BYOD: The Illusion of Cost-Savings

Moreover, the same report found that more than 74% of individual workers had to pay entirely for their work laptop, a device so critical to work in the information economy of the 21st Century that such a practice seems reminiscent of charging mine workers for their helmets and boots at the “company store” in the 19th.

Not Just For 'Boutique' Firms

Perhaps the largest company to confront a BYOD policy is IBM, which recently started its program. At present, only 80,000 IBM employees use their own personal devices. Although IBM had traditionally offered corporate-owned and managed Blackberries, phones and other devices started making an appearance. IBM's CIO decided that “If we didn't support them, we figured [employees] would figure out how to support [the devices] themselves.” This self-directed approach would have been a problem for IBM given the volumes of sensitive information that could have been put at risk. According to IBM's CIO at that time, employees will find the most appropriate tool to get their job done. “I want to make sure I can enable them to do that, but in a way that safeguards the integrity of our business.” “IBM CIO Embraces BYOD Movement,” Computer World, http://bit.ly/UffCgX. However, soon after rolling out its BYOD policy, IBM quickly had to establish guidelines for personal devices, once it realized all of the security issues. Some apps that were considered risky, such as Dropbox for example, were banned. 'We found a tremendous lack of awareness as to what constitutes a risk,' says IBM's current CIO Jeanette Horan. 'We're trying to make people aware.' See, “IBM Faces the Peril of BYOD,” MIT Technology Review, http://bit.ly/YqqxIO.

From an employer's perspective, what could be better than shifting the cost of technology that has become critical to business onto the employees? IT budgets can instead be devoted to new technology, or business intelligence (or, more cynically, simply cut), rather than just equipping everyone with the ubiquitous Blackberry. (Note that a comprehensive BYOD policy may address not only a smart phone, but also an employee's work computer.)

And, even better, for managers: Employees are not only available on a company-owned channel for the proverbial 24/7, but they are also using their business devices constantly when out of the office, and outside normal business hours ' by the employees' own choice.

Start of a Movement

The BYOD movement sprang up from employees' desire to have and use their own choice of a smartphone and to be able to better mix their business and work lives. Yet, this modern-day nod to the 19th Century company town has its dark sides. Not only may the savings that come from having employees pay for their own work-required technology actually increase the employer's costs, but the actual price the employees pay ' in the loss of their personal privacy and legal rights ' may be far higher than any benefit from having one's own iPhone available on business trips. (See, “BYOD: If You Think You're Saving Money, Think Again,” CIO.com, http://bit.ly/S7JrxH.)

An excellent and thoughtful balancing of the costs and benefits of a BYOD policy was prepared by a working group of federal IT executives, but the policy and employee-relations concerns apply equally to private and public employers (see, “Bring Your Own Device,” www.whitehouse.gov/digitalgov/bring-your-own-device).

Consider, for example, the additional costs that a BYOD policy imposes on the IT staff. In a traditional business setting, all employees have the same device, with the same software, for the same platform, in the same version. As a result, upgrades and maintenance don't require any customization, and new features can be rolled out simultaneously for all users.

User Adaptation

In the BYOD world, however, each user's profile must be examined separately before any change, to make sure that the right changes are applied. In fact, simply the cost and burden of maintaining these databases create an extra step, when compared to a company-wide standard ' and that list must be kept up-to-date, as patches and upgrades are required to debug the products, and are offered, regularly.

Departmental Adaption

IT must also consider whether the employee-owned hardware will support the software that the business demands; in today's world, mobile executives may want the latest and greatest computer in their pocket, but (paradoxically) the software run by the business may not yet have been upgraded to run on the newest systems and chips. And that question must be addressed not only for each particular device, but also for the company's servers ' to the extent that the software on the device must connect with the firm's servers, the server-side versions must also be checked for compatibility. For example, the last thing any business traveler needs is to receive a server error, when away for a presentation or critical meeting.

General Adaptations: Will They Happen?

In addition, the same software may not be supported on all platforms and versions ' especially the more specialized products that serve a niche. In a BYOD environment, IT's work must go far beyond whether a product is supported by Windows and Mac programs. More important, is the device being used supported on Android? Will it work with the first adopters who buy Windows 8 devices, as well as for those who prefer the rock-solid performance of Windows XP? Will persons exchanging documents within the same firm face software incompatibilities (much less when dealing with third parties, particularly clients)? Those who work directly with clients may find that clients have chosen to cut costs by not replacing older (but still serviceable) versions of software, and therefore must confirm that their outdated systems and technology will still be compatible with clients' systems.

