Discussion on:

BYOD: Four reasons why your staff will take the plunge - with or without you

Especially considering that many corporations are letting people bring BYOD devices in and seeing lower IT costs as a result.

just a few hours old. Give it some time.

As for me, it will be a cold day before I spend over a grand for work. They can supply the tools I need or the job won't get done.

I haven't seen any of the first point. Less than a dozen of my 200+ users have asked for W7, and we're rolling it out as quickly other duties will let me configure the machines.

I wish the article would have included specific details in point 2 regarding which outdated management tools and practices are hampering user productivity.

My employer supplies the tools I need for work. Unless my employer is giving me a stipend to purchase tools to bring in I am not about to spend my own earnings to purchase the tools my employer should be providing. The only exception so far to this rule has been for short term contracts where the need to provide my own equipment was stipulated up front.

So far in my career every employer has had a strict "No outside devices" rule and for good reason. Having worked for banks, schools and military contractors I have always been in secure environments where laws and regulations define what tools can be used and what policies must be followed.

I think one of the big problems with BYOD is that while you might be happy to use your own hardware when it benefits you, you wouldn't want to do it everyday.

Because if you are doing it every day you are effectively subsiding your company. If companies want to encourage BYOD they need to put some cash in, too.

BYOD is a fool's errand. Why on earth would anyone with at least half a brain use their own property for work and not be compensated for it? If you're going to BYOD, might as well bring in your own desk and chair. Bring in a printer too. Heck, why not provide all your own office supplies? Since you're in such a giving mood, the breakroom could use some new furniture.

Your employer is supposed to provide you with the tools to get your job done or compensation to offset your costs. Only idiots allow any other situation to exist. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but before you mod me down, read the first paragraph again.

If you're using a device that you're comfortable with and prove more productive because of it, that tends to get you higher reviews and as a result, higher pay. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

Then it really isn't BYOD. The IT problem with BYOD is a lack of control/security. Now, some IT departments may be run by control freaks, but my state agency is required by state law to provide a specific level of security. We cannot do that if we let everyone bring in whatever they want.

And, if we buy it, then we support it. Our agency has occassionally done little more than suggest devices for purchase by one of our divisions, but we do it while carefully defining what support we will offer for the device.

Also, our agency is full of users who THINK they know a lot about computers...a few of them are right, but they still fall into the category of "knows enough to cause big problems." Giving them free reign would be a disaster, because each time something didn't work, they would be asking us to fix it.

Fortunately, my agency does not have a lot of mobile users, and the only ones who are BYOD are at the very top, and we pretty much have to do whatever they ask.

I am aware of at least one bank that, up to a point is allowing BYOD for tablets (as long as they can be secured) and phones (depending on position and duties). Even this bank is opening up, however, to even IT staff using iPhones instead of bank-issued Blackberry phones due to issues using those BB phones. Said bank is also looking into 'outside' desktop PCs as well, especially where personnel telecommute in via VPN.

As I understand it, that is because those mobile devices allow IT to partition their storage and wipe corporate data when a user leaves (or if they misbehave). The same approach is not so easy with developers who bring laptops in, install code-signing certs over the LAN, then move on to other companies with critical intellectual property and certificates on their personal devices. We're still trying to work out how to let people put IP on their machines and give it back when their done without giving back the device!

And, to date, I haven't heard anyone address it adequately.

Here's a bit more detail from the report:

"For example, the native operating system and application patching utilities have improved, along with the built-in security and manageability
features, reducing the need for aggressive, repetitive scans that kill performance and interrupt productivity. Application compatibility problems have also been reduced, making it less likely that the user will do something inadvertently that requires technical support."

Malware scanners especially tend to hog resources while they run and depending on the number of files stored in the desktop can take hours of seriously reduced performance even to delaying screen updates while typing a simple document and losing lines of typing for no real reason. I suffered this a lot when working with Windows and I will acknowledge that lowering the scan's priority does ameliorate the issue somewhat, but unless that scanner is configured to run during off-duty hours, it still impacts the users' own performance waiting for their own work to gain clock cycles.

I remember my first encounter with mcaffee shield. I was shocked to discover that it was scanning the entire hard drive for no reason during the day, then starting over and doing it again. Why? It wasn't the times, it was just bad design.

