Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Communications Businesses Cellphones Handhelds Iphone IT

Who Should Own Your Smartphone? 129

snydeq writes "The great corporate barrier against employees using personal smartphones in business contexts has been breached, writes InfoWorld's Galen Gruman. According to a recent report from Forrester Research, half of the smartphones in use among US and Canadian businesses are not company-issued equipment. In fact, some organizations are even subsidizing employees' service plans as an easy way to avoid the procurement and management headaches of an increasingly standard piece of work equipment. Gruman discusses the pros and cons of going with a subsidized, employee-owned smartphone plan, which is part of a larger trend that sees IT loosening its grip on 'dual-use' devices, including laptops and PCs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Who Should Own Your Smartphone?

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:17PM (#31603820)
    The personal phone I carry is none of my IT department's business, and I like it that way--thank you very much. I don't want to EVER get into a situation where my workplace has a legal case for subpoenaing my personal phone.
  • Depends on usage (Score:3, Insightful)

    by syousef ( 465911 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:18PM (#31603824) Journal

    I would always want my own unrestricted phone under my own control. If, as the case is now, that phone gets light-moderate work related use, that's fine since it beats the other option of having 2 phones. Also, if I drop or break it, there's no drama (apart from having to replace it). Now if I was using the phone for hours each day, I'd be wanting a separate work phone.

  • by geminidomino ( 614729 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:18PM (#31603836) Journal

    I'm going to have to go with "Me", Regis.

    I have no problem using or not using it for work. If they want something specific, they can feel free to shell for it.

  • by iamhigh ( 1252742 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:21PM (#31603886)
    As far as "connecting" to the network, I have no issue with what you use, assuming it isn't a device made for malevolence. However, when you come running into my office at 4:56 wanting help with your $latest_awesome_phone, that I know nothing about, then I start to wonder if letting you use your home device for work was a good idea. Or when you want me to enable IMAP because that's all that a single employee's phone supports (and we use Exchange/MAPI like most similar companies), then again, I wonder why we let people use personal devices.

    But it is great to think of dumping all the procurement/management onto the end user...
  • by Enderandrew ( 866215 ) <enderandrew&gmail,com> on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:21PM (#31603890) Homepage Journal

    Do you care about securing smartphones, laptops, etc? Do you want to reserve the right to restrict their use?

    If they can access and store company information, introduce infections into company systems, or pull customer information, then maybe you should reconsider the cost-saving approach.

  • by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:22PM (#31603904) Homepage Journal

    Sadly, if they subsidize your phone, they may actually incur legal liabilities of your actions.. For both parties it should be 100% separate. Just makes business ( and personal ) sense.

  • by j-turkey ( 187775 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:26PM (#31603962) Homepage

    Even though I own my own smartphone [nokia.com], ...where I work (a very large IT company) there is an increasingly lengthy list of requirements and checks for any device connected to the corporate network...

    This is the big issue with ownership & management - requirements for devices to utilize company resources (and whether or not the device needs to utilize company network resources). If the device will connect to the company network, the IT department has a very good case for managing (and/or owning) the device. It really comes down to network security, and disallowing rogue devices from connecting to the network. In a large company with many IT resources (and many to protect), it's far easier to say that the company owns and manages the device. In a small or mid-sized company, where there is less IT infrastructure to protect, or less need to weigh security against usability/ease-of-management, there is a better case to be made for user owned and managed devices.

  • by nahdude812 ( 88157 ) * on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:43PM (#31604184) Homepage

    I'm with you. So far I've never had a job where I was asked to carry a smartphone as part of my job, and I'm glad for that (I wouldn't say no, but I wouldn't like the idea).

    If I ever was asked to carry a smartphone attached to my corporate email, I'd at least think about using my own device so I don't have to carry two. I definitely don't want to do my personal business on the company-owned device, so I'd want my own, but depending on what degree I'd be able to keep my work and personal stuff separate on my personal phone, it might be a better option than two-fisting it. But if they were going to try to claim any access to my phone at all, the deal would instantly be off, and I'll dual-wield, thank you.

  • by beelsebob ( 529313 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:44PM (#31604194)

    Or when you want me to enable IMAP because that's all that a single employee's phone supports (and we use Exchange/MAPI like most similar companies), then again, I wonder why we let people use personal devices.

    You know, because ticking a single box to enable IMAP is hard. And because you wouldn't want to allow pretty much every device under the sun, rather than a few in the exclusive have-paid-microsoft/are-microsoft club to connect.

  • Re:ME! (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @06:14PM (#31604604)

    When my company paid for my cell phone. I left it in my desk at work.

    Now that they canceled that policy to save $$, they can go to hell if they want my personal cell number.

    Your company having your phone number is a pretty normal thing.

    Your company having your phone number doesn't change how many hours you are expected to work. If your company expects lots of unpaid overtime, I doubt having your personal cell number changes that.

    And if you use your personal cell phone (or car, or anything else) for business, it's perfectly normal to file an expense report with your employer.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @06:53PM (#31605004)

    I'll let the 'environment control me' when I get a budget large enough to take on whatever the end-users can throw at me. Until that unlikely day occurs I will continue to control my environment, extending it as much as my budget allows. To do anything else is fiscally irresponsible and simply bad for business regardless of what you think.

  • by Imagix ( 695350 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @06:59PM (#31605070)
    I can't agree with you. IT's job is to keep the network and devices running. Not to be jerked around by the latest whims of the users. IT has responsibilities beyond making the users happy. If that can be accomplished while continuing to ensure the safety and security of the network, fine. But dropping a random device into the network is irresponsible. And unencrypted IMAP may not be acceptable use to some companies. So it's more than "just ticking a checkbox".
  • by fedcb22 ( 1215744 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @07:05PM (#31605134) Homepage
    Name a phone that supports EAS over HTTPS but not IMAP/TLS.

Don't be irreplaceable, if you can't be replaced, you can't be promoted.

Working...