Workplace was a business communication tool from Meta with features like Live Video and Groups, that connected employees. Its discontinuation began in August of 2025, and by June 2026 a full shutdown is anticipated.
Workplace from Meta just had better features and better support. Their features were released much earlier than Yammer - making innovation top of mind for the company.
Workplace [from Meta] far outstrips the others as it allows you to create an information hub, as well as just enabling conversations. The Newsfeed, Groups and the Knowledge Library all make it really simple for the end-user to find information, and the familiarity of having …
We can compare Workplace in general from email communication (we use Bananatag tool for this). Our email communication and Workplace communication are sometimes competitors. RIght now, we have much higher analytics of email read rate/open rate than on Workplace activity. It may …
Having used both Salesforce Community Cloud and Workplace from Facebook for several years, I can honestly say that there is no comparison between the two. The folks at Facebook know their stuff and how to produce a product that welcomes engagement and this has carried over into …
The other helps out only for files and project management. With Workplace place you can go farther in project management and communication between the different teams. It's really a game-changer for every company that as adopts this tool. If you take it, you will see a really …
I think that Workplace facebook is more intuitive for users than Slack or Yammer, it allows you to create groups and send information to everyone in a cleaner and more accessible way, as well as having more functionalities. In the case of Telegram, the functionality is more …
Workplace is so much better than Slack. It is a far less overwhelming way to message employees and provide input and status updates on projects. I feel like Slack is just a never-ending message board and it's all over the place, but with Workplace's familiar interface to …
Sr. Learning & Development Consultant, E-Learning Specialist
Chose Workplace from Meta (discontinued)
I was not involved in the selection process, so I'm afraid I can't be of much help with this. I do know that my company is a stickler for security, though, as well as for making sure that the vendor is financially stable, so I would assume that Workplace by Facebook passed both …
Any other tool used before is not UI familiar as Workplace by Facebook. So now most of companies are migrating to Workplace because it's very easy to use, UI is perfect similar to Facebook which is widely used by everyone now. Also to keep fun in organizations after the …
Slack has very limited features when compared with Workplace by Facebook. It looks like we have to make a group or something like that and start chatting like telegram or WhatsApp. It has some additional features and a professional look when compared with the social media apps, …
I have tried a host of products and found Workplace to be superior to many others based on pricepoint, user interface, features I need and use, and adding some great features I now use. The integration of Live into the Workplace platform is great for team meets, big …
I always liked basecamp but it isn't perfect for every company. It doesn't have as a diverse field of things it can provide like Workplace by Facebook does. Workplace by Facebook is definitely better in almost every sense other than sharing documents. I think Basecamp is better …
The other video conference tools out there are more polished and robust. We still use Zoom for larger, important calls; calls with clients outside our organization (who don't have access to Workplace by Facebook Chat); and when we need to share screens to a group call …
We used SLACK and Trello, but Workplace is so great that we replaced both. Trello solves other problems with internal communication, our clients improved so much that we only use Trello for special projects. That is very important to us, so it is a great ROI.
Workplace by Facebook offers more features with less of a learning curve than other options, which has helped adoption and usefulness. It is built for communication, which it excels at. However, it is not built to address all business needs and other project management, …
In some ways, Workplace offers some interesting features not always found in similar products. For some, this can be in the form its easy to use screens and interaction features. On the other hand, some of its features are less streamlined, making it hard for users to …
Workplace by Facebook has an easy-to-use, interactive and friendly interface compared to the competitors, leveraging the original Facebook design and features to improve user experience and collaboration.
It is free for non-profits, and easy to use. However, it is not very popular. Once the user gets to know this software, it is easy to use. It's also a good connectivity tool -- instant messaging, group chat, files sharing, etc., can be easily done, and can be referred to at a …
Facebook is the one Common word across Globe. Almost Everyone knows how to use it. And if this is capable of handling workplace requirements, then it is perfect competitor for anything in market.
Hangouts is positioning itself as a simpler service. It does not need to have a complete feed or directory of all of the users. Slack works more like Workplace, but feels more limited. Workplace feels more like a community board and can bridge distances between remote teams and …
I think Workplace by Facebook is a great communication vehicle for any mid-sized to large company. (Since it's more groups-oriented than "regular" Facebook, it might not work well for smaller companies.) I also don't have any idea what the cost is for having it, but that also be a reason that it wouldn't be worth the expense for smaller companies. For larger companies, I think it's a terrific way for folks to communicate with one another and for "the powers that be" to communicate with employees. Facebook Live is only suitable when you have a limited number of people who need to be on screen and it wouldn't really be suitable as a vehicle for instructor-led online training -- it's really most suitable for presentations (although, via the comments area, does allow for questions to be asked in writing)
It is so easy to introduce to employees because it has the same look and feel as Facebook, which the majority of our employees are already familiar with.
It's a communications, collaboration, and file/document sharing tool all rolled up into one. It eliminates the need for other software.
Our HR team uses it constantly to keep employees up to date on company news and for polling to get feedback on new initiatives.
Limited project management options - no good way to track tasks or projects, so other tools are needed.
Easy to dismiss for people who don't see the value - the Facebook-like nature of the tool can be a liability when it comes to wanting management to take it seriously.
Chat interface has downsides - the standalone chat applications can be a bit buggy, and the chat interface within the web view is not ideal.
No intuitive way to message a group - chat options like Slack are better at easily messaging a group or department, where in Workplace you have to be a member of a group to start a conversation.
Having to download multiple apps just to use the tool is very cumbersome. Facebook would have make this better by wrapping it in as a main feature within their app, but having to use multiple apps to see discussions and walls is so frustrating.
Workplace by Facebook is an excellent fit in respect of support and documentation. It has excellent tutorials and documentation, as well. The UI and UX are already great as it is developed and maintained by Facebook, so most of the times, there is no need for any support or documentation.
We can compare Workplace in general from email communication (we use Bananatag tool for this). Our email communication and Workplace communication are sometimes competitors. RIght now, we have much higher analytics of email read rate/open rate than on Workplace activity. It may be connected with the fact that there is a lot of communication going on on Workplace. And with the emails we have a dedicated unit to monitor and balance the daily/weekly official email load on the associate. Workplace is a live network. Of course, we as admins balance the posts in official groups. But there are lots of other groups where people post whatever they want (like local communities or communities by interest). Why we keep focus on increasing Workplace engagement instead of email communication is definitely because of this instant feedback that we can get with posting. Email communication cannot create this feeling - it's always a one-way communication in our case.
Workplace offers a free version and a more enhanced, and really enhanced, paid version. The free version is a nice place to test the waters out and see if you can get it working at your company. We have only had a positive return on investment, measured in time.
The on-boarding is where you will see the greatest positive gain. You will quickly be up and running and so will the staff. This will decrease the training and implementation period and for many that means a substantial cost savings.
The only negative return that might be realized is if too much time is spent monitoring and policing the content. If trust is there, then employees can share and enhance the use of this tool to be a positive force. As with any communication tool, set guidelines and let the community police itself to some extent.