Doubts about BYOD promotion schemes

[The proposal of a BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) communications campaign] strikes me as a bit too “happy/clappy” about promoting BYOD adoption. Explaining the process won’t address deep-seated privacy concerns like Peter Nolan’s. If done the wrong way, such promotions smack of the old IT “if we explain it to you lunkheads one more time it will sink in” mentality.

I started as a BYOD advocate and I’m OK with it for myself, at least for certain devices (e.g.,work email on a personal tablet). However, if we in IT want to control devices, we should expect that some won’t want to hand over their personal property. Therefore, if we want to control them, we should be prepared to provision them.

Also, I’m just not sure that BYOD is a great lever for preventing shadow IT. My suggestion would be to start with a more open IT portfolio process, which would ensure that everyone buys into what’s proposed, being executed, and how approvals and controls work.

Adapted from a LinkedIn comment on this post re: shadow IT and trust as a strategy to prevent it.

A quick note on mobile BYOD vs. CYOD

As a practical matter, one needs to have different policies given the expectations in different part of the world. A mobile device isn’t always expected to come as a perk of the job in the US; however, it’s part of the package many other places. You’ll need to go CYOD in the latter, even if you go BYOD in North America.

From a comment on Sam Somashekar’s LinkedIn post on mobile BYOD (bring your own device) vs. CYOD (choose your own device) strategies.

%d bloggers like this: