backtop


Print 23 comment(s) - last by TSS.. on May 4 at 4:27 PM

Employees will be required to use their own devices in the office within the next few years

A new study published by research firm Gartner found that one significant change in the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) trend is coming. According to the study, by 2017 half of all employers will require workers to supply their own smartphones and tablets for work needs.

The research firm believes that companies that offer company-owned smartphones or stipends to purchase your own device will become the exception among enterprise employers. 38% of all companies expect to stop providing devices to workers by 2016 according to the study. The study says that all of those companies that plan to stop providing workers with devices will expect the workers to use their own gadgets.
 
The study found that roughly half of all corporate environments supporting BYOD currently provide partial reimbursement for devices.

Interestingly, the study also found that companies within the United States are twice as likely to allow employees to bring their own devices to work as those in Europe. Europe currently boasts the lowest adoption of all regions for BYOD policies.
 
Gartner also says that workers in India, China, and Brazil are the most likely to be using their own device at the office.

Source: Computer World



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

is this suprising?
By BRB29 on 5/2/2013 9:47:20 AM , Rating: 5
It's already happening. My siblings and friends are already doing this. They reimburse your full monthly payment of a reasonable plan(~$100). It's known to be a waste for companies to provide phones to employees when the employees already have phones. The other problem is carrying 2 phones. Most people will forget one or the other at some point. It is just a waste of money and a hassle. Unless you are working under Top Secret or higher clearance on high priority projects, there is no need for a separate phone.




RE: is this suprising?
By Mitch101 on 5/2/2013 11:07:06 AM , Rating: 2
I also think the satisfaction rate is higher having your own personal preference of device instead of what the company thinks you should be carrying.

I would dare say it probably also cuts down on the lost/stolen/broken devices whenever a newer company issued device comes out. I'm sure there is a percentage of people who do this to get the latest device from their office. Being in the corporate mobile sector the same users seem to have this issue whenever a new device is issued.


RE: is this suprising?
By darckhart on 5/2/2013 11:12:06 AM , Rating: 2
so laziness and irresponsibility of the worker make this ok? many companies have policies in place that do not guarantee any right of privacy and allow themselves unfettered access to any company-owned equipment. no thanks. i'd rather keep them separate.

"hey we pushed some config changes to your phone so you can better access company resources remotely. sorry it borked most of your other apps. btw, we also saw those snapchats. nice pix."


RE: is this suprising?
By jimbojimbo on 5/2/2013 2:06:52 PM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately during the BES era companies were controlling of their mobile devices but more and more the trend is going towards what the users want. This ties in with employee hiring, satisfaction, and retention. It's a perk that we offer potential employees. I'm not sure about other companies but where we work we try to hire the best and the little perks can sometimes favor us in their decisions.


RE: is this suprising?
By retrospooty on 5/2/2013 6:21:36 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds like you need to look for a better company that doesnt = ass.


RE: is this suprising?
By sfbruin18 on 5/2/2013 11:41:21 AM , Rating: 2
"Worlds colliding! Worlds colliding!" - George Costanza (Seinfeld)

I have always kept separate phones, despite the hassle for 2 reasons: 1) My former company issued BB's, and not the latest model, so I preferred my newer, slicker smartphone, and 2) most importantly, because they controlled the phones, they blocked access to social media sites and apps, and were constantly making changes to my phone. Apps would disappear and new ones would be installed without my control. No thanks.


RE: is this suprising?
By Souka on 5/3/2013 1:05:05 AM , Rating: 2
you forgot one important item. A company can wipe your phone at any time... be it a company provided one or personal.

I used to be a BES admin.. standard protocol was to wipe the employee's phone when they were called in to speak with the HR rep & manager. (also locked accounts n' such).

Once the iPhone (personal) came into use, we did the same practice... people really didn't like me(IT) when it happened. But it's part of the agreement the employee signs when they connect a personal device to our Exchange server.


RE: is this suprising?
By kmmatney on 5/2/2013 1:01:42 PM , Rating: 2
I've never had my own cell phone. My company pays for the plan directly - we just go to the ATT store to pick the phone we want. We can have the company pay for the phone (and we have to give it back) or we can pay for the phone, at 2-year plan rates, and keep it. I decided to pay for my iPhone 3GS, and sold it on Ebay for $50 more than it cost to upgrade to the 4S last year. The phone are not controlled by IT - we just have a few documents on how to set them up with our exchange server.


RE: is this suprising?
By jimbojimbo on 5/2/2013 2:08:11 PM , Rating: 3
If your phone is hooking in Exchange they can control certain aspects of it. You just don't know it or skipped over that part in the documents.


RE: is this suprising?
By amanojaku on 5/2/2013 3:31:14 PM , Rating: 2
Here's what Exchange can do to iOS:

Enforce passcode on device (DevicePasswordEnabled)

Minimum passcode length (MinDevicePasswordLength)

Maximum failed passcode attempts (MaxDevicePasswordFailedAttempts)

Note: The device is wiped once the specified value is exceeded.

Passcode requires both numbers and letters (AlphanumericPasswordEnabled)

Note: The user must enter a device passcode that contains at least one letter and one number.

Inactivity time in minutes (MaxInactivityTimeDeviceLock)

Note: The value specified by the inactivity time policy determines the maximum value that users can select both in Settings > General > Auto-Lock and in Settings > General > Passcode Lock > Require Passcode.

The following Exchange Server 2007 and 2010 policies are also supported:

Prohibit simple passcode (AllowSimpleDevicePassword)

Passcode expiration in days (DevicePasswordExpiration)

Passcode history (DevicePasswordHistory)

Minimum number of complex characters in passcode (MinDevicePasswordComplexCharacters)

Note: Specifies how many characters in a passcode must not be numbers or letters.

Require manual syncing while roaming (RequireManualSyncWhenRoaming)

Note: Turns push off while the device is roaming, and is specified separately for each Exchange account.

Allow camera (AllowCamera)

Allow web browser (AllowBrowser)

Note: Prohibits the use of Safari and removes the app from the Home screen.

Maximum age of email messages synced (MaxEmailAgeFilter)

Note: Specified separately for each Exchange account.

Require device encryption (RequireDeviceEncryption)

Note: iPhone 3G and iPod touch models prior to Fall 2009 don’t support device encryption and won’t connect to an Exchange Server that requires it.

http://help.apple.com/iosdeployment-exchange/mac/1...


RE: is this suprising?
By ClownPuncher on 5/2/2013 3:23:36 PM , Rating: 2
I keep work and personal life separate as much as possible. Having 2 phones isn't any more of a hassle.


RE: is this suprising?
By marvdmartian on 5/3/2013 8:01:49 AM , Rating: 2
Of course, it's all a moot point if you don't OWN a smart phone, right??


RE: is this suprising?
By TSS on 5/4/2013 4:27:59 PM , Rating: 2
I think in today's age there's another factor to it, the hype of the damn things.

I had a buddy working on a service desk during the time of the first iphone release and the massive hype surrounding them. The people he was servicing already had smartphones, nokia's, which did the job adequatly mind you.

As soon as the company offered iPhones as well as nokia's for new employees as replacement phones, the failure rate of the nokia's nigh tripled instantly. Ofcourse the emplyees wheren't allowed to "trade in" their perfectly fine nokia's, so the only way to get a new phone quick was to destroy the old one.

Unless you're fine with buying your employees the latest and greatest every 6 months, buying smartphones for your workers is simply not doable.


"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki