|
|||||
FEATURED TOPICDigital Transition -The term "Digital Transition" describes the process all organizations must go through in the 21st Century, as they leverage new technologies that provide new options for Applications, Equipment, Processes, and Networks that make them more effective. In contrast, the term "Municipal Wireless" is limiting. It puts the network technology ahead of the application and process changes that drive the business case. ORIENTATION |
« May 2008 | Weblog | July 2008 » June 2008 ArchiveThe Coming ExaFlood
This is the ... Internet ... I know, it looks like an internal view of the eye, or something. But this is what the internet is - a conglomeration of various local networks of different sizes. Some say there's a flood a' comin'... I'm not sure about that, but I know that the internet is an ever bigger part of our lives, and we're in a very dynamic situation where what we considered "a whole lot" two years ago is "not that much" two years from now... This brief addresses the growing need for internet bandwidth - communications infrastructure capacity at the backbone and last mile, being driven by a multitude of factors.
How Much is "Enough?" Bret Swanson of the Discovery Institute gave this nascent debate the name "ExaFlood" in his January 2007 Wall Street Journal editorial, entitled The Coming ExaFlood. The word exabyte is the basis for the term "ExaFlood", the neologism created by Swanson. The Exaflood refers to the rapidly increasing torrent of data transmitted over the Internet - it's a classic case of demand for bandwidth out pacing supply. The amount of information people upload, download and share on the Internet is growing at an exponential rate (due in large part to video, audio and photo applications). Meanwhile the capacity of the Internet, its bandwidth, remains limited and susceptible to a "flood" of data. At the Broadband Properties Summit 2007, a panel on the ExaFlood raised a challenge. The panel: David Kozischek, Corning Cable Systems; and David McClure - U.S. Internet Industry Association; Larry Irving, Internet Innovation Alliance. The Challenge: How will the Internet handle the estimated traffic in the near to mid-term? The key point driven home in this fascinating keynote panel discussion was this: Not one, but several signs indicate a growing issue, if not a coming crisis. Whether the ExaFlood represents an an issue, a crisis, or a market opportunity is a matter of perspective, however. Whether there is a growing need for bandwidth is not. The FTTH Council Video on the ExaFlood, summarized in the Signposts inset above and shown below, provides a quick overview of the themes of this discussion. A Matter of Scope When faced with any problem, it helps to put it into perspective before spending too much time on a solution. When it comes to the "ExaFlood," how much do we know about data and the internet? The amount of traffic on the Web has grown dramatically over its short lifetime, and it continues to show strong signs of growth.
Growth is driven by three primary factors: first, number of users - how many access the Web daily; second, frequency - the number of times each user accesses the Web; and third, bandwidth, the type of content that flows over the Web. All three of those factors are on the rise, but it's the third - the type of content - that is most worrisome. The rise of video content, especially high definition video, dramatically increases the amount of data traffic. According to Doug McClure of the US Internet Industry Association, print is not the problem, per se. Where a typewritten page is about 2,000 bytes, and a small graphic image is about 100 kilobytes, the complete works of Shakespeare about 5 megabytes, and an entire pickup full of books about a gigabyte, it would take a billion of those pickup trucks to amount to a single exabyte. It's video that is the bandwidth hog. Standard definition video consumes 450 times the bandwidth of a regular web browsing session, but high definition video bumps that to 2,700 times the bandwidth. YouTube Growth JANUARY 29, 2007 YouTube videos comprise two percent of all Internet traffic. Surveys: Internet Traffic Touched by YouTube JUNE 19, 2007 In six months, YouTube video traffic has grown from two to ten percent of all internet traffic. YouTube Comprises 10% Of All Internet Traffic | WebProNews FEBRUARY 1, 2008 Six months later, YouTube video traffic comprises 20% of all internet traffic. Alexa.com YouTube traffic statistics However one looks at it, this is a statistically significant growth curve that supports the concerns about the ultimate capacity of the internet, fast becoming as critical an infrastructure as our electric grid. The Consequences of Growth As more and more Internet traffic is video traffic, and as more and more subscribers start using broadband to gain access to the Internet, we will face some mixture of these consequences, to an ever growing degree. First, without significant investment in infrastructure, continued growth in network traffic is likely to result in network performance degradation, most likely in the form of slower uploading and downloading. One significant consequence is pressure to manage the Demand Side (i.e., Net Neutrality debate). As one follows this debate, one quickly recognizes the political agenda - there usually is a political agenda when looming shortages and the need for a change in public policy enter the picture. The ExaFlood and Net Neutrality debates are - inevitably - interwoven, and predictably, political. A driver of the conditions that create the Net Neutrality issue in the first place is the scarcity of broadband bandwidth. Incumbents argue for the need to differentiate on service pricing in the face of scarce bandwidth. The ExaFlood is all about scarce infrastructure. Moves by ISPs to suspend heavy users or cut them off entirely reflect the sense of scarcity. Political pressure to allow ISPs to charge varying rates for different levels of service or on the other side, to prohibit different levels of service are each signs of looming issues. Incentives to manage the Supply Side may be a preferred alternative. While there will be increasing business incentives to build more last-mile broadband infrastructure, political incentives may be another way to stimulate broadband infrastructure growth that would relieve such scarcity. Clearly, when it comes to broadband, efforts to fit all this increasing traffic into an already tight pipe (i.e., current network capacity) must be contrasted with some effort to figure out a way to get a robust sustainable infrastructure built out. Anyway this issue is sliced, we're going to have to spend more capital on broadband infrastructure. We should be talking about the best ways to get this infrastructure built. Fiber v. Wireless Broadband In the face of ever growing demand for bandwidth, we need both the infinite capacity of fiber broadband, and the ubiquitous mobility and utility of wireless broadband ... we need to meet the ever growing need for both bandwidth and mobility. We need wired solutions like Cable, and DSL, and wherever possible, FTTH, for reliable connectivity when we are in a fixed position, like at home or at work. We need wireless solutions like cellular wireless and wireless broadband when we are mobile and away from our normal fixed locations. Hot Spots, by the way, are not really adequate substitutes for a mobile solution. They're a portable solution - not mobile, but