Security

Apart from the simple question of compatibility remains the critical issue of security (see, “BYOD and Don't Forget Your Security,” SAP.com, http://bit.ly/SoELU9). In a closed environment, if a device is lost or stolen, IT can often shut it down, or even wipe its hard drive clean with a remote command.

For that same functionality in a BYOD world, however, the firm must license additional copies of all of its security software and install them on every BYOD device. The same upgrade and maintenance merry-go-round applies to such “infrastructure” software (servers and mainframes) as the products need to do the work. Similarly, any regular backup and document-retention policies must be updated to reflect that a critical mass of devices containing confidential company and personal information walk out the door each night (much less travel with their owners to rock concerts and beach vacations).

Guarding the 'Exceptions'

Further complicating these BYOD burdens are the “outliers” ' early adopter employees who prefer to be on the cutting edge of technology, or who still don't understand why they had to move past Windows 95 ' or DOS or WordPerfect rather than Word, for that matter. Consider the true cheapskate who simply won't upgrade an underpowered machine that disrupts his productivity. In a true corporate world, that preference is irrelevant ' the user must function with what he or she is provided by the firm. In the BYOD environment, however, the user's own budgetary preference will be all that matters ' and IT is stuck with accommodating (and paying for) a much wider range of choices and devices.

Teamwork

Moreover, for all the time that those in the technology businesses (particularly technology attorneys) spend isolated in front of screens, or staring at a smart phone display, today's business, particularly in the legal profession, requires working with others ' clients, opposing counsel, experts, consultants, and the IT departments of all of the above. The more an attorney's BYOD choice deviates from an accepted norm, the less likely that she will be able to function in today's connected world (much less be able to rely for help on staff, who may not be trained on or otherwise able to help her, as they may be engaged in work duties and too busy, or off site, to assist).

e-Discovery and Records Retention

Records retention and electronic discovery are additional areas of critical importance to law firms and clients alike that are severely challenged by a BYOD approach. As anyone who has been involved in a case with electronic discovery knows, the parties must be able, early in the case, to control all relevant electronic information, and provide it to other parties as required by the procedural rules.

While that process can be difficult when retrieval consists solely of finding relevant information on a firm's own computer network, it becomes a practical challenge (a euphemism for nightmare or other unprintable responses) when data must be retrieved from devices that are not in the office 24/7. A BYOD employee may carry information subject to court rules (much less the employer's confidentiality requirements) with her all the time ' even though IT may be ordered to access or work with it on short notice.

Consider, too, the many widely reported cases of data-security breaches when devices containing personally identifiable information were left behind at airport security lines, or lost, or stolen ' the latter being the case even for sensitive information such as Social Security numbers and tax data stolen, apparently by a hacker in Russia, from agencies of the state of South Carolina in October.

Even worse, a court may order that a personally owned device be turned over to an opposing party for inspection ' depriving the employee of a tool he needs to do his own job, and, possibly, exposing confidential data to a competitor, or worse. Adequate security measures must be taken before giving up control of the device to opposing counsel.

On a more mundane level, routine backups of BYOD devices containing mixed business and personal data impose an ongoing additional cost on the employer. While cell phone cameras may now be able to compete with traditional ones, a routine, regular backup can't parse the work/personal distinctions in a cell phone full of vacation images and sports photos.

In short, the savings from not having to purchase employees' mobile devices under a BYOD policy may quickly be dwarfed by the extra costs that IT must incur to support the world of potential devices that employees may choose to purchase. While IT may be able to control this cost somewhat, by specifying a list of “approved” devices ' the iPhone, but not a Wii U controller or home-built clone machine, for example ' each device on such a list means a duplication of IT work ' and costs ' to enable the employee who chooses it to communicate with the office. To make matters worse, that duplication recurs each time new software is needed, or existing software is upgraded by the firm or vendor.

Even More Costs

Although the financial costs of a BYOD policy may be great, other costs of that approach may be even greater. Once an employee's phone or personal device becomes her “work device,” her employer has the legal right to monitor what she does with it, and to examine it, even without much prior notice.

Even if the employer never undertakes any of those intrusive acts, just knowing that it can do so ' and that it can track when and how much an employee is using the device ' can further break down whatever is left of the legal and psychological wall between home and work that has been under assault since online work changed the definition of “working from home” from “day off” to “working in your pajamas.”

After all, when the pressure to work, whether self-imposed or from one's manager, becomes too great, it is one thing to have to travel to an office, or even to remotely connect through a desktop computer, but it is altogether a different and much more threatening world to be tempted, constantly, to log in to work every time a person calls a spouse, mother or friends, or check the weather or sports scores. This is a very slippery slope indeed.

Work Life Balance?

Still, perhaps the worst part of that situation, unfortunately, is that the hole in the personal/work firewall that allowed this breakdown was self-inflicted. Employees “invited” their employers into their homes and personal lives, by asking for devices that they could use for work and personal business ' and were so entranced by the allure of the devices provided by their employers that they did not focus on the costs of such use exacted from their own privacy.

In fact, consider some of the implications of mixing work and personal data when the BYOD model is used. Typical corporate policies allow remote “wiping” of the device, should it be lost or stolen, usually as quickly as possible after the report of the loss. The fact that the “personal data” may have been irreplaceable pictures of family, or records of family events, is truly irrelevant under a BYOD policy. As one IT executive coldly and dispassionately stated, when presented just such a conundrum: “It's up to the users to make sure they protect their personal information” (see, “BYOD: If You Think You're Saving Money, Think Again,” supra) ' notwithstanding that many typical employees have neither the ability to take such protective action (much less realize that it is needed) without consulting with the IT department that will not, or is not permitted to, help them.

To compound the problem, sorting out these conflicts then becomes yet another burden on IT departments, which are caught squarely in the crosshairs of this dilemma ' including for their own personal data, because IT help-desk staffers are often on call 24/7, as well as for their “internal customers” who run to them when their kids' baby pictures have been deleted. (I am obviously using a worst-case, “parade of horribles,” scenario, but my own firm's IT director has told me how much personal data is supported on our firm's network and backups.)

Labor and Industry Rules a Concern

The BYOD movement also highlights a problem that has long plagued home-based e-commerce: application of wage and hour laws to remote work. If employees hold their virtual office in their hands all day, all seven days a week, then how should they be compensated (for those who are not in senior positions exempt from such laws) when they routinely handle work matters outside normal work hours?

Don't Blame the Employee

Perhaps the most insidious aspect of the BYOD movement, however, may be its allocation of blame on the employees ' a traditional employer's way to deflect criticism of its challenging policies (see, “IBM CIO Discusses Big Blue's BYOD Strategy,” Computer World, http://bit.ly/RdhRSI).

As noted above, according to IBM's CIO, its “BYOD program really is about supporting employees in the way they want to work. They will find the most appropriate tool to get their job done. I want to make sure I can enable them to do that, but in a way that safeguards the integrity of our business.”

In fact, they love choosing how best to do their work so much that 80,000 of IBM's 120,000 employees choose to pay for their own devices and monthly fees ' expenses they presumably never would have thought about paying had they worked in more traditional settings.

Be Careful '

But in the end, perhaps the traditional warning, “Be careful what you wish for, because you may get it,” best describes the infatuation of tech employers and employees with letting employees use their own devices for work.

Long before anyone had ever heard of BYOD, the Rolling Stones famously warned, “You can't always get what you want, but if you try, sometimes, well you might find, you get what you need.” BYOD employees, however, certainly neither needed nor wanted the loss of privacy that BYOD's illusion of personal choice has brought them, and their employers certainly didn't want the added costs imposed by a proliferation of BYOD duties.

While employees obtain the ability to carry an iPhone, and check e-mail and shop all day, they also may have lost the ability to “go home” from work, metaphorically, if the cost of that benefit means that they are so tethered to their electronic devices that they cannot pull the literal or figurative plug on their work day.

Even worse, they also expose their personal digital lives to their employer's HR department's ever-vigilant eyes.

Corporate controllers and information technology budget managers across America have embraced the bring-your-own-device (BYOD) movement. (See, “Bring Your Own Device Movement By the Numbers,” ZDNet.com, http://zd.net/UTdEzm; “Building the Business Case for a Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) Program,” Forrester Research (http://bit.ly/XBJU11); and “The BYOD Opportunity,” a whitepaper from VMware (http://bit.ly/SaMtTa).)

