FINRA, but their rules were in place before these sites became popular. The Regulatory Notice merely pointed out the FINRA rules apply to these sites.

    FINRA is correct to not apply specific rules to specific sites because the functionality changes so quickly. Even users have trouble keeping up. (Hello new Facebook interface.) In the end these are communication tools and they are going to be regulated like any other communication tool.

    The sites need to face the reality of regulatory compliance and offer tools for helping that happen.

    The rules are there to protect investors from bad advice and bad people. The tools need to allow that to happen.

    As others have said, banning LinkedIn is going too far. But the questions section of LinkedIn is place where an investment professional can get in lots of trouble. LinkedIn recommendations are also another function that is troublesome.
  • This is why organizations need Social Media Policies approved by legal (but NOT WRITTEN BY LEGAL) and then locked down.
  • danchristopherson
    Good to know about this issue. We had it on our t0-do list to review or add LinkedIn profiles for our wealth managment consultant client. I guess if you are a regulatory agency and don't fully comprehend something, or cannot figuere out how to control it, it is just easier to impede or outlaw it altogether

    Dan Christopherson, APR
    Christopherson & Co. Communications.
  • chadbockius
    This is unfortunate. Just as we were making forward progress some firms take two steps back. As many have already stated it sounds like this firm misinterpreted the guidelines. There are aspects of a LinkedIn profile that need to be pre-approved by the firm. Specifically it is the static content (the content that is not intended to be interacted with). Examples would be your work history, hobbies, summary blurb, etc. However, status updates on LinkedIn are considered interactive content and do not require pre-approval. These are a great way to stay top of mind with your the people in your network.

    And let's not forget how valuable LinkedIn is purely from a networking tool. You can track the moves people are making in the industry, identify prospects, find new recruits, collaborate with others and more.

    My recommendation to this firm is:
    1. Commit to using these social sites - you are literally throwing away money by not participating.
    2. Dive into the details of FINRA's guidelines and make sure you understand how they apply in the world of social. This guide is a good place to start http://bit.ly/8xT73y.
    3. Develop your specific policy
    4. Implement a system to manage social networking compliance. Here is one example: http://bit.ly/bMoUQo
  • Rather than implement appropriate policies and procedures to supervise social media use by representatives, this firm decided (poorly) that the easiest thing to do is prohibit social media use altogether.

    It's a shame that the firm does not encourage representatives to communicate with clients or maintain a professional profile to support their business. Instead, the firm would rather save a few dollars by not having to set up systems to supervise such activity.

    If I were the rep, I'd look for another firm that wanted to help me grow my business, not lay down barriers to growth.

    Bill @ FPPad.com
  • stephsammons
    I agree very much with Mr Astarita. Technology that makes it easier to communicate is not going away. Just as email completely changed the way financial advisors communicate, social media will do the same. There will always those who push the envelope, but firms must lay out their guidelines and trust that their financial advisors will abide by the rules. Those who abuse the policies should be reprimanded, but a policy of 'no participation' harms everyone. Financial firms can't indefinitely deny financial advisors what the rest of the world has and expect to be competitive in today's marketplace. Those who close the door on social media will be left behind!
    http://www.wiredadvisor.com
  • Completely agree. Just like it seems idiotic to not give an employee email, in a few years we'll look back at these kind of moves as the idiocy that they are. The companies that get it and empower their employees to use these tools responsibly will be the companies that win.
  • There is no good reason for a firm to force its employees to take down their LinkedIn pages, and the FINRA release explicitly PERMITS the use of LinkedIn. As you said, if the firm can't trust their employees to maintain a LinkedIn profile, they have the wrong employees, or the employees are working for the wrong firm. Are these firms going to ban email next? My analysis of LinkedIn and Advisers is online at http://seclaw.blogspot.com/2010/02/brokers-advi...
  • Yeah it must be a pretty horrible interpretation of the ruling. I can't imagine that it will hold up.
blog comments powered by Disqus


Bad Behavior has blocked 6065 access attempts in the last 7 days.