Mixing
A more flexible purchasing policy for office technology
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
We're interested in thinking about making our technology policies at our company more flexible. Right now IT basically issues everyone a Windows box when they start here. We're primarily a technology company though, and for at least a couple years most of our deployments are on Linux servers, so handing out Windows boxes is often a poor choice.
Management is interested in letting people use environments that 1) they're more comfortable with, 2) would be more productive on, 3) give us a broader set of platforms to play around with (e.g. easily check whether our code runs well on Android devices).
I'm neither in management nor IT, but I've been asked to come up with potential schemes for how we could change the way we do this. Our company is about 60 people (and growing) with around 3 or 4 IT people, and the rest are developers or other technology people.
One idea from management is to give people a certain budget each year (maybe $1500) that could be applied to technology purchases - could be a cheap new laptop, could be a tablet, could even be a standing desk or whatever. Or people could wait a couple years and get a beefier desktop machine, maybe a Mac, maybe a slicker Linux laptop with SSDs, whatever. I'm sure there will also be people who just want whatever standard box they're already getting, too. The point is to give people more control over their technology & environment decisions.
So I'm interested in hearing what kinds of schemes can work well. Are there paradigms that are well-known to be bad ideas, or pitfalls that can be avoided? Any pointers to other places where this gets discussed? What models have been tried by similar-sized startups? (We're not a startup, we're a wholly-owned subsidiary of a huge company, but we have enough autonomy that they don't control stuff like this.) I hope this is the right forum - I waded through all the Stack Exchange sites and this seemed like the closest fit, but I'd welcome any help turning this into a better question or finding a better forum too.
company-culture productivity company-policy technology
asked Oct 8 '14 at 14:15
Ken Williams
1341
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
We're interested in thinking about making our technology policies at our company more flexible. Right now IT basically issues everyone a Windows box when they start here. We're primarily a technology company though, and for at least a couple years most of our deployments are on Linux servers, so handing out Windows boxes is often a poor choice.
Management is interested in letting people use environments that 1) they're more comfortable with, 2) would be more productive on, 3) give us a broader set of platforms to play around with (e.g. easily check whether our code runs well on Android devices).
I'm neither in management nor IT, but I've been asked to come up with potential schemes for how we could change the way we do this. Our company is about 60 people (and growing) with around 3 or 4 IT people, and the rest are developers or other technology people.
One idea from management is to give people a certain budget each year (maybe $1500) that could be applied to technology purchases - could be a cheap new laptop, could be a tablet, could even be a standing desk or whatever. Or people could wait a couple years and get a beefier desktop machine, maybe a Mac, maybe a slicker Linux laptop with SSDs, whatever. I'm sure there will also be people who just want whatever standard box they're already getting, too. The point is to give people more control over their technology & environment decisions.
So I'm interested in hearing what kinds of schemes can work well. Are there paradigms that are well-known to be bad ideas, or pitfalls that can be avoided? Any pointers to other places where this gets discussed? What models have been tried by similar-sized startups? (We're not a startup, we're a wholly-owned subsidiary of a huge company, but we have enough autonomy that they don't control stuff like this.) I hope this is the right forum - I waded through all the Stack Exchange sites and this seemed like the closest fit, but I'd welcome any help turning this into a better question or finding a better forum too.
company-culture productivity company-policy technology
asked Oct 8 '14 at 14:15
Ken Williams
1341
Originally asked at superuser.com/q/820543/120672 .
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 14:17
2
Voting to close because the question asks for technical advice.
– Vietnhi Phuvan
Oct 8 '14 at 14:36
@VietnhiPhuvan That's a bit odd, you chose to provide irrelevant technical advice that was not requested but the question itself seems perfectly fine. Telastyn's answer illustrates the kind of things that can be said without any reference to the respective merits of various operating systems.
– Relaxed
Oct 8 '14 at 14:58
1
Who is responsible for maintaining the machines (antivirus, patches, etc)? Does a new platform create work for IT or will employees manage their own boxes?
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:40
6
This isn't a technical question; it's a question about setting policies. I think it's a good question for The Workplace.
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:43
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
We're interested in thinking about making our technology policies at our company more flexible. Right now IT basically issues everyone a Windows box when they start here. We're primarily a technology company though, and for at least a couple years most of our deployments are on Linux servers, so handing out Windows boxes is often a poor choice.