We'd need the scans less if users would stick to doing work and not surfing the internet endlessly. We've worked hard to reduce the number of virus calls, but in almost every case the infection is traced back to the user being on some site that is not work related. They aren't necessarily bad sites, just not work related.

Of course, I think that the problem where I work is that there are a lot of devout Christians, and religious sites are now a bigger source of malware than porn sites. But, the latter gets you fired while the former does not.

1. Workers have been on Windows XP for too long

Windows XP is 11 years old, yet it???s still in on more than half of corporate desktops and laptops. ???For employees accustomed to using Windows 7 or even the Mac OS at home, being forced to use Windows XP for work is frustrating,??? the report said. ---- Yes and no. Yes, Windows 7 is better, but it's hardly a 180-degree shift in how things work. I've worked around many who have Vista or 7 at home, and they have NO PROBLEMS using XP still. Some even PREFER it to Vista or 7.

2. Management tools and practices are outdated

Forrester said most of the tools and practices used for endpoint management and security were developed in the early 2000s, for Windows 2000 and XP. Since then, many of the underlying reasons for these practices have changed, rendering them obsolete. ???Both Mac OS Lion and Windows 7 are very different from earlier-generation operating systems on many levels, yet IT organisations still apply the same outdated management tools and techniques,??? it said. ---- This one has merit, and is fairly true. Especially as a lot of companies never spent the money to have their IT/Systems Admins do it PROPERLY. If it's not done properly, it is a bigger hassle than anyone would like to deal with. HOWEVER, if done correctly, even the older 'models' of the management tools work just fine now.

3. Locked-down PCs create productivity bottlenecks

Many employees now use two computers to get around the corporate IT lockdown - All the rest doesn't matter. Bottom line. Effectively if not flat-out illegal, or at least against corporate policy. This could get most fired if someone chose to crack-down in the least. Especially if it is confidential info on a non-work device.

4. Gorilla-sized agents hog PC resources

Forrester said nearly half the processes running on a corporate PC may have nothing to do with the user???s day job, causing great frustration. ???The top offenders include antivirus and security agents, data backup processes, systems management, and a range of other processes such as application updaters. These agents run in their own space and routinely interrupt the end user???s work by monopolising disk I/O, CPU, or other resources, often for several minutes at a time,??? the report said. ----- Umm, Antivirus and security agents having nothing to do with an end-user's job? I call BS... While the end-user may not USE them, themselves... I'm sure you've seen if not heard the horror stories of some tech-ignorant user downloading something with a virus and infecting half it not most of the office. Deal.

End breakdown:

Those in the USA at least (as I am here and can speak to what I've seen), have a major issue and feeling of entitlement. Because something is out there, and we're here in the USA (or at so/so company, etc), they are entitled to things that they have not earned. Whether it be money from the government, 'toys' or services that are not 'rights' (sorry, if you're ON welfare, owning an Xbox is a perk, not a 'right'), or exemptions from corporate policies.
Thanks to Facebook, Twitter, and just a sharply increased lack of Common Sense, too many people are of a 'I should get it because I want it' attitude that has no place in the workplace.

As others have said, and for myself; If they want me to do their work, I expect to use their devices. If they want me to use my own, they'd better pay me for it. Phone plans, Data plans, repair/replacements, etc. Also, all of the 'Big Brother' issues are bad enough out there, I don't need, and certainly don't want my company's variant on my personal devices as well.

Of course the ads on TV can lead you to think it is BYOD. Take the Sprint commercial about the guy who did not call in for the meeting and the boss saying that maybe if you got a better data plan you would not have had to worry and maybe if you did not use so much of your current data plan on vacation you would not have had to worry. Look, If I am paying for the data plan it is for my personal phone. If you are requiring me to use a cell phone for work than you provide it and the plan. Now if I use my business phone for pleasure than it puts me on the hook for misuse of company equipment.

Your response was close to what I screamed at the set: "If you want him in the meeting, pay for his damn phone service!" This is BYOD can lead to: not just the company's expectation that you pay to work, but that advertisers will present your doing so as an advantage.

... they fully expect you to use what they pay for in a corporate manner. As a telecommuter into a major bank, my cable internet access is essentially paid for by that bank and as such our bandwidth limits must be balanced so that the bank gets what it pays for. Even with that, my wife and I are considering an upgrade to a small business account with our cable provider in order to improve our bandwidth and reduce the 'rush hour' slowdown caused by the surge of users in after-hours residential bandwidth.