an alternate fixed location while roaming. Wireless and wired broadband should be considered two equally valid, complementary technologies. Asking which is better pre-supposes that there is a certain need being filled and that wired and wireless are comparable solutions to fill that need. Most times, one is better than the other - the variable is the need for capacity v. the need for mobility. In considering the need for both FTTH and wireless broadband - not one or the other - an apt analogy is " The 747 and the Helicopter." The 747 is hard to beat if the objective is to move a large number of people economically and comfortably over a very long distance, say, over an ocean or between continents. The helicopter is the best solution if the objective is to move a small number of people or things from any one location to another, generally over a relatively short distance, irrespective of airports and runways. There is no better network for capacity than fiber - FTTH offers nearly infinite capacity and long-term viability because of its physics. But there is no better network for mobility than wireless broadband - Wi Fi Mesh offers a relatively low-cost wireless solution that goes up relatively quickly, then provides far more bandwidth than a cellular air card solution to far more people. Which should come first, capacity or mobility? On the one hand, a small town may opt for a FTTH solution first, because they have very poor alternatives for triple play services, and little need for mobility. But after the network is in place they may grow more interested in a Wi Fi Mesh network, because with fiber widely available, the price of Wi Fi Mesh goes down, and its utility goes up. On the other hand, another town, perhaps a little larger than the previous one, may opt for wireless broadband because they already enjoy adequate competition for triple play service, but their city government operations could benefit from more options for mobile solutions. But after the wireless mobile broadband solution is in place, the value that the community places on broadband goes up, and there may be a more compelling appreciation for the benefits of FTTH. It's a matter of priorities and at some point, after some experience is gained, it's about awareness and perspective. But in every case, we must come to some agreement that we all will need both the infinite capacity of FTTH and the ubiquitous mobility of wireless broadband, before all is said and done. Some of us will get it sooner than others. And those local populations that adopt broadband lifestyles, whether fixed or mobile, are more likely to devote the resources needed to get the other. The Debate on Solutions Advocates of Net Neutrality tend to argue in favor of flat pricing for access and separation of infrastructure ownership and/or management service from content delivery service (structural unbundling). Opponents of Net Neutrality argue for continuation of status quo vertical integration, variable pricing options to ensure quality of service and network management flexibility and little-to-no regulation to ensure adequate (abundant) revenue sufficient to finance network construction. There is significant distrust on both sides of the argument, and lots of history.
Source: Wikipedia article on "Bit" But back to the approaching shortage of bandwidth. The first question is whether one believes that there even is a coming shortage. Debates about other shortages seem more long-term - the coming oil shortage as we approach Hubbert's Peak, the theory about approaching finite limits of oil production on the planet; or projections of world population growth and coming food shortages and famine (see also the Limits to Growth by the Club of Rome and Thomas Malthus). The difference is that while the Club of Rome's projections of disaster and calamity have been proven wrong (so far), and Hubbert's Peak remains an unknown (so far), the ExaFlood dilemma seems more immediate and real, and we can still imagine that the problem is somewhat manageable. Drowning in the ExaFlood gives an interesting counterpoint to this suggestion of a coming "flood" of data transmission shortage. Author Tim Lee, a fellow at the Libertarian Cato Institute, makes the argument that we are facing less of a "flood" of bandwidth shortage and more of a simple extension of the continuing need for telecom firms to build out their infrastructure, which supports his rationale for government to get out of the way. Bring On The Exaflood by Bruce Mehlman, former assistant secretary of commerce under President Bush, and Larry Irving, former assistant secretary of commerce under President Bill Clinton - both currently co-chairmen of the Internet Innovation Alliance - embrace the problem and see solutions at hand, as follows. All sides agree that we need ongoing investment in content, massive upgrades of infrastructure and relentless innovation to handle the phenomenal growth in data traffic. We need advancements in how we build and operate networks, including new file compression technologies, upgraded traffic management software, better spam and virus filters, and new delivery platforms. And we need substantial investments in short-haul bandwidth through fiber to homes, broadband over power lines, satellites and fourth-generation wireless networks. The formula for encouraging such extraordinary investments is clear: minimize tax and regulatory constraints and maximize competition. Policymakers across the nation have ample opportunity to implement this blueprint right away. They should pass common-sense legislation such as permanently extending the Internet tax moratorium, building broadband-ready public housing, and cutting depreciation schedules for network equipment and infrastructure. The Bottom Line The ever growing demand for bandwidth appears to be quite real, but also incremental, so it need not be a crisis. But it deserves much greater attention and more creativity. The ExaFlood scenario makes a strong argument on all sides to build out real broadband infrastructure at both the backbone (transport) and last mile levels (100 Mbs - 1Gbs) ASAP. Such speeds mean fiber in all its forms - nothing else will get us those speeds and be truly future-proof, or in this case, Exa-Ready. And the need for infrastructure means letting go of limiting the number of players in the infrastructure business. We need more energy and creativity to accomplish such a Herculean task. Conferences and articles may be good to raise the hue and cry and get people motivated and busy. But this is a project no less exciting than building the railroad network was in the 19th Century, and it demands the attention of leaders at all levels. We should be building out broadband networks, both wired and wireless, as robustly as possible. Given these trends of exploding data needs, most especially the growing popularity of video applications in all their forms, we appear to be at little risk of overbuilding (certainly out on the edge we are not). We are quite likely to see an unending need for bandwidth in the foreseeable future.
Posted on June 30, 2008 at 06:26 AM | Comments (0) The World Wide Web: W3, Web 2.0 and Beyond(Amazing video on Web 2.0 - check it out before reading on - you'll want to watch it a couple of times, it's so chock full of images.) There follows a brief on all things World Wide Web. Lots and lots of links. Be sure to watch both of the YouTube videos on this post, you won't regret it!