The prestigious research outfit Gartner Group even characterizes a BYOD world as “the new normal,” finding that 90% of organizations support one form or another of use of personal devices for work matters (see, “Ten Steps to Secure BYOD,” from technology consultants Carolina Advanced Digital (http://bit.ly/Y37yTa)).

And it is not surprising that employers like the BYOD approach as much as they obviously do ' they think it saves money; a lot of money. In this new world, companies allow employees to select their own computer equipment, whether that equipment is a phone or a computer, to allow them (in theory) to work in the way they prefer ' but at an average cost to employees (presumably not reimbursed in full) of more than $1,253, in one study, with all the funds saved by the employer (see, “By the Numbers,” supra).

Moreover, the same report found that more than 74% of individual workers had to pay entirely for their work laptop, a device so critical to work in the information economy of the 21st Century that such a practice seems reminiscent of charging mine workers for their helmets and boots at the “company store” in the 19th.

Not Just For 'Boutique' Firms

Perhaps the largest company to confront a BYOD policy is IBM, which recently started its program. At present, only 80,000 IBM employees use their own personal devices. Although IBM had traditionally offered corporate-owned and managed Blackberries, phones and other devices started making an appearance. IBM's CIO decided that “If we didn't support them, we figured [employees] would figure out how to support [the devices] themselves.” This self-directed approach would have been a problem for IBM given the volumes of sensitive information that could have been put at risk. According to IBM's CIO at that time, employees will find the most appropriate tool to get their job done. “I want to make sure I can enable them to do that, but in a way that safeguards the integrity of our business.” “IBM CIO Embraces BYOD Movement,” Computer World, http://bit.ly/UffCgX. However, soon after rolling out its BYOD policy, IBM quickly had to establish guidelines for personal devices, once it realized all of the security issues. Some apps that were considered risky, such as Dropbox for example, were banned. 'We found a tremendous lack of awareness as to what constitutes a risk,' says IBM's current CIO Jeanette Horan. 'We're trying to make people aware.' See, “IBM Faces the Peril of BYOD,” MIT Technology Review, http://bit.ly/YqqxIO.

From an employer's perspective, what could be better than shifting the cost of technology that has become critical to business onto the employees? IT budgets can instead be devoted to new technology, or business intelligence (or, more cynically, simply cut), rather than just equipping everyone with the ubiquitous Blackberry. (Note that a comprehensive BYOD policy may address not only a smart phone, but also an employee's work computer.)

And, even better, for managers: Employees are not only available on a company-owned channel for the proverbial 24/7, but they are also using their business devices constantly when out of the office, and outside normal business hours ' by the employees' own choice.

Start of a Movement

The BYOD movement sprang up from employees' desire to have and use their own choice of a smartphone and to be able to better mix their business and work lives. Yet, this modern-day nod to the 19th Century company town has its dark sides. Not only may the savings that come from having employees pay for their own work-required technology actually increase the employer's costs, but the actual price the employees pay ' in the loss of their personal privacy and legal rights ' may be far higher than any benefit from having one's own iPhone available on business trips. (See, “BYOD: If You Think You're Saving Money, Think Again,” CIO.com, http://bit.ly/S7JrxH.)

An excellent and thoughtful balancing of the costs and benefits of a BYOD policy was prepared by a working group of federal IT executives, but the policy and employee-relations concerns apply equally to private and public employers (see, “Bring Your Own Device,” www.whitehouse.gov/digitalgov/bring-your-own-device).

Consider, for example, the additional costs that a BYOD policy imposes on the IT staff. In a traditional business setting, all employees have the same device, with the same software, for the same platform, in the same version. As a result, upgrades and maintenance don't require any customization, and new features can be rolled out simultaneously for all users.

User Adaptation

In the BYOD world, however, each user's profile must be examined separately before any change, to make sure that the right changes are applied. In fact, simply the cost and burden of maintaining these databases create an extra step, when compared to a company-wide standard ' and that list must be kept up-to-date, as patches and upgrades are required to debug the products, and are offered, regularly.

Departmental Adaption

IT must also consider whether the employee-owned hardware will support the software that the business demands; in today's world, mobile executives may want the latest and greatest computer in their pocket, but (paradoxically) the software run by the business may not yet have been upgraded to run on the newest systems and chips. And that question must be addressed not only for each particular device, but also for the company's servers ' to the extent that the software on the device must connect with the firm's servers, the server-side versions must also be checked for compatibility. For example, the last thing any business traveler needs is to receive a server error, when away for a presentation or critical meeting.