Management is interested in letting people use environments that 1) they're more comfortable with, 2) would be more productive on, 3) give us a broader set of platforms to play around with (e.g. easily check whether our code runs well on Android devices).
I'm neither in management nor IT, but I've been asked to come up with potential schemes for how we could change the way we do this. Our company is about 60 people (and growing) with around 3 or 4 IT people, and the rest are developers or other technology people.
One idea from management is to give people a certain budget each year (maybe $1500) that could be applied to technology purchases - could be a cheap new laptop, could be a tablet, could even be a standing desk or whatever. Or people could wait a couple years and get a beefier desktop machine, maybe a Mac, maybe a slicker Linux laptop with SSDs, whatever. I'm sure there will also be people who just want whatever standard box they're already getting, too. The point is to give people more control over their technology & environment decisions.
So I'm interested in hearing what kinds of schemes can work well. Are there paradigms that are well-known to be bad ideas, or pitfalls that can be avoided? Any pointers to other places where this gets discussed? What models have been tried by similar-sized startups? (We're not a startup, we're a wholly-owned subsidiary of a huge company, but we have enough autonomy that they don't control stuff like this.) I hope this is the right forum - I waded through all the Stack Exchange sites and this seemed like the closest fit, but I'd welcome any help turning this into a better question or finding a better forum too.
company-culture productivity company-policy technology
asked Oct 8 '14 at 14:15
Ken Williams
1341
We're interested in thinking about making our technology policies at our company more flexible. Right now IT basically issues everyone a Windows box when they start here. We're primarily a technology company though, and for at least a couple years most of our deployments are on Linux servers, so handing out Windows boxes is often a poor choice.
Management is interested in letting people use environments that 1) they're more comfortable with, 2) would be more productive on, 3) give us a broader set of platforms to play around with (e.g. easily check whether our code runs well on Android devices).
I'm neither in management nor IT, but I've been asked to come up with potential schemes for how we could change the way we do this. Our company is about 60 people (and growing) with around 3 or 4 IT people, and the rest are developers or other technology people.
One idea from management is to give people a certain budget each year (maybe $1500) that could be applied to technology purchases - could be a cheap new laptop, could be a tablet, could even be a standing desk or whatever. Or people could wait a couple years and get a beefier desktop machine, maybe a Mac, maybe a slicker Linux laptop with SSDs, whatever. I'm sure there will also be people who just want whatever standard box they're already getting, too. The point is to give people more control over their technology & environment decisions.
So I'm interested in hearing what kinds of schemes can work well. Are there paradigms that are well-known to be bad ideas, or pitfalls that can be avoided? Any pointers to other places where this gets discussed? What models have been tried by similar-sized startups? (We're not a startup, we're a wholly-owned subsidiary of a huge company, but we have enough autonomy that they don't control stuff like this.) I hope this is the right forum - I waded through all the Stack Exchange sites and this seemed like the closest fit, but I'd welcome any help turning this into a better question or finding a better forum too.
company-culture productivity company-policy technology
asked Oct 8 '14 at 14:15
Ken Williams
1341
asked Oct 8 '14 at 14:15
Ken Williams
1341
asked Oct 8 '14 at 14:15
Ken Williams
1341
asked Oct 8 '14 at 14:15
Ken Williams
1341
1341
Originally asked at superuser.com/q/820543/120672 .
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 14:17
2
Voting to close because the question asks for technical advice.
– Vietnhi Phuvan
Oct 8 '14 at 14:36
@VietnhiPhuvan That's a bit odd, you chose to provide irrelevant technical advice that was not requested but the question itself seems perfectly fine. Telastyn's answer illustrates the kind of things that can be said without any reference to the respective merits of various operating systems.
– Relaxed
Oct 8 '14 at 14:58
1
Who is responsible for maintaining the machines (antivirus, patches, etc)? Does a new platform create work for IT or will employees manage their own boxes?
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:40
6
This isn't a technical question; it's a question about setting policies. I think it's a good question for The Workplace.
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:43
 |Â
show 2 more comments
Originally asked at superuser.com/q/820543/120672 .
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 14:17
2
Voting to close because the question asks for technical advice.
– Vietnhi Phuvan
Oct 8 '14 at 14:36
@VietnhiPhuvan That's a bit odd, you chose to provide irrelevant technical advice that was not requested but the question itself seems perfectly fine. Telastyn's answer illustrates the kind of things that can be said without any reference to the respective merits of various operating systems.