They're paying the bill, they can set the conditions Why would anyone have any other expectations?

That even if you pay for your BYOD it will probably fall under corporate governance. How about we wipe that iPhone for you?

I'm sorry I just don't see any definite upside to BYOD for the person paying the bills. Even your assertion of "more productive = better performance review = more money" is questionable if the organization in question is so tight they want you to pay for work equipment.

I took a contract role where the location was essentially expected to be at the office, but due to the mobile workplace resources and work modes, working off site was an option and I chose to take it. This was a benefit to me.

While employees got internet service from the company, at least in some cases, as a contractor if I chose to work off site I had to pay for my own internet, AND ensure it worked, was fast enough, was available, etc.

Naturally my internet service was a tool that I provided as a contractor (while using a company laptop, incidentally) and I was able to get tax offset, and of course the fact that I didn't have to travel saved me time while travelling and the cost of the transport as well.

This was definitely a net benefit to me, and indirectly for the company.

My point is only that if I'm paying for it out of my pocket, my boss has no say in how I chose to use the limited resource. Contrarily, if the company is footing the bill, they have every right to mandate what I use it for, and it should be spelled out clearly in a BYOD policy.

Steve, I agree that companies banning BYOD is not going to solve the problem their IT departments are facing. The BYOD trend will grow and rather than shying away from it, companies need to embrace it. From what we???ve found working with our customers is exactly what you???ve hit on: employees will work around IT???s rules and make BYOD a reality regardless. What we all need to a better job of is informing IT that there are mobile application management (MAM) solutions out there to solve this problem. An effective MAM solution not only addresses the demands of employees, but actually helps IT run more efficiently. There???s a lot more to it, but at its basic level it???s about providing platform-agnostic application lifecycle management ??? and if your MAM solution offers that, then your business is really going to enjoy some productivity gains. ??? David Baeza, Apperian

"???The mismatch between employee needs and IT???s position is obvious"
Obvious to whom?
Its not a need its a want, they are not the same.
If an employer is not supplying tools needed to do a job then that is the issue.
In my eyes it would be a failing to not provide the tools needed to do a job.

What employees want should not be the driver. It is an empoyers duty to provide what is needed.

Address the facts here, employees are spending silly money on gadgets and gizmo's that they cannot do without in 'real life' they need thier facebook lives at work..

Its like school uniforms, they are there to ensure that all are equal and theres no ***** wearing toffs to snear at those without.
This is a those that have and those that dont storm brewing. Wholly unfair and selfish.

Tools for the jobs not tools for the snobs.

Now wheres my iPad I sneaked in today

It is IT's job to prove indisputably whether a device is necessary or not and even then may find itself overridden by demonstrated example to the contrary.

I have watched in one major corporation where IT emphatically declared tablets (and iPhones) as useless compared to devices already in place, only to see those same tablets (and iPhones) greatly improve efficiency in management and personnel response times in several areas--to the point that Blackberry phones are starting to be phased out despite their higher security and tablets are a standard tool in corporate meetings (of all scales) in place of conventional laptops. Combine this with the proven reliability of more-expensive-branded desktops and the company is realizing overall savings on the order of millions of dollars per year by allowing BYOD.

IT generally has a tight budget and an even tighter requirement for security. And in many companies, tablets and smartphones are an IT cost.
Then there are company limitations that originate from business type or customer requirements. For example, does your business deal with certain governments? Congratulations, you can't use certain tablets, and god forbid you bring a smartphone to the table. Company based in the US doing work in certain regions of Asia? Good luck explaining why you use secured tablets or smartphones to the US government.

Then you get the technophobe senior management that stop initiatives before they start. Quite often the middle to lower tier members of the IT department are the ones that -want- to bring in the new tools and devices; but are stopped by senior management (quite often a CIO/CTO or VP of IT pretending to understand the world of IT), security policies, or organizational requirements.

... that uses tablets in-house all over the world, not just in the US. Senior management of that bank actually overrode IT which claimed they couldn't be used and later discovered that those same tablets have reduced IT costs significantly by reducing desktop support calls.

who published all those credit cards numbers recently? And a few months ago. And a few months before that...

the word G u c c i was starred out.. wierd...

