The work that falls to the IT department of any business is increasing in our technological age, and the addition of a long-term hybrid work model, combining staff who work remotely, staff who work in the office, and staff who work in both based on the needs of their department has only seen the complexity of mobile device management triple in complexity.
This has resulted in three different but connected approaches to managing device management: bring your own device (BYOD), choose your own device (CYOD), and DaaS (device as a service). Each of the three approaches has its pros and cons, and each model is likely to suit different types of businesses.
Bring Your Own Device is a model that has become a lifeline for many companies that weren’t already using a hybrid work system when the Covid-19 pandemic hit. This allowed companies to hire staff without necessarily providing them with the devices they would need to get the job done – and it meant there was no need to spend extra money buying new secure staff devices. existing that had switched to remote working. pattern out of sheer viral necessity.
However, in a post-pandemic world, with an unprecedented 22% increase in cyberattacks in the year since lockdowns were eased, there are questions of security and mindset. that need to be firmly addressed before companies commit to continuing this trend. mobile device management emergency template.
First, BYOD depends on the strict delineation of the device and its working data. The device, purchased by the staff member with his own money, remains his property. But all data provided to the staff member, created by the staff member, or with which the staff member interacts in any way remains the property of the company in perpetuity.
As a model, it works well up to the point where anyone has to split or review the two. And while in our age of cloud computing, shared folders, and instant changes reflected in data stored anywhere in the system, it shouldn’t be a hard thing to do, using your own device in a remote environment tends to mean a higher potential for using it in your own wayregardless of company policies.
This can end up causing IT departments, responsible for issuing, using, maintaining and managing, more headaches than before, ensuring that cybersecurity is up to date and compliant with company standards, and in particular it can lead to long downtime if and when the staff member’s own machine is damaged or needs to be replaced quickly. It can be difficult in a time-critical role to deal with a situation where you have to wait until payday to replace your own device.
Choose your own device significantly reduces pressure on IT departments. Usually, in CYOD, IT departments offer the employee the possibility to choose from a limited number of devices, but with reliable specifications. The device management process then tends to be much more controlled, in the sense that before or shortly after the device is sent to the staff member (depending on whether it is being shipped from park onsite or shipped from a store or manufacturer), IT can specify the programs and cybersecurity measures that must be on the device before it can be used for business work. Then the device management cycle is largely time-based, with upgrades or replacements due a certain number of months after initial deployment, and either replaced from on-premises stores or re-ordered as devices become damaged or require upgrading.
There are a few drawbacks to remember with the CYOD model. First, the added workload of maintaining a device management and upgrade system falls on IT, which is less than ideal when their time should be spent more productively. managing day-to-day and strategic IT issues that help the business achieve its longer goals. – long-term goals.
Second, the standard of the CYOD model is to offer only a small range of device options, all fairly basic and specified only to meet the needs of the position. This can reduce costs, but it can also negate any “benefit” value of work devices for employees, meaning staff are less likely to invest in “owning” their work devices and may end up treat them with insufficient care, because they are “just” a work tool.
While this is much less of a concern than points 1 and 2, there is also an environmental impact of being locked into a regular upgrade cycle that makes each device purchased a one-time expense (lifetime lasts typically around 24 months), after which the devices must either be destroyed or expensively wiped of data, before the whole supply cycle begins again.
Device as a service is exactly what it claims to be – a service model approach to equipping staff with the devices they need and mobile device management that takes the strain off the IT department.
DaaS has advantages, in that it can free up IT to focus on the tasks the business needs, without having them also act as procurement and management specialists. machines. If you find the right DaaS provider, they can also achieve economies of scale to expand the range of devices available to staff, including some of the newest technologies available.
Upgrades and repairs can be managed simply online through a device management system owned and managed by the DaaS provider, and it becomes a matter between staff and the DaaS provider, with IT only being involved at the start of the device procurement and specification stage. , and perhaps through an annual report that the vendor sends to IT, detailing any changes, upgrades, or replacements during the year.
The downside of the DaaS model is that it may necessarily be more expensive than CYOD or BYOD models because it literally outsources all of the time and stress that would otherwise fall on the IT department. This stress and time translates into a pure business expense, and some companies cannot afford the luxury of this.
Deciding which model is right for your business will require you to make a business decision considering your budget for managing disposable devices, the size of your business, and the importance of strictly controlling the access points to your system by cybersecurity terms. . But with more cyberattacks hitting businesses than ever before, it’s fair to say there’s a general drift away from BYOD towards at least one of the other, more controllable options.