– Relaxed
Oct 8 '14 at 14:58
1
Who is responsible for maintaining the machines (antivirus, patches, etc)? Does a new platform create work for IT or will employees manage their own boxes?
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:40
6
This isn't a technical question; it's a question about setting policies. I think it's a good question for The Workplace.
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:43
Originally asked at superuser.com/q/820543/120672 .
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 14:17
Originally asked at superuser.com/q/820543/120672 .
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 14:17
2
2
Voting to close because the question asks for technical advice.
– Vietnhi Phuvan
Oct 8 '14 at 14:36
Voting to close because the question asks for technical advice.
– Vietnhi Phuvan
Oct 8 '14 at 14:36
@VietnhiPhuvan That's a bit odd, you chose to provide irrelevant technical advice that was not requested but the question itself seems perfectly fine. Telastyn's answer illustrates the kind of things that can be said without any reference to the respective merits of various operating systems.
– Relaxed
Oct 8 '14 at 14:58
@VietnhiPhuvan That's a bit odd, you chose to provide irrelevant technical advice that was not requested but the question itself seems perfectly fine. Telastyn's answer illustrates the kind of things that can be said without any reference to the respective merits of various operating systems.
– Relaxed
Oct 8 '14 at 14:58
1
1
Who is responsible for maintaining the machines (antivirus, patches, etc)? Does a new platform create work for IT or will employees manage their own boxes?
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:40
Who is responsible for maintaining the machines (antivirus, patches, etc)? Does a new platform create work for IT or will employees manage their own boxes?
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:40
6
6
This isn't a technical question; it's a question about setting policies. I think it's a good question for The Workplace.
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:43
This isn't a technical question; it's a question about setting policies. I think it's a good question for The Workplace.
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:43
 |Â
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
First step, ask your IT people. Since they're responsible for the technological support and security for your company, you will need to make sure they're cool with expanding the platforms they need to support by an order of magnitude. Standard machine images exist for a practical reason.
That said, I have seen one place where this has worked. It was a startup, and the policy was that IT would support 3 standard machines - some non-technical windows box, a technical windows box and a super-standard technical linux box. If you wanted something different, you could do that but were on your own if you needed any sort of support.
It was made clear that any sort of "but my machine wasn't working" would not be tolerated and that this policy was a privilege like working from home. This limited a bit of the chaos to people who really wanted something different.
answered Oct 8 '14 at 14:31
Telastyn
33.9k977120
Yes, clearly IT support is a really big part of the equation. It can't be the whole answer, though - the easiest platform to support isn't necessarily the best platform for everybody to get their work done. Conversely, people won't have time to get work done if they're constantly "configuring" their machines either, so there's some kind of balance to be struck.
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 21:32
3
Your current IT people shouldn't be dictating your desktop platform if business needs indicate otherwise. If your business would be more productive with Linux desktops but your current IT people only do Windows, you should be hiring IT people who can support Linux - not muddling along with Windows.
– Andrew Medico
Oct 9 '14 at 14:42
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
I worked at some point for a large (public) organization that allowed quite a lot of flexibility. Everybody would get a standard Windows machine (with a few options available) and for everything else, you had to find your own budget and write a short motivation (because the main provider had to be chosen through an EU tender procedure).
Support was not guaranteed but generally accommodating. It sounds a bit vague as a policy but that's pretty much how it worked in practice: For example, support for printing, etc. was not as good on Macs but someone did take care of it eventually.
I don't know how much of this translates to your situation but that's one way to do it.
answered Oct 9 '14 at 6:57
Relaxed
1,07289
suggest improvements |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
First step, ask your IT people. Since they're responsible for the technological support and security for your company, you will need to make sure they're cool with expanding the platforms they need to support by an order of magnitude. Standard machine images exist for a practical reason.
That said, I have seen one place where this has worked. It was a startup, and the policy was that IT would support 3 standard machines - some non-technical windows box, a technical windows box and a super-standard technical linux box. If you wanted something different, you could do that but were on your own if you needed any sort of support.
It was made clear that any sort of "but my machine wasn't working" would not be tolerated and that this policy was a privilege like working from home. This limited a bit of the chaos to people who really wanted something different.
answered Oct 8 '14 at 14:31
Telastyn
33.9k977120
Yes, clearly IT support is a really big part of the equation. It can't be the whole answer, though - the easiest platform to support isn't necessarily the best platform for everybody to get their work done. Conversely, people won't have time to get work done if they're constantly "configuring" their machines either, so there's some kind of balance to be struck.