The internet is the system of connected local area networks, the network of networks that uses Internet Protocol (IP) language as a common system of data transfer. The World Wide Web - 'Web" for short - is the system of hypertext documents connected by hyperlinks, accessed via a Web browser (Internet Explorer, Safari, Firefox, etc.) over the internet. The concept of the Web has to do with how we extract value out of internet connectivity, and significant changes are afoot, highlighted by what has come to be called Web 2.0. The Web Grows Up Web 2.0 is a good jumping off point to discuss the evolution and implications of the World Wide Web. More important than the term Web 2.0 is the evolution it embodies. Web 2.0 as a label emerged at the Web 2.0 Conference in 2004 sponsored by Tim O'Reilly. So far, feedback on this concept is wide-ranging, from "it's a load of hype" to "it's the second coming of the Web." For the unitiated, Wikipedia is a great resource on the relatively new phenomenon of Web 2.0 - see both the Web 2.0 listing, as well as the entire Web 2.0 Category listing. At its most simple, Web 2.0 is a term that describes what the Web is becoming: websites are more and more interactive, now including features like YouTube video clips, blogs, wikis and podcasts - tools for interactivity - that provide much more utility than older websites, which tended to be more static presentations of information, with limited e-commerce capabilities. Here's a synopsis of what the Web looks like (looked like, this was written nearly three years ago): The scope of the Web today is hard to fathom. The total number of Web pages, including those that are dynamically created upon request and document files available through links, exceeds 600 billion. That's 100 pages per person alive. How could we create so much, so fast, so well? In fewer than 4,000 days, we have encoded half a trillion versions of our collective story and put them in front of 1 billion people, or one-sixth of the world's population. That remarkable achievement was not in anyone's 10-year plan. The accretion of tiny marvels can numb us to the arrival of the stupendous. Today, at any Net terminal, you can get: an amazing variety of music and video, an evolving encyclopedia, weather forecasts, help wanted ads, satellite images of anyplace on Earth, up-to-the-minute news from around the globe, tax forms, TV guides, road maps with driving directions, real-time stock quotes, telephone numbers, real estate listings with virtual walk-throughs, pictures of just about anything, sports scores, places to buy almost anything, records of political contributions, library catalogs, appliance manuals, live traffic reports, archives to major newspapers - all wrapped up in an interactive index that really works.
This website also includes a list of the Best (Or Most Interesting) Web 2.0 Definitions and Explanations - as well as The Best Web 2.0 Software of 2005. The Meme A meme -a new word for self-propagating units of cultural information - is a great example of the new Web 2.0 world, where people are connected and enabled to circulate ideas at the speed of light. The "meme map" above is an early attempt to forge a group consensus on the concept of Web 2.0. Note the fluid, dynamic nature of the Web. The Web is vast, decentralized, democratic, and dynamic, changing and evolving before our very eyes. The Web has become transcendent, so we must approach it peripherally to grasp and describe it. Web 2.0 is actually a meme itself. It created quite a buzz in 2005 and 2006, but has been criticized as one more example of the Gartner Hype Cycle, which sees exaggerated interest in any new technology typically followed by a commensurate dramatic fall off of interest, then a discovery of true value as understanding of the technology and its utility takes hold. Much of the material available to understand Web 2.0 is indeed from the 2005-2006 time period.
Web 2.0 Tag Cloud image from Wikipedia Web 2.0 Applications One way to understand Web 2.0 is to look at software applications that embody the new Web approach. MySpace and facebook are emblems of the social networking trend, where the Web is used in new ways to connect people with other people. Google Maps is a powerful tool that puts the user out in space, looking down on the planet. Flickr lets us all share our photos with each other; YouTube does the same with our home movies. Del.icio.us introduces the concept of tagging and bookmarks, more Web-oriented ways to label what we put out on the Web, and find what we're looking for. Looking at information organization is a good departure to better understand Web 2.0. Tagging, bookmarking, and tag clouds, like the one in the graphic above, are new ways of organizing information into folksonomies, a means to access information more accommodating to the decentralized nature of the Web than the traditional taxonomies of static categories and subcategories. David Weinberger's book, Everything Is Miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder shows that the way we deal with information has transformed with a maturing Web. Search Engines provide us a tool so that we no longer have to have "a place for everything and everything in its place," at least when it comes to the digital "everythings" in our lives. We can leave them in a "big, messy pile," and when everything is tagged with descriptors, we just need a good search engine and a knack for describing our search problem to find what we're looking for - we don't need to remember where we filed the item. According to a review on Boing Boing, we've traditionally divided the world into categories, topics, and hierarchies because physical objects need to be in one place or another (they can't be in all the places they might belong). But computers and the Internet turn this approach on its head: because a computer can "put things" in as many categories as they need to be in, at little to no cost, and because individuals can classify knowledge, tasks, and objects idiosyncratically with "tags," the hierarchy, best characterized by the Dewey Decimal system we grew up with in libraries, has become an outdated mode to organize information - at least when it concerns digital information. Web 2.0 Principles and Lessons Tim O'Reilly laid out these underlying principles that led him and his colleagues to come up with this terminology and the lessons learned with this new "Web 2.0 perspective." (see What Is Web 2.0. Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, published on-line on September 30, 2005). 1. The Web is a platform where the value of the software is proportional to the scale and dynamism of the data it helps to manage, i.e., build bridges to more data, not fences around your data (e.g., Google). Leverage customer-self service and algorithmic data management to reach out to the entire web, to the edges and not just the center, to the long tail and not just the head (e.g., Overture and AdSense). The service automatically gets better the more people use it (e.g., BitTorrent).
2. Embrace the power of the web to harness collective intelligence, so that network effects from user contributions are the key to market dominance (e.g., Wikipedia). Blogs are the best example of this principle. ... like Wikipedia, blogging harnesses collective intelligence as a kind of filter. What James Suriowecki calls "the wisdom of crowds" comes into play, and much as PageRank produces better results than analysis of any individual document, the collective attention of the blogosphere selects for value. 3. Data is the next Intel Inside, as data become the building blocks for Web 2.0 applications (e.g., GoogleMaps). O'Reilly envisions a coming battle over control as data owners line up against applications that seek to leverage that data. 4. End of the Software Release Cycle. When software is viewed as a service rather than a product, operations that ensure service quality become a core competency, users become co-developers, and development moves from an episodic activity characterized by releases, to a constant activity marked by fluid updates. 5. Lightweight programming models drive several shifts, lightweight programming models that allow for loosely coupled systems, a preference for syndication over coordination, and designs that anticipate being hacked and mixed on the back end (designers start the process and let the hordes of smart programmers leverage their creativity to continue the process beyond the original vision, in new - and unpredictable - directions).
