I think it depends on the company, but I disagree with your point in general. There are plenty of companies that would benefit from an easy model for sharing content internally, whether it be links to articles relevant to the company, wide discussions about internal (confidential) topics, or pictures from a recent company BBQ. With the features Google launched today, companies can safely use a social network and assume that internal information will stay that way.

Thanks for the reply.

That is done today already. Ignoring SharePoint: Many companies I know of deploy wikis internally (for content) or just have shared network drives (for pictures, movies).

Why should that leave the corporate net? And what feature is G+ offering? That thing is about social interactions ('share content', 'chat', 'follow news').

So I have some issues here:

1) Mixing a type of site that is mostly for procrastination (FB, G+, this site) into the company culture doesn't seem a smart move

2) All the useful features of G+ are probably already deployed internally (which company doesn't have a way to share documents/news?).

3) What kind of (business) and size of (numbers of employees) would ever go for this thing? For lots of businesses storing stuff in the cloud is a no-go. For small-to-mid sized companies this seems .. laughable. Posting on G+ to your circle of co-workers sitting behind you/on the same floor, connected to the same network?

I'm sure I'm extra harsh because I don't even see the benefits of (some/most of) these products in general, but at work? There's just no way that I can see any added value.

Fair enough; again, it's probably not useful at every company, but in the companies that I've worked for in the past (big and small) that have used internal social networks (like Yammer for example), it's definitely been beneficial to me.

I think that wikis and shared network drives don't work as well for sharing content in the same way that they don't work for me sharing with friends. People like the format of a social network, curating content and sharing it with the right people in a way that it will pop up where they are looking and provide an easy way to have a discussion about it. And this sort of content shouldn't really "leave the net" (unless you're talking about the physical intranet); the idea behind this feature is that it stays within the company's control, in a place viewable only by employees.

To respond to your other points:

1) An interesting point, and this is where I think it depends on the company. I don't really view Google+ as a time-wasting site (though I do moreso with Facebook), because Google+ has a big focus on sharing interesting and relevant content to the user. In a company that embraces this sort of internal sharing of content, I think it could be very useful.

2) Perhaps lots of places already have deployed solutions for internal sharing; Google is just providing another way (a way that is being actively developed and potentially already is being paid for by the company because of other Google Apps).

3) I used Yammer at a small startup once, and it proved to be a nice way to aggregate work-related content. But at really large companies that are willing to have their data stored with Google, I think this is even more useful because it provides a good way to communicate with people you don't know at the company, and a way to follow what is being said by the internal superstar developers.

I liked the second paragraph. It's possible that I have an inherent dislike (no pun here) for the 'social' format. It is to be, almost by definition, unprofessional and low quality.

Maybe that's what colors my view on G+ in general and a corporate version in particular. Have to think about it - hard to look past an assumption like this on a whim. :)

Having seen how vibrant the discussion is using these features at Google, I have to disagree. In my experience, G+ is really well-suited for this, and it's way easier than editing a wiki, for example.

Well, you're talking from experience here.

My problem with that datapoint? You work at Google. G+ is your (company's) product. I assume that you had a headstart using G+ (the basic thing) as well and I also assume that this thing is already heavily used.

I just don't think that this translates to other places. (Forgive my ignorance and correct any mistake in the generalization hereafter): A huge company with a number of global offices all over the world, full of internet savvy, always online, 'young' early adopters doesn't seem to be a good example for things that make sense in general.

Or in other words: I have trouble mapping your experience to any place I worked at so far, plus any customer I've been in contact with here in Europe (with a heavy focus on Germany).

Here's a post from another company that's been using it: http://tomcritchlow.com/private-google-plus-engagement . I understand that some people might be skeptical of G+ in the workplace. Some people were skeptical of Google Apps in the workplace, and that's fine. But G+ can be a really powerful tool for companies that want to use it.

One more anecdote: I have a friend whose company just moved from Lotus Notes to Google Apps, and they love Apps. I can easily see people in that company hopping on video calls or posting internally.

His experience is his data point. Albeit, he works for Google.

What's your data point? Have you used a similar product before?

A company I used to work for with 400+ employees had heavy engagement with Yammer.

I can empathize with this point of view. I was very skeptical when our company added Socialcast--which scratches a similar itch--but in a large enterprise with people spread out in multiple locations around the world, I've been able to share information and learn from other people I'd never normally interact with because they're in a different continent or line of business. And, for whatever reason, I've found people more likely to share, comment, or help when the interface looks like a social media site.

I don't know if smaller, less geographically diverse organization would find this type of tool as helpful.

No, this is a competitor to SalesForce's Chatter and the like, not Sharepoint (which is more of an enterprise content management tool).

The implications for sharing in a social sense aren't as significant as that for work - especially if you happen to work in a more tightly secured workplace - how many families or friend groups will kick you out for inadvertently sharing sensitive data? - that's a real potential career limiting move in the enterprise space.

"Going for a bike ride this weekend, does anyone want to join me?"

"Is anyone else having trouble with the printer on the third floor?"

"I think we should buy copies of Beyond Compare. I used it at my last company, and it was awesome."

"Hey Chuck, when you get a chance, cal you tell my team about that library you wrote? We have a few questions for you. I'll let them hop on the conversation and ask."

"I'm sharing a link to an article I found about that project we did last year."

And you can SEARCH these conversations (and the results can show up in your google.com search results, if you use that feature). Even the conversations that happened before your start date.

All of these things could be better done with personal email and mailing lists. I'm much more excited about corporate video conferences.

I think personal email is far worse, particularly because it is not visible to people who start at the company after the conversation starts.

Mailing lists are pretty good, but generally companies don't have good tools to quickly make impromptu mailing lists.

And I think you're not giving enough attention to the fact that things shared on Google+ can show up in your search results.

If you work at a Zoo, and you search for "python," it'd be great to see relevant links about the animal. If you're a programmer, it'd be great to see relevant links about the programming language.

I mean, meeting someone for lunch doesn't need to be searchable. Mailing lists are searchable at later times. Google search integrates gmail results now.

The mailing list software is a good point-does google sell Google Groups software?