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 21:32
3
Your current IT people shouldn't be dictating your desktop platform if business needs indicate otherwise. If your business would be more productive with Linux desktops but your current IT people only do Windows, you should be hiring IT people who can support Linux - not muddling along with Windows.
– Andrew Medico
Oct 9 '14 at 14:42
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
6
down vote
First step, ask your IT people. Since they're responsible for the technological support and security for your company, you will need to make sure they're cool with expanding the platforms they need to support by an order of magnitude. Standard machine images exist for a practical reason.
That said, I have seen one place where this has worked. It was a startup, and the policy was that IT would support 3 standard machines - some non-technical windows box, a technical windows box and a super-standard technical linux box. If you wanted something different, you could do that but were on your own if you needed any sort of support.
It was made clear that any sort of "but my machine wasn't working" would not be tolerated and that this policy was a privilege like working from home. This limited a bit of the chaos to people who really wanted something different.
answered Oct 8 '14 at 14:31
Telastyn
33.9k977120
Yes, clearly IT support is a really big part of the equation. It can't be the whole answer, though - the easiest platform to support isn't necessarily the best platform for everybody to get their work done. Conversely, people won't have time to get work done if they're constantly "configuring" their machines either, so there's some kind of balance to be struck.
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 21:32
3
Your current IT people shouldn't be dictating your desktop platform if business needs indicate otherwise. If your business would be more productive with Linux desktops but your current IT people only do Windows, you should be hiring IT people who can support Linux - not muddling along with Windows.
– Andrew Medico
Oct 9 '14 at 14:42
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
First step, ask your IT people. Since they're responsible for the technological support and security for your company, you will need to make sure they're cool with expanding the platforms they need to support by an order of magnitude. Standard machine images exist for a practical reason.
That said, I have seen one place where this has worked. It was a startup, and the policy was that IT would support 3 standard machines - some non-technical windows box, a technical windows box and a super-standard technical linux box. If you wanted something different, you could do that but were on your own if you needed any sort of support.
It was made clear that any sort of "but my machine wasn't working" would not be tolerated and that this policy was a privilege like working from home. This limited a bit of the chaos to people who really wanted something different.
answered Oct 8 '14 at 14:31
Telastyn
33.9k977120
First step, ask your IT people. Since they're responsible for the technological support and security for your company, you will need to make sure they're cool with expanding the platforms they need to support by an order of magnitude. Standard machine images exist for a practical reason.
That said, I have seen one place where this has worked. It was a startup, and the policy was that IT would support 3 standard machines - some non-technical windows box, a technical windows box and a super-standard technical linux box. If you wanted something different, you could do that but were on your own if you needed any sort of support.
It was made clear that any sort of "but my machine wasn't working" would not be tolerated and that this policy was a privilege like working from home. This limited a bit of the chaos to people who really wanted something different.
answered Oct 8 '14 at 14:31
Telastyn
33.9k977120
answered Oct 8 '14 at 14:31
Telastyn
33.9k977120
answered Oct 8 '14 at 14:31
Telastyn
33.9k977120
answered Oct 8 '14 at 14:31
Telastyn
33.9k977120
33.9k977120
Yes, clearly IT support is a really big part of the equation. It can't be the whole answer, though - the easiest platform to support isn't necessarily the best platform for everybody to get their work done. Conversely, people won't have time to get work done if they're constantly "configuring" their machines either, so there's some kind of balance to be struck.
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 21:32
3
Your current IT people shouldn't be dictating your desktop platform if business needs indicate otherwise. If your business would be more productive with Linux desktops but your current IT people only do Windows, you should be hiring IT people who can support Linux - not muddling along with Windows.
– Andrew Medico
Oct 9 '14 at 14:42
suggest improvements |Â
Yes, clearly IT support is a really big part of the equation. It can't be the whole answer, though - the easiest platform to support isn't necessarily the best platform for everybody to get their work done. Conversely, people won't have time to get work done if they're constantly "configuring" their machines either, so there's some kind of balance to be struck.
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 21:32
3
Your current IT people shouldn't be dictating your desktop platform if business needs indicate otherwise. If your business would be more productive with Linux desktops but your current IT people only do Windows, you should be hiring IT people who can support Linux - not muddling along with Windows.
– Andrew Medico
Oct 9 '14 at 14:42
Yes, clearly IT support is a really big part of the equation. It can't be the whole answer, though - the easiest platform to support isn't necessarily the best platform for everybody to get their work done. Conversely, people won't have time to get work done if they're constantly "configuring" their machines either, so there's some kind of balance to be struck.