6. Software Above the Level of a Single Device is a paradigm shift required by web-based businesses, where the web and web services pull together resources to provide a service not possible without a network paradigm. iTunes and TiVo are examples of services that manage data as a service and leverage network dynamics. 7. Rich User Experiences. As new applications are written with the Web as a platform, the creators can leverage not only the new capabilities that network dynamics make available, but also the best of the old PC-based applications, which results in a delightful, new, rich user experience. This transition provides new companies with a great opportunity, and incumbents with an ongoing challenge. Adapting to a New World Order
Graham highlights three points in his blog about Web 2.0. First, he says consider the new ways of designing Web applications that are more intuitive and easier to use, with the help of tools like Ajax. Second, he says that democracy matters in the Web 2.0 world, highlighting things like Wikipedia and blogs, where normal people have access through the Web to make a difference, to gain an audience, and to impact the business world without having to go through the establishment, VCs, or an editor. Finally, Graham says that the new mantra of "Don't Maltreat Users" is vital to Web 2.0. When an average Joe can reach millions through the Web, millions who interact at their leisure, it makes good business sense for a Web 2.0 business to be as affordable and user-friendly as it can be, to prevent competitors from undercutting the business plan and to keep those millions coming back. If a Web 2.0 business is not on its toes, its audience can fly away in a heartbeat. Respect for the customer has moved to the front of the line. This lack of initial "stickiness" is a huge difference between the old and new worlds on the Web. In the Web 2.0 world, there are severe and immediate consequences for not putting one's best foot forward with customers. That's good news for customers, bad news for more traditional, less hyper competitive businesses and organizations. The rapid advances being made with Web 2.0 companies should indicate to cities the pace of change and changing expectations. The days of of playing it safe and getting by with minimal change as a late adopter are ending, or at least, they carry an ever higher cost. City officials, just like private sector business people, must recognize the need to adapt to the trends expressed by Web 2.0 companies because citizens are users and increasingly will have these same tools at their disposal. The environment is changing more rapidly than we think and the business and political structures and practices that we are used to will not be the same in 10 years, maybe even in five years. At the risk of understating the case, the internet and the World Wide Web are intricately connected. Just as computer software and hardware progressed in tandem throughout the early days of the Computer Age, we see the internet and the World Wide Web evolving in similar fashion. Continuous extension of the broadband internet, bringing more and more Web surfers onto the Ethernet waves, will hasten the changes discussed in this analysis of the evolving World Wide Web. Expansion of broadband will be helped along by technologies like Wi Fi Mesh and WiMAX, two technologies that are driving accelerated adoption of community broadband. City leaders can no more choose to avoid the changes of the evolving Web than individuals can. We can turn away, but evolution will progress apace. We withdraw from this march at our own risk, making catching up that much harder to do when we're finally compelled to act.
Posted on June 28, 2008 at 04:04 PM | Comments (0) Quick, Cheap, and Good (Enough)Especially notable in the public sector are the wasted cycles spent trying to please all parties, trying to reach that perfect solution that will meet all the requirements of a project. But as we know living in the real world, its extremely rare to find that perfect solution. This brief outlines the issues associated with seeking the perfect instead of the best solution, and suggests an alternate pathway to get to the destination incrementally rather than in one fell swoop.
Government agencies are most guilty of pursuing, albeit with the best of intentions, the perfect solution at the expense of an adequate, but good solution. Most often this is done by adhering to a rigid process of competitive bidding and formal rules, only to turn away competitive but partial solutions, or worse, to accept the lowest cost solution, one which may well not be the best-fit solution. Too often, the result of this mindset is the opposite of perfect - the worst outcomes - either doing nothing - wasting valuable time and resources - or getting taken to the cleaners. This brief is intended as a challenge to the status quo of public bidding and vendor selection, which too often seeks optimal solutions on behalf of the public interest, but ends up with sub-optimal results. MetroNetIQ suggests that its time for a reality reset when it comes to city government processes and results. Reality Reset We learn through buying and selling, gaining experience in the marketplace, that giving time to a vendor at the door or a salesperson on the phone is an actual commercial exchange - while accepting a vendor overture rarely results in the promises that first come across the threshold, it may well be worth the time if one learns something. In point of fact, "Free" is always subsidized by someone, somewhere, so there is someone picking up the tab out there, carrying an expectation of a payoff, whenever costs are incurred. There's an implied debt whenever a gift is accepted. Beware the gift that comes with strings attached. There is almost always a sacrifice of quality, for instance, when a "free" gift is accepted. It is rare that something of true quality is offered for free. Paying for something should always be acceptable, IF there is a fair exchange of value - that is, in fact, the very definition of commerce. "One can't get something for nothing" is a primary lesson of adulthood that we all must accept and keep in mind, because we're constantly told the opposite by people who want something from us. Growing up means accepting reality, and one of the toughest lessons to learn and relearn is that "free" is not, in fact, "free," no matter how attractive it may look. 2. Low Bid is Not Always Best Bid. If we can't have it for free, we often shouldn't even want it for cheap! This is worth a small digression... The Golden Triangle When it comes to digital transitions and metropolitan broadband projects, all of us are bounded by some basic constraints that govern any procurement or project. There's a business maxim one could call the "Rule of the Business Golden Triangle." You may recognize it by the name of the Project Triangle: you'll no doubt recognize its truths as you read on.
According to the Rule, when it comes to procurements and projects, one cannot have one's cake and eat it too. That's reality in the business world. The three aspects of the golden triangle that control and impact any project manager's prospects are Time (fast v. slow, sooner v. later), Quality (high quality v. low quality), and Money (less expensive v. more expensive). To recognize the truth of the Rule, just try to imagine getting just what one would want - the Best Case: very high quality, immediately, for very little money - let's face it, that's not going to happen, that's a fantasy world. Or imagine the polar opposite, the Worst Case: getting something of very low quality over a long period, with project delays, while spending a lot - unfortunately, that may just happen, and that's getting taken to the cleaners. While one extreme is possible but unlikely (the best case), another is regrettably common (the worst case, above). The rational choices in a procurement or business decision guide the outcomes, and too often the worst case is the result, when better alternatives are available. Alternately, project managers should focus on best possible outcomes in the middle of those two extremes - they should pick two factors that are most important and relax the third constraint: Middle of the Road Outcomes a) Fast and less expensive, but lower quality. Strategy: Lower one's standards (accept less quality or fewer options, usually achieved through extensive planning and negotiation between stakeholders to determine the must-have items and the nice-to-have items and then setting priorities). b) High quality and less expensive, but takes more time. Strategy: Start the project earlier (to be a responsible steward of time as a resource, a city leader would start a low-grade project immediately to get a jump on things and then move at a reasonable pace to allow adequate time to find savings and develop creative approaches that would leverage existing assets or competitive advantages). c) Fast and high quality, but costs more. Strategy: Pay more (budget more to accommodate a higher expense, create a strong business case to justify a financial strategy, identify alternate grant or funding sources, etc.).