I don't see *any* compelling arguments for BYOD among the four points in the article. In particular, point 4 about anti-virus, backup, etc. implies that these elements of a system are unncessary. If your personal device doesn't protect against malware and there's no backup, I'd be worried. If the particular tool your company uses has an over-heavy footprint, find a different tool - don't throw away the system protection.

I'm convinced that much of the so-called BYOD bandwagon is hype created by the tech media. I work for an SME so maybe it's different to a large organisation but I won't be rushing to propose BYOD any time soon.

You nailed it mark1408. The only people I hear talking about BYOD is the tech media. I see no evidence of it at all in our office. Maybe it's more of a trend in Silicone Valley.

I am constantly appalled at the obvious lack of proper education to properly express oneself as evidenced by the total disregard of the rules of spelling, grammar and punctuation...especially by the author of this article, et al. It would seem a reasonable expenditure of IT funding to hire a proofreader well-versed in the aforementioned disciplines.

If you work in a multinational with more than 50'000 employees, then unless you work for someone like IBM or Google, you will almost certainly be on Windows XP and have a completely locked down system with the bare minimum features. Corporates, especially during the financial crisis, are increasingly unwilling to spend the money on IT, adopting the "if it aint broke, don't fix it" approach.

Sadly, this results in exactly the things mentioned in this article, stagnation, frustration, appallingly slow performance and general low quality of life for employees.

The company I work for has completely outsourced all IT to India, so they don't even know if I bring my own device. I have zero access, even something as basic as installing a font requires a lengthy and maddening phone call to Bangalore.

We have reasonably good secure WiFi in place, so I am able to bring my own iPad and laptop to work on, and use my Windows XP desktop for accessing company email and secured network file shares. I use a USB stick to copy files on to my laptop, work on them, then copy them back to my work PC to send them to people using the corporate email and Sharepoint.

I can complain all I want to whoever I want, my manager will gladly spend all the money she can throw at me, but there is literally no way for me to connect to the company network using anything other than the "standard" company build of Windows XP. My work desktop is in fact a Core i5 Quad Core with 4GB of ram and all the latest hardware, but it's completely crippled by the corporate OS install. Try as I might, there is no way they are going to upgrade to something better. So please spare a thought for those of us trapped in 2001 by the corporate machine.

If the only way we can be fully productive, achieve our targets and work towards promotion is to bring our own kit to do the work on, then surely that $1200 is not looking such a bad investment after all. In any case, I already had the iPad and Laptop, it's not like I bought them specifically for work.

The same "power users" (aka upper management) slash OT budgets because IT no longer supplies the devices when the reality is that BYOD requires MORE help desk personnel because of the lack of user understanding of their devices and how to use them. The reality is the Gorilla sized agents are their because the same users that complain vociferously when malware cripples their PC or they spill coffee into the keyboard and there is no data backup of the now fried hard drive. Here's the compromise. When users take their BYODs into their own hands and learn how to protect them and backup their own data THEN you can cut the IT budget. In fact, in a perfect world, every employee will be their own level one help desk and there will be two or three others in the office who can function as level 2; no IT needed. However, the same management that levels these sorts of accusations against IT insist that users should not be responsible for their own support because it is "not their job." That's a cop out. Employees drive to work every day. The company expects them to be in the office. The company expects that their car works or that they know how to take the bus. Get the point? Computing devices have changed since 2000 and for the best. Now management and users need to change. They need to step up to the plate and start managing the tools they need to do their jobs for themselves. Computers have been tools in the office for more than two decades. How long do users need to understand they are not going away and that they need to start understanding them better. That will make them far more efficient and allow more work to get done than any mandated BYOD support policy.

While i agree that a lot of Corporate users are unhappy with the speed of the advancement of teech at the workplace.Bringing an unapproved device to the workplace and using it to access the companys files can often be a fireable offence. I am a Senior Computer Consultant and i cannot count the times I have been told that just having a flash drive near the companys machines is grounds for being marched to the door. I cannot believe that employed would put their jobs at risk in that manner

I am a graphic designer/public relations officer working for government and 18 months ago bought my own laptop to allow me do my work effectively after gnashing my teeth over what worked like an electric typewriter (remember those ancestors of the word processor?) Now I can can instal my favourite Adobe design software and carry my work over home for the weekend...and what's more, I have learnt so much on my new baby that I wonder how I even breathed without her. I call her Lappie, sweet baby - especially when she's purring on...

