Category Archives: IT Channel

Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) – Productivity Gain or Problem in the Making?

English: A woman cuddling a pile of digital de...

Which Devices To Take To Work? (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The incredible growth in sales of tablets and smartphones during the past few years is changing the landscape for business, leading to increased demands for knowledgeable business consultants that understand the dynamics of this rapid change and the opportunities and risks it presents. The Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) concept has also become popular over the past few years.

The latest statistics really emphasise the speed of this change:

  • Nearly 1 Billion smartphones will be shipped this year, overtaking basic mobile phones for the first time, according to IDC.
  • Tablets, such as the iPad, have already overtaken laptops – just 3 years after being introduced – with shipments of around 230 Million expected this year, pushing them 20% ahead of laptops. In fact, tablets are expected to pass sales of all PC form factors in 2015, reaching sales of around 330 Million.

Recognising the desire of employees to take advantage of the latest technology to make them more productive, companies are embracing the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) concept , with an iPass survey carried out in December & January showing that 81% of companies accommodate personal devices in the office, and 54% of them having formalised policies for this.

This is where the need for consultants becomes apparent – nearly half of the world’s companies don’t have formal policies that address this urgent issue, and the problem becomes more apparent when we realise that the top 2 sources of frustration in IT departments relate to onboarding and supporting personal devices (thus approving the BYOD practise) in the office. This even eclipses security concerns, although these, of course, become even more of an issue with such devices.

In fact, over half (55%) of companies surveyed reported some form of security issue in the past year, mainly in connection with lost or stolen phones. When you consider that in 2011, over 70 million smartphones were stolen (we don’t yet have the data for 2012), and only 7% of these were recovered, the size of the problem really becomes apparent. Even with laptops, companies can expect to lose one in ten during their lifetime (3-4 years).

When we then consider that, according to IDC, 70% of enterprise data now resides on mobile devices and yet three out of four companies lack comprehensive policies for managing and securing their mobile devices, while nearly 60% of lost smartphones were unprotected, the enormous scale of the costs to business become clear.

So, given this, why are companies embracing the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) concept?

Simply put, because allowing staff to choose and use their own devices increases employee satisfaction, improves productivity and reduces cost to the company. Over half of mobile workers report working more than 50 hours per week, and nearly one in five reports putting in over 60 hours each week.  The gains here are tangible, as are the cost reductions through companies not needing to invest so heavily in such devices themselves.

Companies need to take full advantage of the benefits of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD), while minimising the risks through putting comprehensive policies, systems and procedures in place that will minimise the risks and costs inherent in the loss of such mobile devices. Doing so will improve their performance, competitiveness and bottom line. Failure to do so risks them being left behind.

Note: I first posted this on the Business Connexion blog on 12 Jun.

Advertisements

Bad Processes Kill Business

While I argued last week that oversight of business is necessary to move us to a longer-term approach to growth, too much oversight is even worse for a business.

I’ve come across countless examples in my own, IT, industry where companies seem to try very hard to prevent sales, rather than make them – all as a result of too much oversight. Let me illustrate this with an excellent example.

The company in question, let’s call it ABSC (A Big Software Company) is a very significant multinational software vendor, with offerings targeted at a range of companies, from the very largest down to a mid-size level – and it is this mid-size level where the powers-that-be are expecting significant growth. The only problem is that their processes and procedures effectively kill sales in this market and make them extremely difficult in their traditional high-end one, too.

Let’s assume that an end-user, we’ll call it Widgets Inc., wants to purchase a 100-user system from this company after being sold on the concept by a Reseller of ABSC – in line with ABSC’s policies that all SMB sales go through the channel. The outline of the process is as follows:

  • Reseller calls ABSC and requests a quote (they cannot yet provide a quote to Widgets Inc. as there are no official price lists).
  • The Account Manager for Reseller at ABSC in turn requests a quote from ABSC EMEA HQ as even he has no pricelists. The turnaround time for this quote is typically 2-5 working days (not helped by different working days in different countries).
  • The Account Manager receives the quote from ABSC’s EMEA HQ and emails it to Reseller who can then provide an official quote to Widgets Inc.
  • Widgets Inc., accepts the quote and asks to place the order. Because Widgets Inc., is a new customer (as are most SMBs!), Reseller has to supply Account Manager with extremely comprehensive information on Widgets Inc., in order that this can be properly recorded on the ABSC systems for, amongst other things, credit purposes (even though ABSC is not providing Widgets Inc., with credit as that is up to the Reseller).
  • Account Manager enters all the data and applies for the software licenses. This approval process generally takes some 10 working days to go through the various internal levels in EMEA HQ (although 4-6 weeks is not unusual). Eventually, approval for the sale is granted and Reseller can download the software licenses. Total turnaround time from when the customer firsts wants to buy until delivery is some 4 weeks on average, and up to 2 months if there are any problems.

Apparently, the rate of lost/cancelled sales as a result of this tedious process is very high – customers simply go with their #2 option for the solution, where that solution can be provided more quickly.

Of course, what should happen is that Widgets Inc. expresses interest, Reseller gives immediate quote from its own pricelist, Widgets Inc. agrees and places order on Reseller who places this on Account Manager at ABSC and is then given the licenses within a day (after checks are made that Widgets Inc. is not prohibited by US Law from accessing the software).

Unfortunately, though, this streamlined approach to business is the exception rather than the rule in our industry. ABSC is, admittedly, an extreme example (although absolutely factual), but most IT vendors have degrees of this sort of inefficiency built-in. We might sell software and/or hardware to make [other] companies more efficient, but our own processes leave a great deal to be desired instead of showing the way.

Isn’t it time the customers started expecting the vendors to practice what they preach? It would not only allow them to get what they want, when they actually want it, but should reduce prices, too, as the sort of process described above is extremely expensive in terms of manpower and, therefore, cost.