The bottom line? If one is interested in digital transition and metropolitan broadband as an option for one's community, one is best served to bring in professional help to find the right fit, devise a strategy, and develop a business case, all of which will position one and allow one and one's city to: There's no substitute for: Getting back then to the Reality Reset of city government processes and results: 3. A changing environment demands adaptation; doing nothing is a choice too. The essence of denial is that if I don't recognize something, if I avoid facing it, then it doesn't exist. Living in denial is alternately seen as childish, immature, or unhealthy behavior. It's often called various things in shorthand: "Burying your head in the sand." "Running away from your problems." "Delaying the inevitable." Traffic increases or economic activity dwindles. Without a clear strategy to monitor a changing world and adapt a city or organization's strategy to manage its position in that world, it becomes inevitable that one's position will decline. Any system faces decline without new energy being fed into it. The concept of Entropy is a physical reality, not readily understood, and even less readily accepted by the psyche - it says that left alone, all things will decay over time, from a state of order to a state of disorder. Quit investing in the future, and watch the world around you slip into decay. If the world is constantly changing, then one must constantly spend energy (time, money, etc.) to adapt in order to stay even, and spend even more energy (time, money, etc.) in order to move ahead and do better than the rest. Doing nothing is a choice, but in a highly dynamic environment, it becomes a choice to fall behind. No longer is it the case where one could pretend that high tech did not matter - to pretend otherwise, to cling to old analog tools and processes, is to accept less efficiency and more cost. That is not to say that all things digital are good, necessary or even effective; to discern the mix between old and new requires an investment of time and attention, to gain the understanding and experience to tell the difference. The silicon chip is now pervasive, and increasingly, connectivity over an IP network is becoming just as pervasive. To deny the need for broadband is to deny reality. To deny the need for mobile broadband is equally evasive, because as new tools become available, they offer an adaptability challenge that we either accept or deny. Going through a digital transition is a matter of When, not If. 5. Life is a Series of Choices and Consequences. Individually and collectively, we each choose to be In the Game or On the Sidelines. There are costs and benefits to either choice, but the reality is that we do not get a third choice. The Reality of Freedom means that there are Choices and there are Consequences. Having to choose is indeed a burden, just as not having an ability to choose is a burden. Life is a burden, that's reality. Freedom of choice places a premium on education and learning to make good choices, profitable choices, beneficial choices, healthy choices, just choices. Refusing to make a choice is in itself a different kind of choice, with its own set of consequences, including the lack of experience that comes with being engaged in a project. Delaying a choice opportunity is a strategy that can be appropriate or inappropriate, given the circumstances at hand. Denying a choice opportunity, at least as an adult in a free society, is an aversion to accepting reality. Sometimes reality can present a series of "bad" choices that can seem like the same as no choice at all. But in that case, we are forced to weigh the outcomes and choose the least bad option - that is reality - to say that there is no choice is to play the victim, to deny that one is in control. On this topic, I'm obliged to share a statement actually made by the CEO of a major corporation where I worked - I was only a week or two into the new job, when I took my first trip to corporate headquarters to attend an annual all-hands conference. The CEO gave a headliner speech, where he described the bleak business environment in our industry at the time and shared this pearl. That was in 1995 - five years later, the 70 year old company was acquired. The CEO was right, but he also steered the company into a safe harbor as his final duty. At the time, I was shocked to hear those words in a public speech, but they stuck with me, 15 years later. The essence of good leadership in bad times is to make hard decisions that offer the best outcome over the long run, with the least pain in the short term. Reality in life is about accepting life as it comes at one and doing the best one can with what one has to work with at the time. It's not all that hard to analyze what we all now face in regards to digital transitions and metropolitan broadband when one accepts reality. The reality we face is that all cities, all organizations, all communities will have to go through a Digital Transition sooner or later. In a sense, a Digital Transition, can be looked at as making the most of a necessary evil, along the lines of the Shit Sandwich analogy.
Having accepted Reality as what it is, we can start having the adult conversation about what a future based on digital tools connected with ubiquitous broadband would look like, and how we can get from here to there. Optimal v. Best Facing Reality is acknowledging that while we would all prefer the perfect, no-risk outcome, it is not attainable. Therefore, we have to look at what is attainable given the current set of constraints and position ourselves to find the best fit at the time. Such a "rough order of magnitude" or "ROM" strategy accepts that there will be time after any decision to improve on the situation and then make subsequent decisions with more options at hand. A ROM strategy assesses the situation and the set of options and compares the indicated outcomes with the default outcome, which is doing nothing and accepting the status quo. If that assessment indicates that the situation is improved with one or more of the options, they can be weighed against each other and one option will be indicated to be the best solution at that time - even better than taking no action at all. Based on the need for quality (and some situations carry grave risks if quality is not maintained), the decision-making process and line of reasoning offered in this brief suggest that a solution that is quick and cheap, most times, may be good enough to move forward. For those times when quality is the standard, then one can choose to move forward quickly, accepting that it will cost more, OR one can choose to use time to one's advantage, saving money by going slowly and deliberately ahead. Whichever of the three options chosen, this analysis suggests that moving forward in a time of rapid change is generally preferable to standing still, all other things being equal.
Posted on June 23, 2008 at 11:48 AM | Comments (1) Digital Video and Voice - Forget About It!VOIP and VoD are two killer apps that are bringing enormous pressure to bear on two very large industries. And broadband internet is driving adoption of both of these applications. For those without broadband access - Forget About It. A Once & Future Killer App One of the worst punishments man can suffer is isolation from others. The sound of another human voice is vital to the human experience. In March 1876, Alexander Graham Bell and his assistant famously and successfully transformed spoken voice sound waves into electric analog signals to enable voice communication over distances. His "telephone" innovation, patented in that year, proved a social revolution. The term "killer application," or "killer app" for short, means a "technological innovation that has a transformative impact on society." One would have to call Bell's telephone the quintessential killer app, and so it remains.
Telephone innovations progressed over the next one hundred years or so, until a truly dramatic innovation occurred with the adaptation of traditional analog wave transmission services to the digital realities of the internet world. VOIP is dramatically innovative in at least two ways. First, because VOIP is a digital application being provided over the public internet, it provides a competitive alternative to voice communication services provided by a telecom company over proprietary telephone company lines, opening up competitive options that never existed before, which lowers prices and increases service options. Second, because VOIP is not an analog but a digital application, it opens up an array of accompanying add-on services - not available with traditional analog telephony, such as getting voice mails as "WAV" files right there along with your emails. While VOIP turns any laptop into a "soft" telephone, its sound quality still depends on network-provided "quality of service" or "QOS" to prevent dropped packets that cause the voice signal to become choppy. VOIP is a killer app, but is still coming of age and is not widely adopted yet. A Second Killer App Transmission of video content over distances is another killer app of modern life. While the actual moment of the invention of television is a far less documented moment than Bell’s phone call to his assistant, few can argue that television has transformed our lives. Extending television content services to consumers and households has differed from telephone services in several ways. First, the primary television network was wireless. Rather than telephone lines extended to households and businesses to connect telephones at the ends, the television network was comprised a broadcast network of towers and stations, and wireless receivers at the ends - television sets or "TVs" for short.
