Telwares in the media: smartphones

Telwares was quoted today in InfoWorld on the topic of corporate ownership of smartphones. You can access the full article by visiting:

http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/who-should-own-your-smartphones-173

Behind the curtain: Corporate versus individual liability in wireless

The topic of who owns and who pays for an employee’s wireless services is once again heating up, and has been for the past year. It’s no coincidence – from a financial perspective, times are tough and companies need cost out opportunities. On the technology side, smart devices  continue to penetrate the enterprise at ever-increasing rates…sometimes even alarming rates. This is a recipe for direct conflict and the issue is multifaceted.

Many organizations think moving to a stipend or pure T&E model will solve the cost issue in wireless. Some companies are questioning the concept of subsidizing wireless at all. The real truth is that no single model will solve the financial requirement for cost out, and certainly won’t solve the technical issues. It’s all about having a relevant mix of liability models (think bell curve that spans the wireless population) that drives the optimal impact. Basically, the “IL versus CL” debate is based in financial logic today, but will quickly evolve into the relevant discussion of risk tolerance, security, culture, and ultimately competitive advantage. Here’s why:

•It’s not about the simple MRC versus a stipend: the TCO and IT impacts shape the story and drastically impact end results (you still need to support connectivity, which then spins into security, compliance and support)

•A stabilized (or at least consistent) environment to launch back office enablement or enterprise tools becomes front and center in the argument to own the assets – not for finance, but for consistency and foundation and speed of deployment

•There is no such thing as a liability model without layers of exceptions including tiered stipends (what happens if I spike?), T&E (I exceeded my cap, now what?), or a pure consumer model (you don’t reimburse, I don’t answer the phone)

•The ultimate mix of liability models depends almost entirely on the subtleties of IT capabilities, business requirements, financial conditions and organizational culture

•Almost every organization embraces multiple liability models, whether they are formally acknowledged or not

As financial conditions tighten, cost out often leads to demand destruction – the outright removal of devices from the subsidized population of employees. Cost out can also mean the removal of certain services, the potential downgrade of support, or refinement of eligibility or entitlement policies. The math might work in the short term, but the business effects can last long after the short term savings gain. The point here is to vet out eligibility early, and be smart about what is fundamentally impacted by making changes. It can be financially and culturally painful if not executed carefully.

The bottom line, corporate liability is a consistent best practice for most organizations. What’s changing is the need to be specific and savvy about how to apply it, and how to bolster it with smart options.

Look for more thoughts from Telwares on this topic next week in a media feature, link to be posted here Monday.