General Adaptations: Will They Happen?

In addition, the same software may not be supported on all platforms and versions ' especially the more specialized products that serve a niche. In a BYOD environment, IT's work must go far beyond whether a product is supported by Windows and Mac programs. More important, is the device being used supported on Android? Will it work with the first adopters who buy Windows 8 devices, as well as for those who prefer the rock-solid performance of Windows XP? Will persons exchanging documents within the same firm face software incompatibilities (much less when dealing with third parties, particularly clients)? Those who work directly with clients may find that clients have chosen to cut costs by not replacing older (but still serviceable) versions of software, and therefore must confirm that their outdated systems and technology will still be compatible with clients' systems.

Security

Apart from the simple question of compatibility remains the critical issue of security (see, “BYOD and Don't Forget Your Security,” SAP.com, http://bit.ly/SoELU9). In a closed environment, if a device is lost or stolen, IT can often shut it down, or even wipe its hard drive clean with a remote command.

For that same functionality in a BYOD world, however, the firm must license additional copies of all of its security software and install them on every BYOD device. The same upgrade and maintenance merry-go-round applies to such “infrastructure” software (servers and mainframes) as the products need to do the work. Similarly, any regular backup and document-retention policies must be updated to reflect that a critical mass of devices containing confidential company and personal information walk out the door each night (much less travel with their owners to rock concerts and beach vacations).

Guarding the 'Exceptions'

Further complicating these BYOD burdens are the “outliers” ' early adopter employees who prefer to be on the cutting edge of technology, or who still don't understand why they had to move past Windows 95 ' or DOS or WordPerfect rather than Word, for that matter. Consider the true cheapskate who simply won't upgrade an underpowered machine that disrupts his productivity. In a true corporate world, that preference is irrelevant ' the user must function with what he or she is provided by the firm. In the BYOD environment, however, the user's own budgetary preference will be all that matters ' and IT is stuck with accommodating (and paying for) a much wider range of choices and devices.

Teamwork

Moreover, for all the time that those in the technology businesses (particularly technology attorneys) spend isolated in front of screens, or staring at a smart phone display, today's business, particularly in the legal profession, requires working with others ' clients, opposing counsel, experts, consultants, and the IT departments of all of the above. The more an attorney's BYOD choice deviates from an accepted norm, the less likely that she will be able to function in today's connected world (much less be able to rely for help on staff, who may not be trained on or otherwise able to help her, as they may be engaged in work duties and too busy, or off site, to assist).

e-Discovery and Records Retention

Records retention and electronic discovery are additional areas of critical importance to law firms and clients alike that are severely challenged by a BYOD approach. As anyone who has been involved in a case with electronic discovery knows, the parties must be able, early in the case, to control all relevant electronic information, and provide it to other parties as required by the procedural rules.

While that process can be difficult when retrieval consists solely of finding relevant information on a firm's own computer network, it becomes a practical challenge (a euphemism for nightmare or other unprintable responses) when data must be retrieved from devices that are not in the office 24/7. A BYOD employee may carry information subject to court rules (much less the employer's confidentiality requirements) with her all the time ' even though IT may be ordered to access or work with it on short notice.

Consider, too, the many widely reported cases of data-security breaches when devices containing personally identifiable information were left behind at airport security lines, or lost, or stolen ' the latter being the case even for sensitive information such as Social Security numbers and tax data stolen, apparently by a hacker in Russia, from agencies of the state of South Carolina in October.

Even worse, a court may order that a personally owned device be turned over to an opposing party for inspection ' depriving the employee of a tool he needs to do his own job, and, possibly, exposing confidential data to a competitor, or worse. Adequate security measures must be taken before giving up control of the device to opposing counsel.

On a more mundane level, routine backups of BYOD devices containing mixed business and personal data impose an ongoing additional cost on the employer. While cell phone cameras may now be able to compete with traditional ones, a routine, regular backup can't parse the work/personal distinctions in a cell phone full of vacation images and sports photos.

In short, the savings from not having to purchase employees' mobile devices under a BYOD policy may quickly be dwarfed by the extra costs that IT must incur to support the world of potential devices that employees may choose to purchase. While IT may be able to control this cost somewhat, by specifying a list of “approved” devices ' the iPhone, but not a Wii U controller or home-built clone machine, for example ' each device on such a list means a duplication of IT work ' and costs ' to enable the employee who chooses it to communicate with the office. To make matters worse, that duplication recurs each time new software is needed, or existing software is upgraded by the firm or vendor.

Even More Costs

Although the financial costs of a BYOD policy may be great, other costs of that approach may be even greater. Once an employee's phone or personal device becomes her “work device,” her employer has the legal right to monitor what she does with it, and to examine it, even without much prior notice.

Even if the employer never undertakes any of those intrusive acts, just knowing that it can do so ' and that it can track when and how much an employee is using the device ' can further break down whatever is left of the legal and psychological wall between home and work that has been under assault since online work changed the definition of “working from home” from “day off” to “working in your pajamas.”

After all, when the pressure to work, whether self-imposed or from one's manager, becomes too great, it is one thing to have to travel to an office, or even to remotely connect through a desktop computer, but it is altogether a different and much more threatening world to be tempted, constantly, to log in to work every time a person calls a spouse, mother or friends, or check the weather or sports scores. This is a very slippery slope indeed.

Work Life Balance?

Still, perhaps the worst part of that situation, unfortunately, is that the hole in the personal/work firewall that allowed this breakdown was self-inflicted. Employees “invited” their employers into their homes and personal lives, by asking for devices that they could use for work and personal business ' and were so entranced by the allure of the devices provided by their employers that they did not focus on the costs of such use exacted from their own privacy.

In fact, consider some of the implications of mixing work and personal data when the BYOD model is used. Typical corporate policies allow remote “wiping” of the device, should it be lost or stolen, usually as quickly as possible after the report of the loss. The fact that the “personal data” may have been irreplaceable pictures of family, or records of family events, is truly irrelevant under a BYOD policy. As one IT executive coldly and dispassionately stated, when presented just such a conundrum: “It's up to the users to make sure they protect their personal information” (see, “BYOD: If You Think You're Saving Money, Think Again,” supra) ' notwithstanding that many typical employees have neither the ability to take such protective action (much less realize that it is needed) without consulting with the IT department that will not, or is not permitted to, help them.

To compound the problem, sorting out these conflicts then becomes yet another burden on IT departments, which are caught squarely in the crosshairs of this dilemma ' including for their own personal data, because IT help-desk staffers are often on call 24/7, as well as for their “internal customers” who run to them when their kids' baby pictures have been deleted. (I am obviously using a worst-case, “parade of horribles,” scenario, but my own firm's IT director has told me how much personal data is supported on our firm's network and backups.)

Labor and Industry Rules a Concern

The BYOD movement also highlights a problem that has long plagued home-based e-commerce: application of wage and hour laws to remote work. If employees hold their virtual office in their hands all day, all seven days a week, then how should they be compensated (for those who are not in senior positions exempt from such laws) when they routinely handle work matters outside normal work hours?

Don't Blame the Employee

Perhaps the most insidious aspect of the BYOD movement, however, may be its allocation of blame on the employees ' a traditional employer's way to deflect criticism of its challenging policies (see, “IBM CIO Discusses Big Blue's BYOD Strategy,” Computer World, http://bit.ly/RdhRSI).

As noted above, according to IBM's CIO, its “BYOD program really is about supporting employees in the way they want to work. They will find the most appropriate tool to get their job done. I want to make sure I can enable them to do that, but in a way that safeguards the integrity of our business.”

In fact, they love choosing how best to do their work so much that 80,000 of IBM's 120,000 employees choose to pay for their own devices and monthly fees ' expenses they presumably never would have thought about paying had they worked in more traditional settings.

Be Careful '

But in the end, perhaps the traditional warning, “Be careful what you wish for, because you may get it,” best describes the infatuation of tech employers and employees with letting employees use their own devices for work.

Long before anyone had ever heard of BYOD, the Rolling Stones famously warned, “You can't always get what you want, but if you try, sometimes, well you might find, you get what you need.” BYOD employees, however, certainly neither needed nor wanted the loss of privacy that BYOD's illusion of personal choice has brought them, and their employers certainly didn't want the added costs imposed by a proliferation of BYOD duties.

While employees obtain the ability to carry an iPhone, and check e-mail and shop all day, they also may have lost the ability to “go home” from work, metaphorically, if the cost of that benefit means that they are so tethered to their electronic devices that they cannot pull the literal or figurative plug on their work day.

Even worse, they also expose their personal digital lives to their employer's HR department's ever-vigilant eyes.