Second, from the beginning, TV sets were far more complex and expensive devices than telephones. And while telephones, at least until the past few decades, were leased by the telephone company, TVs have always been end devices that were purchased by users. Third, voice content is user-created, while video content was "produced" by professionals and either broadcast "live" or stored on a storage medium and broadcast later. The first major video innovation was to finance content with commercial sponsors, who were allowed to insert advertisements, which came to be known as "commercials," directly into the video programs. This ad-supported content provisioning model allowed content to be broadcast over-the-air for "free" to users who had invested in a TV set. The advent of cable networks, originally intended to provide content services to areas that had poor over-the-air reception of the video signal, changed things dramatically. Cable providers grew into large video distribution companies that generated significant revenue from selling bundled video content. In addition, video became available with the invention of analog VHS video tape players and cassette, which could be purchased, but more often were rented. While digital innovation substituted DVDs for VHS tapes, the business model stayed the same until recently. While professionally produced video over a cable service remains the norm, the rise of broadband internet has made available new services for accessing video content, including streaming video from companies like Netflix, peer-to-peer video content using technology from BitTorrent, and user-produced video content from YouTube. The Triple Play On the backs of their respective killer apps and slim to no competition in local and regional markets, telephone companies and cable MSOs grew into very large, very successful business ventures providing access and content services over their privately-owned networks. In many, if not most markets, telephone and cable companies offered core services under a monopoly franchise. When the internet gained sufficient interest to look like it would be around for a while, first the cable companies, then the telephone companies moved in to provide internet access services that were a step ahead of dial-up internet access in terms of both speed and quality. High-speed internet service, or "broadband" as it came to be known, was until recently loosely defined as "service above 200 Kbs in 'throughput' speed." Of course, the definition of broadband is in the eye of the beholder, and increasingly "broadband" is viewed both domestically and internationally as more in the range of 1.5 - 10 Mbs. In more advanced countries, even these speeds are viewed as relatively slow. Cable companies were first to offer broadband service over their coaxial cable networks, starting in the mid-late 1990s. Telephone companies were late to the game, providing broadband service over their copper wires with a technology they termed "digital subscriber line" or "DSL." To win market share away from their cable competitors, telephone companies offered service that was a little slower, but much less expensive. The strategy worked and now cable and telephone companies together account for nearly all of the residential broadband service in the United States. Broadband has proven a boon for telephone and cable companies for two reasons. First, as their base level offerings come under more competition and revenues decline, broadband revenue has provided high-margin revenues for both telephone and cable companies. Second, offering broadband to their customer base provided cable companies the ability to enter their telephone competitor's space with a competing voice product - VOIP. Having gained some experience with broadband, cable companies recognized that they could provide digital VOIP and offer their customers not only video and broadband, but also voice, for a bundled set of services that came to be called the "Triple Play." In response, the telephone companies soon began to partner with satellite dish networks in order to match the cable Triple Play bundle. Over time, telecom giant Verizon started offering a Triple Play bundle where its fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) network had been deployed, and as it became capable, ATT did the same under its U-verse label in select markets. Broadband as the Enabler When it comes to new digital innovations in video and voice, broadband is a required element to be able to receive such service. The broadband internet offers consumers an alternate channel to gain access to new voice and video service options. On the voice side, besides the cable company VOIP offer, numerous smaller providers are active. Perhaps the most innovative VOIP application is Skype, which began as a simple software application that could be downloaded to a PC or laptop to enable free VOIP, but both parties to a call had to use the application. The original free Skype service that turned laptops into soft phones was soon joined by SkypeIn and SkypeOut VOIP service that allowed Skype users to make and receive calls to and from regular telephone users for a modest fee. These services have seen strong acceptance for international calls especially, given the high rates prevalent for such calls. On the video side, progress is somewhat slower, as professionally produced cable TV content must be acquired under license before being transmitted over the internet. Netflix has begun to offer VoD movies, and BlockBuster has followed suit. YouTube videos are becoming ever more common on websites, and are especially in evidence during the 2008 political season. As broadband penetration grows, expect both VOIP and VoD options to proliferate, making broadband an even more worthwhile service offer.
ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT - The reader is encouraged to link to this post and to share this material, with the understanding that they provide an attribution to MetroNetIQ and share any alterations with MetroNetIQ.
Posted on June 22, 2008 at 04:35 PM | Comments (0) Time for a Second Look at Public Private Partnerships
So far, "Public Private Partnerships" mean that the public sector entity supports a private sector network operator/investor by agreeing to act as an "anchor tenant" by signing up for a long-term service contract, thereby lowering the risk of the project, ensuring project financing, and wooing over a reluctant private sector partner. So far. Things are changing, and I would suggest it's time to take a second look at what such partnerships might entail. Fact is, there are many successful network operators out there that do not consider the public sector to be within their tightly focused field of vision. They have achieved success with wireless broadband precisely by avoiding the mess that Muni Wireless has become. So they eschew any involvement at all with "government." But consider what would be possible if these successful network operators opened themselves up to the possibility of supporting a field digital transition project in a neighboring community. They already have a network in operation, servicing private sector clients. They have already made the required investments. Odds are, they have slack capacity in backhaul bandwidth and local area coverage...they could help, if they chose to. This brief argues for a second look at how we define a Public Private Partnership, on both sides. Let's open our minds to the possibilities presented by this time of change. Public Demand for Access and Applications Successful broadband network operators with a history of focusing on private sector clients should take a second look and reconsider public sector broadband clients, given recent changes in an evolving market. And public sector organizations interested in digital transition and broadband access options should look to their immediate neighborhood for partners. Despite discredited business models that bring bad press, municipal interest in wireless broadband continues to grow, being driven by a growing awareness of the attractive economics of field digital transition and wireless broadband applications. Public sector entities are beginning to recognize wireless broadband applications and their supporting networks as a way to contain city operating budgets. Private sector-focused network operators should consider two principal areas to take advantage of this trend and provide new revenue with little added risk: 1) operating public sector-owned networks in exchange for access to bandwidth on those networks; or 2) providing public sector clients access services using privately-held networks already in place, augmenting the networks where necessary based on market opportunity. They should consider these select market segments: 1) cities sufficiently motivated to invest in network assets; 2) cities adjacent to private sector networks that may be extended to provide service to interested public sector clients; or 3) cities where these two trends converge: a city may invest in a partial network in order to leverage an adjacent private operation. Private Sector Success By and large, private sector firms that have been successful so far in leveraging 802.11 technologies and point-to-point wireless broadband