Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Policy Development vs. Policy Enforcement

Corporations by their very nature are political organisms. And as such, much like their siblings, government entities, they require policy to regulate and incentivize behavior. All corporations should commit to building a thoughtful and comprehensive policy to guide employee behavior related to wireless devices. As I mentioned in the prior post, today’s cell phones are as powerful and versatile as many laptops were only a few years ago. Users, if left to their own devices, have access to expensive downloads, streaming video, television, music and unfettered access to the internet, including illicit sites. Not only can this behavior cost the corporation thousands of dollars in the short term but it can also cost millions later through lawsuits and fines. A well constructed and communicated wireless policy can help to allay the fears in the board room as employees are less likely break policy if they know that there is in fact a policy and understand its basic components.

But, solid policy alone falls short without equally diligent policy enforcement. How so, you ask? Let’s take a fairly common and benign example. Several times each year, a new and exciting device comes out, replete with an updated OS, sophisticated styling, upgraded hardware/software and the media hype and consumer buzz that logically follows. The most recent example would be the Google Android-based phones by HTC, Motorola et al. Before that it was the Blackberry Tour. Before that it was the Palm Pre/Pixi. Before that, it was the BB Storm. You get the idea. Game changing technology or not, the associated buzz creates demand in the wireless users community. We have seen time and again a dramatic uptick of phones being damaged, stolen, lost etc coinciding with the release of the latest and greatest smart phone. Even though your workhorse Blackberry Tour is still at the top of its game, your desire for the new Droid has you marching into your manager’s office requesting the upgrade. “It’s buggy” you exclaim. “I’ll have more luck with the Droid” you conclude. Here is where policy and policy enforcement can and often do, deviate from one another. Let’s say that corporate policy is to upgrade phones every 18 months. But when did you last upgrade you device? Who’s keeping track? If they were keeping track they would see that you have had 4 upgrades in the last 18 months, each coinciding with the release of a “game changing device”. Without the mechanisms in place to measure behavior against policy, an organization has very little chance to enforce policy. Lack of enforcement renders policy impotent. So, if policy alone serves little purpose and enforcement is virtually impossible without the proper mechanisms in place to measure, what are those mechanisms and how do I get them?

Wireless Expense Management companies like Cellution, work with organizations to take charge of their wireless environment, empowering wireless users, mitigating risk and putting teeth to wireless policy. Cellution’s proprietary software known as BillSMART tracks every minute of talk time, every kb of data, every upgrade or accessory request, every mobile media or ringtone download etc. Our clients know precisely when an employee last upgraded their phone. They know which users average 500 texts each month, 10 calls to 411 and 5 application downloads. Some of our clients are able to curtail that behavior in real time by leveraging our Mobile-I real time product. So, there are mechanisms out there, in the case of Mobile-I, off the shelf products that arm companies with the information to put teeth to their wireless policy. So the next time an employee asks for the latest and greatest, you will have the appropriate information at hand to make the appropriate decision.

Other examples of employee abuse of wireless devices can have far more dire consequences for the corporation. Examples of such behavior might be frequenting illicit web sites, downloading and disseminating trade secrets and texting while driving. Lawsuits resulting from any of these activities would certainly be directed at the corporation owning the phone and not the employee participating in the behavior. For example, in 2005 Beers Skanska paid $4.75M to settle a lawsuit when one of its employees crashed into a stationary car while reaching to retrieve a message from a mounted, hands-free cell phone. A policy prohibiting such behavior is a start but putting into place the appropriate mechanisms to actually shift employee behavior is critical to the wellbeing of the organization. Cellution can partner with your organization to create your policy, measure behavior against said policy and, using proprietary software components and a world class team, shift behavior to achieve compliance.

No comments:

Post a Comment