The problem with Google+ requiring a real name

According to MSNBC.com, in a recent move, the rapidly emerging social network site, Google+, dumped individuals who violate their policy and don't use their "real," that is their legal names. Granted, technically Google gets to choose its policy and it is well within its rights to delete accounts (although Google will likely pay a price for people's frustration); however there are issues for users who use different online names to create a sense of online privacy, to promote themselves (particularly if they have a common name), or to separate their different spheres of life by having multiple accounts.

True, part of the payment for using the "free" site is the data-mining and targeted ad content that Google gains from knowing who we are. But a lot of that can be done without knowing someone's name. Besides names aren't unique identifiers like social security numbers or email addresses, so confidence that you have the right person is limited. Plus there are other complications. Here's an example. My name is relatively unique (read: hard for a lot of people to spell or pronounce). I have a professional name, a married name, and a legal name. Furthermore, because a lot of the late 1990s government databases that have my married name couldn't handle spaces, my last name ends up being a 16-letter mash-up of three words in many of them, sometimes cut off because a developer assumed no one's name would ever be longer than 8, 9, or 10 characters. (Mine is 18 with spaces). So which of my "legal" names would count as official under Google's policy? And can it handle spaces? (I haven't checked yet, although I have a Google+ account and appreciate using a lot of their tools).

I would argue that managing your online identity and reputation by strategically providing or altering one's name or associated information is not necessarily deception or fraud, even if it run's afoul of Google's policy. If you decide to keep your legal name on Google+, or any other social networking site, be aware of how it might be used by current or future employers, partners, friends, or roommates. And also consider the tradeoffs -- of having different profiles, different names, or managing multiple identities. There isn't a perfect solution.

Tradeoffs and Opportunity Costs of Online Career Development

When thinking about career development activities--online or offline--we often forget to consider the tradeoffs or opportunity costs of online reputation development. In a recent issue of the Austin American Statesman, tech writer Omar Gallager provides an overview of research on how online reputation is likely to affect our lives more and more. As part of the article, Gallager noted the results of some of my research that suggested that having no information online might be as problematic as the red flags (e.g., drunk and naked photos), that we're used to hearing about in media reports. Although this suggests that people interested in career development should engage in online activities that make their expertise visible and reputation positive, the answer is not so simple. By spending time online for career development, we are extending our work commitments even further outside the time and space boundaries that define work from the rest of life. Furthermore, if our primary (or only) concern when engaging in online activities is the impact on our work and career, we may (although not necessarily), lose out on some of the identity exploration, social support, and other activities that research suggests are typical and oftentimes valuable uses of social media.

I am in support of career development, but I encourage you to consider the costs and the tradeoffs of those activities. Employers are likely going to keep looking. What we need are more creative solutions. That's one goal of my research. Suggestions are welcome.