strategies have opted not to pursue public sector business opportunities. Public Sector Failure The case for public involvement in wireless broadband networks remains to be made, and it hasn't been helped by the speculative quality and poor performance of early efforts ("Earthlink," "Free Wi Fi"). Those private providers that pursued public initiatives were undone by "bad" business models, high equipment costs, inadequate capabilities and poorly financed networks. Paradoxically, despite bad press and public failure, public managers are growing more interested in wireless networks, but no longer to serve the disadvantaged or to provide free services. Interest is now based on the potential cost savings found in wireless broadband applications, driven by the proliferation of Wi Fi client-side chip sets. For example, a recent survey of 33 cities in Orange County, CA, showed the following interest levels in wireless broadband applications among "currently deployed" or "planned" networks: While demand for such applications on the public side is rising, few if any successful operators with demonstrated skills in 802.11 or point-to-point networks with private sector clients have offered connectivity services to meet such growing demand for public sector-focused networks to provide the access needed for the municipal applications. The Best of Both Worlds: New Varieties of Public Private Partnerships Publicly-owned, privately-operated networks: A new business model is emerging where a city may choose to leverage access to advantageous long-term bond financing in order to optimize public control and benefit by owning the network. The lowest risk approach for cities that opt to invest in infrastructure will be to seek private sector partners as operators and to develop market opportunities based on low or no-cost access to excess wireless bandwidth. In a win/win scenario, the private operator would gain competitive market advantage without expending capital on network construction. Those private sector operators who currently enjoy success in private-sector operations are best positioned and the most experienced to take advantage of this trend. Extensions of privately-owned & operated networks: A private network operator may choose to leverage current assets by extending existing network operations to adjacent cities or towns, as an alternative to municipally-initiated green field projects, the current norm. Like Cablevision's plans to take advantage of existing wired network assets by extending their reach with 802.11 technology to service municipalities and their own customers with mobile broadband services, any private network operator has an opportunity to react to local demand for a municipal network, or pro-actively promote the same where it makes sense. Where a private network owner can extend current subscriber-focused network operations at low risk, the operator is able to more fully utilize current investments, whether in network bandwidth, backhaul injection facilities, pole attachment agreements, or network operating centers (NOCs). City departments seeking wireless broadband applications that sign long-term service contracts provide stable secondary revenue for operators whose primary revenue source remains private subscribers. The Bottom Line Local public sector wireless broadband opportunities complement private network operators' core business (subscriber or client-based revenue) by adding new revenue and spreading fixed costs over a wider base. Left unaddressed, the need for broadband connectivity and services to support digital transformation projects will likely be met by cities providing such services to themselves or bringing in new entry operators who see public private partnerships as attractive points of market entry.
ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT - The reader is encouraged to link to this post and to share this material, with the understanding that they provide an attribution to MetroNetIQ and share any alterations with MetroNetIQ.
Posted on June 17, 2008 at 08:50 AM | Comments (0) Communities & Communications
We human beings really have it rough. We can't live without each other, but being in a society can be such a pain in the ass! So many of our problems stem from either the inability or unwillingness to communicate effectively with each other, or the difficulties we find in making our communities work equitably and functionally. The key to both age-old problems is improved communication and more effective communities by way of a digital transition and broadband communications networks. We need to all try to understand each other and get along better, because We Are Family... Common Roots Having something in common is the basis for all friendship; the connections we form with others are the basis of the society we create. From those connections we gain the experience we need to establish trust. From trust, we get the courage to accomplish things by working together, to share risks and reap greater rewards. Our joint actions involve bringing things together.
All those things we really enjoy in life, those things that make it all worthwhile, come from connecting with others and finding a way to live and work together. Having something in common is where it all begins. With that, we are a part of a greater whole, a part of a community. And as a group of individuals with a common bond, we must communicate. We communicate with more variety now than we used to; our need to communicate has in no way diminished, and we have more tools at our disposal. It's far easier now to pick up the phone and make a call, in fact, long distance is even beginning to fade away as a communications term. And then there's email. While we may send fewer letters, we actually end up writing much more often by using these new electronic media. An essential element for all this communication is "always on" broadband infrastructure. Broadband technology makes it ever easier to communicate and stay in touch, to form, build and keep communities. In a world where events and activities seem to conspire to pull us apart, broadband has become one of our most potent and vital tools. We'll never stop talking, never stop connecting. Our need to stay connected will not diminish. Broadband is but one more step in an evolutionary path to find easier, better, and cheaper means of staying in touch with our many communities. Local Community Support Communities must communicate internally and with the outside world and they rely on the dominant telecommunication providers (cable and telecom) to provide the broadband access service they need. In the absence of such traditional connectivity, communities must find a 'Plan B." But as corporate entities, the dominant ISPs believe that broadband is a corporate service that they choose to provide to markets for a profit. They believe that broadband should resemble their traditional service models, It is anathema to traditional ISPs for broadband communication to look like other access services delivered over local distribution networks that society has installed over the years (electricity, water, gas), regardless of any logical argument or community rationale. But there's no good reason broadband access projects should not be free to dip from both wells. They can use both approaches as models for services as well as infrastructure deployment. Broadband can be part of a service bundle (like from a cable or DSL provider), or it can be yet one more access service provided more like a utility (like electricity). And to ensure coverage to all markets in a timely fashion, communities are likely to employ such a utility approach in some areas to gain broadband access, and when they do, the effort will require local community support.
Building the trunk line, the core of any network, is not like building the local distribution networks out at the edges: the trunk lines serve everyone, so there's less risk of cost recovery when everyone pays in to the pot - there's a vested interest for all in seeing that these core networks get built. So at first, the core gets more attention. But when it comes to local distribution networks, nobody outside the local community cares that much, at least not nearly as much as the local population does. Locals have incentives - they experience infrastructure problems daily, while visitors suffer only a temporary inconvenience and then leave the area - and their problems - behind. Beyond the primetime NFL cities - in other words, "all the rest of us", building citywide networks out at the edge requires two critical elements: 1) local initiative and community support; and 2) some form of firm market security (often, a monopoly grant or long-term contract) to ensure both a broad base of revenue and the promise of long-term capital recovery. Without those two critical elements, towns are stuck with the status quo - the networks they currently have in place - or their new local distribution networks will only get built out in spots where cost recovery can be assured. That's why build-out of local Last Mile Broadband has been so slow - it depends on local community support, and lacking any cohesive national strategy to give that process direction, local politics remains a slow, stop-start business.
