Global Standards. A strategic practice.

The eight strategic practices

Global enterprises do not optimise workplace technology for one priority alone. They balance risk, cost, experience, compliance, sustainability, and operational control - often across dozens of countries.

Over decades of supporting complex international environments, we have learned that eight disciplines consistently define success. These are what we call our strategic practices.

They are not service categories. They are the principles that guide how we design programmes, structure delivery models, and advise enterprise IT leadership.

No single practice wins in isolation. The right model sits in the balance between them - shaped by your risk profile, regulatory exposure, cost structure, and transformation ambitions.

This article explores one of those eight practices: Global Standards.

Standardisation is not centralisation

Global enterprises often declare that they operate under a global device standard.

In practice, that standard frequently fractures.

Regional procurement teams negotiate local contracts.

Country IT teams approve alternative models.

Local regulations introduce variations.

Acquisitions bring inherited portfolios.

Over time, one standard becomes many interpretations.

The intention is global alignment.

The reality is controlled fragmentation.

True global standards are not about removing local flexibility. They are about creating a structured framework where deviations are governed, visible, and intentional - not accidental.

Where fragmentation creates cost and risk

When device standards differ across countries, complexity multiplies.

Support becomes inconsistent.

Warranty handling varies.

Spare part availability changes by region.

Image management becomes more complex.

Asset management data becomes inconsistent.

Security baselines diverge.

Lifecycle refresh cycles drift.

Residual value becomes unpredictable.

And perhaps most critically, enterprise visibility declines.

Multiple device models across markets make it harder to forecast, harder to negotiate, and harder to recover value at scale.

Global standards are not about aesthetics. They are about control.

The myth of necessary localisation

It is often argued that global standards are unrealistic because every country is different.

There is truth in that.

Tax environments differ.

Labour regulations vary.

Import controls change.

Language requirements apply.

But these are delivery considerations - not reasons to abandon standardisation.

The strongest global models separate what must be local from what should remain global.

Device portfolio selection, lifecycle governance, security baselines, reporting frameworks, and asset data structures should remain consistent.

Logistics execution, customs handling, and regulatory compliance can adapt locally.

When this distinction is clear, standardisation strengthens rather than restricts.

Engineering one global framework

At Egiss, Global Standards is one of our eight strategic practices because it underpins every other discipline.

Sustainability improves when devices are standardised.

Security strengthens when configurations are uniform.

Economy at scale increases when demand is aggregated.

Lifecycle management becomes predictable when refresh cycles align.

Our global lifecycle model enables enterprises to:

• Define controlled global device catalogues

• Align specifications across regions

• Maintain consistent provisioning standards

• Integrate asset data into central ITSM and ERP platforms

• Govern deviations through structured approval processes

Because we operate global hubs across multiple regions and maintain local VAT registrations where required, we enable consistent standards without creating tax or delivery friction.

Global standards are not enforced rigidity.

They are structured consistency.

The right balance

Global Standards must coexist with employee experience.

They must respect local regulatory requirements.

They must support sustainability goals.

Over-standardisation can create resistance.

Under-standardisation creates complexity.

The right balance ensures global control while preserving necessary flexibility.

The strongest enterprise models do not debate whether to standardise.

They focus on how to do it intelligently.

Why this matters now

Workplace technology estates are expanding.

Hybrid work models increase deployment points.

Acquisitions accelerate portfolio complexity.

Sustainability targets demand predictable reuse cycles.

Security frameworks require consistent baselines.

Without global standards, scale becomes a liability rather than an advantage.

Standardisation is no longer an efficiency exercise.

It is a governance requirement.

Closing perspective

Enterprises that operate globally must think globally.

Not in policy alone - but in device selection, lifecycle governance, reporting, and recovery.

Global Standards is one of our eight strategic practices because without it, the workplace model fractures under its own growth.

One enterprise standard - intelligently governed - creates the foundation for control, efficiency, and long-term resilience.