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 21:32
Yes, clearly IT support is a really big part of the equation. It can't be the whole answer, though - the easiest platform to support isn't necessarily the best platform for everybody to get their work done. Conversely, people won't have time to get work done if they're constantly "configuring" their machines either, so there's some kind of balance to be struck.
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 21:32
3
3
Your current IT people shouldn't be dictating your desktop platform if business needs indicate otherwise. If your business would be more productive with Linux desktops but your current IT people only do Windows, you should be hiring IT people who can support Linux - not muddling along with Windows.
– Andrew Medico
Oct 9 '14 at 14:42
Your current IT people shouldn't be dictating your desktop platform if business needs indicate otherwise. If your business would be more productive with Linux desktops but your current IT people only do Windows, you should be hiring IT people who can support Linux - not muddling along with Windows.
– Andrew Medico
Oct 9 '14 at 14:42
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
I worked at some point for a large (public) organization that allowed quite a lot of flexibility. Everybody would get a standard Windows machine (with a few options available) and for everything else, you had to find your own budget and write a short motivation (because the main provider had to be chosen through an EU tender procedure).
Support was not guaranteed but generally accommodating. It sounds a bit vague as a policy but that's pretty much how it worked in practice: For example, support for printing, etc. was not as good on Macs but someone did take care of it eventually.
I don't know how much of this translates to your situation but that's one way to do it.
answered Oct 9 '14 at 6:57
Relaxed
1,07289
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
I worked at some point for a large (public) organization that allowed quite a lot of flexibility. Everybody would get a standard Windows machine (with a few options available) and for everything else, you had to find your own budget and write a short motivation (because the main provider had to be chosen through an EU tender procedure).
Support was not guaranteed but generally accommodating. It sounds a bit vague as a policy but that's pretty much how it worked in practice: For example, support for printing, etc. was not as good on Macs but someone did take care of it eventually.
I don't know how much of this translates to your situation but that's one way to do it.
answered Oct 9 '14 at 6:57
Relaxed
1,07289
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
I worked at some point for a large (public) organization that allowed quite a lot of flexibility. Everybody would get a standard Windows machine (with a few options available) and for everything else, you had to find your own budget and write a short motivation (because the main provider had to be chosen through an EU tender procedure).
Support was not guaranteed but generally accommodating. It sounds a bit vague as a policy but that's pretty much how it worked in practice: For example, support for printing, etc. was not as good on Macs but someone did take care of it eventually.
I don't know how much of this translates to your situation but that's one way to do it.
answered Oct 9 '14 at 6:57
Relaxed
1,07289
I worked at some point for a large (public) organization that allowed quite a lot of flexibility. Everybody would get a standard Windows machine (with a few options available) and for everything else, you had to find your own budget and write a short motivation (because the main provider had to be chosen through an EU tender procedure).
Support was not guaranteed but generally accommodating. It sounds a bit vague as a policy but that's pretty much how it worked in practice: For example, support for printing, etc. was not as good on Macs but someone did take care of it eventually.
I don't know how much of this translates to your situation but that's one way to do it.
answered Oct 9 '14 at 6:57
Relaxed
1,07289
answered Oct 9 '14 at 6:57
Relaxed
1,07289
answered Oct 9 '14 at 6:57
Relaxed
1,07289
answered Oct 9 '14 at 6:57
Relaxed
1,07289
1,07289
suggest improvements |Â
suggest improvements |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f34716%2fa-more-flexible-purchasing-policy-for-office-technology%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Originally asked at superuser.com/q/820543/120672 .
– Ken Williams
Oct 8 '14 at 14:17
2
Voting to close because the question asks for technical advice.
– Vietnhi Phuvan
Oct 8 '14 at 14:36
@VietnhiPhuvan That's a bit odd, you chose to provide irrelevant technical advice that was not requested but the question itself seems perfectly fine. Telastyn's answer illustrates the kind of things that can be said without any reference to the respective merits of various operating systems.
– Relaxed
Oct 8 '14 at 14:58
1
Who is responsible for maintaining the machines (antivirus, patches, etc)? Does a new platform create work for IT or will employees manage their own boxes?
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:40
6
This isn't a technical question; it's a question about setting policies. I think it's a good question for The Workplace.
– Monica Cellio♦
Oct 8 '14 at 15:43