I don’t agree with this. Specifically I don’t feel individuals in a large org should have such free reign. The problem the IT group has is with too many platforms and technologies keeping them updated, secure, and virus free is a huge effort. While discussions deciding what over all will fit best with some folks having to make concessions is fine, to allow each person their own choice is a really bad business decision.

Myself and a coworker wrote a business case on this earlier this year and I was quite amazed how much money we would save by moving only 400 associates to this program (roughly 1/5 our corporate workforce in the Bay Area). I have been mobile and without the need for a desk for several months now but I am in the office pretty much every day. My computer set-up is different than the standard build that is normally provided which was development in partnership with our IT team. This was also a very large change for our People and Facility teams.

Thanks for sharing this paper, Jeremy. I have to think more and more companies are going to adopt this kind of strategy. When it’s explained with this level of clarity, it all seems like common sense (which shows the authors have done their job!) 

The most crucial recommendation is the middle step in the action plan: working with different groups of users to pinpoint their specific mobile needs and help them find solutions that may even be better than the ones they are using now. Not only will this maximize the productivity gains from mobile, but users are also more likely to cooperate with strategies that they see as aimed at helping them get their work done, rather than making life easier for IT. And that, paradoxically, will help make life easier for IT.

Thanks for sharing .Very informative..