Those saying they cannot spend their own money to buy 'office' equipment have lost it. Wait until they have to leave their comfort zones and find their skills are archaic, then they'll know better!

What's obvious to me is how mobile device manufactures have successfully created a paradigm shift in the minds of so many " techno-suffering" employees with "BYOD". First it was the assault on corporate in-house storage in favor "the cloud" and now BYOD - the next perfect "catchy", 'trendy" "win-win" for cost conscious companies who want "happy", "more productive" employees". Give me a break... An all out adoption of corporate BYOD is a win for mobile device manufactures, it puts IT into an unenviable position of having to support personally owned gear (no matter how you try to slice and dice that) and it further exposes company data. Who pays for a stolen BYOD device on company premises? Do we mandate having employees hand over their BYODs on termination to remove/recover/safeguard critical documents? If a device is stolen or lost with sensitive corporate data on it, every employee will feel duty bound to report that in a timely manner right? Company provided, managed and distributed gear is best with a healthy balance of COMPANY PROVIDED new cutting edge tools operated and maintained within sound best practice security frameworks.

is the home visit.

I've had people demand that IT staff not only configure their device for corporate infrastructure, but want us to come to their house and do the same. I always told folks up front that there were too many liabilities (including the workload) to allow technicians to start doing home visits.

How would you feel if you found out that your personal, financial, or heath information leaked out from your employer, bank, hospital, doctor's or dentist's office because they allowed their employees to use their own unsecured technology to work?
I am not talking about a malicious leak. I am talking about that well intentioned person who wanted to finish a financial spreadsheet overnight so they install their personal remote access client on their company owned desktop, or they email the data to their personal email account, or they save it to an unprotected flash drive, cd, smartphone, tablet, or the cloud.
As a Director of an IT Department, I am seen as the obstacle to new technology because I provide you with a tried and true way to access data through a secure encrypted tunnel or a fingerprint & password protected encrypted laptop but you don't want to be burdened with having to remember your login credentials. It's too much work. It slows down productivity.
So again, I ask what if it is your personal data I'm trying to protect?

...Joe Public really doesn't see that as a problem. Also, I'm sure you've noticed, everybody is a technology "expert" and you're basically an incompetent, justifying your position, roadblock to all that is right in the world.

I recently got the Security+ cert to allow me to do DoD contract work. As I studied for it, I remember thinking that cert would be better suited for end users than IT pros. It would put an end to a LOT of the nonsense guys like you and I have had to deal with our entire careers.

Most people, and by extension, most companies, simply are not serious about security. And if you try to bring things to their attention, their response is to kill the messenger more often than not.

If security were the sole reason to block progress, then we'd still be using punch cards and mainframe computers despite the separate issues those present. Even the DoD is experimenting with the newest technologies, including smartphones and tablets, for both their functionality in the field as well as their ability to be secured. Even President Obama has a DoD-secured Blackberry and now iPad.

You'd be surprised by how many companies are serious about security, but that doesn't stop them from embracing change when it's to their advantage.

And too many IT Departments are run by control freaks and power lovers. I am definitely sympathetic to that reality.

But more often than not...and I'm speaking of 15 years of experience with the reality....people who don't understand the slightest thing about IT and IT security are the ones pushing for every new gadget. I simply have experienced more businesses that were averse to anything that wasn't convenient.

Example...and this is a true story:

When I first started my business, I went to a first time client, fired up my laptop in the car to find an open WAP. Browse for shares...yep....see if I can get in...yep...what's on one of those shares....financial data.

I bring this to their attention...their response...."What's the chances somebody will be able to do that?" And they were NOT happy I made the absurdly simple discovery. When I started making recommendations, protests were too numerous to count, and some of them were angrily done with implications that I was just making work for myself.

This is just one example. I have many. After several years of encountering similar scenarios, I dropped the idea of bringing business class IT to small businesses. It's a mugs game, but not because of the technical work. It's because of the public's attitude about technical matters.

EDIT:

I agree BYOD will probably pick up traction. But I wouldn't want to be giving out WIFI keys to some of the users I've dealt with over the years. I wouldn't want a job where I had to provide support for whatever somebody decided to bring to work. I would think common sense would dictate management would have a position that made the user responsible for his or her own device. I would hope they would understand why someone like me wouldn't want a personal device attaching to a corporate network that has confidential data. If not, I don't want to be responsible for that network, and only a crazy person would.