Critical Call The Emerging Criticality of Cellular Services by Chris Trayhorn, Publisher of mThink Blue Book, May 14, 2007 The advancements in cellular services that have been witnessed in recent years have had a dramatic effect on the decision-making processes of many field organizations within the utilities industry. Current emergency voice systems, primarily based on land mobile radio (LMR), are reaching or have exceeded their traditionally long life cycle. The cost of replacement or upgrade is enormous, considering the scale of the systems and the cost of replacing mobile and dispatch units in the field. Even the greatest advancements in LMR, from trunking to digital IP voice and data systems, are no match for the advancements witnessed in cellular. From critical voice to the emergence of mobile data, large enterprises, such as utilities, are finding themselves in need of more than LMR yet they are culturally attached to it. Some of the key questions coming out of the utilities industry today are, Where does cellular fit within my long-term strategy? and What do I do about the near term requirements for emergency voice services? The Growing Criticality of Cellular Utilities are finding that they have a growing dependence on cellular services. The widespread use of cellular for noncritical applications has subtly become critical as people and process become more integrated; Anytime, anywhere access to key resources and decision makers is already critical; Service technician call ahead supports customer satisfaction objectives and workforce efficiencies; The use of mobile data dispatch will dramatically increase the criticality of cellular; and The increase in real-time data value, from scheduling changes to emergency response, is raising the bar on data communication criticality. The Workforce Mobility Effect A Catalyst for Change The nature of field communications is clearly changing with mobile data. The adoption of mobile computing, changing from clipboard to computer, is enabling more efficient execution and accounting of workforce activities, resulting in real business improvements. A key to realizing these improvements is the real or near-real-time data communications between the dispatch and field crew applications. For this discussion, the term near-real-time describes data synchronization between field and dispatch within a one- or two-hour window. These applications can (but dont have to) communicate real-time changes in priority, crew location information, and routing and mapping. These everyday processes are even more critical when widespread service disruption occurs. The vast majority of utilities that have moved toward workforce mobility have done so by relying heavily on cellular carrier networks. As the workforce moves toward a communications model that includes data as a key aspect, utilities are also facing increasing communications costs and a new dependence on cellular providers. Radio System Challenges and Drivers As the dependence on cellular increases, the traditional radio systems are seeing fewer and fewer users during normal operating hours. Some key issues confronting large-scale field force operations with respect to field communications are: LMR upgrade or replacement costs are simply out of reach for systems that can span 10 to 20,000 square miles; Spectrum availability and suitability limits the ability to harmonize the network using a common platform; Land mobile radio OEMs have consolidated or left the business leaving typically a choice between one or two vendors; and The user base is shrinking as utilities outsource construction and other field services. LMR upgrade and replacement activity is tempered by the realization that even the best LMR today will provide much slower data speeds than what is currently available throughout much of their service territories from cellular providers. Additionally it will require a minimum capacity for emergency response that will be significantly underutilized during normal operations. Furthermore the ecosystem that supports field operations will extend well beyond the enterprise and into the partner community. Providing mobile radio and/or mobile data equipment to that community becomes an even greater challenge. The shift from voice to data services is also driving down capacity requirements, but not scale, resulting in significantly less voice traffic. Many utilities have already shifted noncritical voice communications to carriers and have adopted carrier-provided mobile data services. Tactical vs. Strategic Response Utilities are being forced to confront a very basic question in regard to field communications: Will my response to an aging infrastructure be tactical and focus on current like kind, or will the investment align with a broader strategy that includes everything from electronic meter reading to asset monitoring and intelligent grid initiatives? The Tactical Response The tactical response leads down a narrow path. For example: Fewer and fewer vendors offer land mobile radio equipment; Spectrum availability limits common system architectures; Transition from analog to digital requires a new network design, coverage analysis, site requirements and a likelihood of additional sites; and Minimum capacity requirements for emergency response will result in significant underutilization during normal operations as more field workers use cellular as their primary means of communicating. The fact is that utilities must have communications during critical moments throughout the day. Safety is critical. A renewed investment into reliable communications is inevitable; your crews life may depend on it. But in many cases, real analysis needs to be done before you invest; you need to know what you are getting and not getting; and you often need a new strategic approach to maximizing the value of the investment. The Strategic Response Utilities that have a strategic response take a structured view of current systems, assets and capabilities as well as current and future field requirements. Some of the key strategic challenges are: How do we create the most business value for the least cost? How do we leverage as few solutions as possible to enable business requirements? Does a single solution provide the best solution? Does the solution provide for future communication requirements? The Optimal Comparative Communications Architecture Methodology (OCCAM), a methodology created by IBM, provides a structured approach to building design templates and business case templates for studying the optimal communications architecture for a given environment and business need. This architecture is based on matching the most appropriate communication technology with a given geographic area and business need. The OCCAM approach is broken down into the following phases: Phase 1: Technology Identification During the technology identification phase, the study will focus on identifying relevant communications technologies, understanding each technologys strengths and weaknesses, and documenting the high-level costs associated with each technology. Phase 2: Environment Stratification During the environment stratification phase, the study will focus on identifying the attributes that make up a unique environment. These environments should be general enough to be replicated in multiple geographic locations through the utility service territory but specific enough so as to best meet the financial and business needs for a given area. Phase 3: Design & Business Case Template Development During the design & business case template development phase, the study will leverage the information gathered during the previous phases to develop architectural design templates and business case templates for each of the unique environments identified within the utilitys service territory. Conclusion In applying the OCCAM principles to several utilities that are in need of investing in aging field radio systems, a case can be made for shifting to a cellular-servicebased model. In order for utilities to realize the benefits of this model, investment and cooperation will be vital. Collaboration between cellular carriers and utilities have the potential to drive significant improvement in carrier networks and create unlikely investments in carrier infrastructures from enterprises that can spend less to invest in hardening cellular sites and establishing priority, coverage and availability requirements, than investing in a wholesale replacement of their existing LMR environment. In addition, as carriers advance, whether through licensed WIMAX or future 4G technologies, collaboration will allow both carrier and utility to better understand the needs and capabilities of each other. In this increasingly globally integrated world, the integration of interests between cellular service providers and large-scale mobile workforces has the potential to benefit much more than just the carriers and the workforces. Improvements in backup power facilities, in cooperative priority restoration services, and coverage enhancements that reach every power meter, would translate into greater coverage and availability for us all. Regardless of the final outcome, utilities must have a plan for the future that meets the field requirements of today and tomorrow. Utilities Should: Develop a comprehensive communication road map defined by business goals; Develop detailed communications requirements for achieving business goals; Collaborate with those that have intersecting interests; and Develop a clear path to closing the gap between current state and future state. Utilities Should Not: Always wait for something better; Ignore obsolescence and an aging infrastructure; Develop technology road maps that fail to map to business goals; and Fail to collaborate within their business ecosystem. In IBMs quest to drive innovation that matters, we often encounter the effects of culture and tradition. Moving beyond that is the most difficult step a utility will make. It is also potentially the most beneficial. Filed under: White Papers Tagged under: Utilities About the Author Chris Trayhorn, Publisher of mThink Blue Book Chris Trayhorn is the Chairman of the Performance Marketing Industry Blue Ribbon Panel and the CEO of mThink.com, a leading online and content marketing agency. He has founded four successful marketing companies in London and San Francisco in the last 15 years, and is currently the founder and publisher of Revenue+Performance magazine, the magazine of the performance marketing industry since 2002.