Distribution Networks It has ever been the case with distribution networks. Build-outs of other networks have shown two predominate paths: In contrast to these established services, broadband service is still very new, only a little more than ten years old. Largely, it is supplied over existing cable and telecom networks, and it has indeed proven to be a high-value service where it's been offered. The cable and telecom networks have taken us a long way in this first phase, adapting their existing networks to provide faster and faster access service, bundled with content or other services in most cases. Of course, current providers would continue under this model - to them, it ain't broke, so why fix it? And broadband service has proven very lucrative so far.
One thing, however, is certain. Given ten years of experience with broadband, we can now conclude that more creativity and local coordination will be needed if local broadband distribution networks are ever to be built out over large areas, or if they're ever to be built out anytime soon. Communities Take Control Despite recent set-backs with initial business models, today's digital transition initiatives merely follow in the footsteps of history, as local communities take the imitative to bring in a vital utility service. As broadband grows in importance, more local communities will grow impatient with existing telecom and cable providers and step up to exert more local control and create a sense of urgency. But it's a slow process. Wi Fi Mesh and WiMAX, the latest iterations of wireless broadband innovation, are so new that unanswered questions remain. Fiber networks have more proven value, but they're very expensive. Ultimately, local broadband network projects move forward with local community initiative and support from local governments, businesses and community leaders. Such leaders have two choices: 1) strike a political and economic accommodation with existing telecom and cable incumbents, cellular carriers, and/or successful new service providers; or 2) strike out on their own. Digital transition initiatives with broadband applications and wireless broadband networks provide a quick technology fix, but where they manage to take hold, expect at some point for the wireless phase to be followed and complemented with a fiber network phase for long-term sustainability. But regardless of the technology at the edge, it's still the politics that drive the solution in the end. When it comes to local distribution networks, the public and the private sector need each other. The most efficient solutions marry the respective advantages of public and private sector players and help offset disadvantages. All previous types of distribution networks offer lessons on where community digital transition and broadband network projects can go, if there is political will at the local level. And as leaders on both sides come to grips with this economic and political reality and gain some flexibility, we'll begin to see the pace of last mile digital transitions and broadband projects increase. While history gives us valuable lessons about economic and political constraints, the Internet has taught us a lot recently about emergence and bottom-up solutions. Either existing leaders will begin to catch on, try new approaches and get busy, or new solutions and new leaders will emerge to go around them - when it comes to broadband infrastructure, we must insist: "Lead, follow, or get out of the way!"
ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT - The reader is encouraged to link to this post and to share this material, with the understanding that they provide an attribution to MetroNetIQ and share any alterations with MetroNetIQ.
Posted on June 15, 2008 at 10:52 PM | Comments (0) March to MobilityAt the TAGITM conference last week, a thought occurred to me. Cities spend so much time and money and energy focused on the IT shop inside their city buildings. They have desktops, servers, networks, telephones, storage, software - it's their Enterprise function, and the IT support crew was out in force to make sure their needs are met. Most of the vendors were there to address the needs of the cities as it pertains to their enterprise IT functions, inside the house. Yet we know by experience that about half of any municipal workforce spends at least some of their time on a regular basis out in the field, and many, most especially the public safety folks, spend most of their time in the field. Their needs are assumed to be met by radios and cell phones, perhaps some air cards. So the mission of Field Digital Transition is to take the Enterprise functionality out of the office and into the field, to make employees more functional and efficient when they are away from their office. IT departments spend most of their time and money trying to get more efficient inside the buildings, tweaking what are no doubt already pretty efficient operations. Here is the magic of this space: IT departments could start spending some of that money on their field applications to make their field employees more effective. And given the current rudimentary state of field mobile data access, it is likely that the first waves of investment would produce significant savings in the first couple of rounds. And that is because, as we know, we are increasingly mobile in our lives and on the job. We have come to expect to stay connected by voice wherever we are. I call it the March to Mobility, and its a relatively recent phenomenon when it comes to data communication (as in broadband).
The Roots of Mobility Radio was like magic two generations ago - it was the original "wireless." To understand the societal impact, you have only to chat with someone who is getting on in years and watch as they get a twinkle in their eyes recounting their first experience with radio. Motorola got its name and made its early fortune by putting the radio in the car, solving interference problems that hampered reception. As for mobile two-way communication, you had a nickel in your pocket and a pay phone on the nearest corner. If it was wireless two-way, then for a long time you were limited to bulky hand-held radios and walkie talkies, with advances spurred on by military research - remember those WWII jeep mounted radios and Korean War radio set back packs that weighed 80 pounds? Broadcast radio and two-way telecommunications weren't truly mobile until transistors freed them from the bulkiness of vacuum tubes 50 years ago, so we could take our music and voice communications with us on foot. While we came a long way with analog or non-digital radio systems, mobile telecommunications really only began to take off as the brief period of transistors were followed rapidly by integrated circuits on silicon chips. We haven't looked back since. Digitization and miniaturization enabled mobility to continue the trend of adding voice and data options, as well as more mobility, for less. Digital pagers were our early digital mobile devices, back in the Telecom Dark Ages (20 years ago!) when a cell phone was a car phone. Power sources had to keep up with communications capabilities. The Sony Walkman created a sensation when it took the cassette tape out of the stereo cabinet, out of the car dash, and put it in the hands of joggers, cyclers, and snow skiers. This was true mobility! While not a communication device per se, the Walkman gave a new generation a revolutionary new approach to mobile entertainment. At the original demonstration of the first car phone in the U.S. back in the 1980s, the car battery drained before they were able to demo the phone! More work needed to be done on power supply, one of many challenges to overcome. Soon, however, cell phones went on to become expensive appendages for the business professional. Two advances catapulted cellular phone adoption: the build out of the cellular tower network and the ATT Wireless national roaming plan (no more long distance fees on cell phones). Soon copied by competitors, national plans put pricing of cell phone service plans within the range of the mass market, and higher call quality with improved cell phone reception levels spurred cell phone adoption. Data Comes to Town But what about mobile data? The lowly pager, first to market with mobility, was marginalized to a niche service with the rise of cell phones. Pushing limited data in niche applications became the realm of pagers and mobile data, the RIM Blackberry surged in popularity, with combined data and voice capability in a compelling user interface. SMS text messaging over cellular networks remains narrow band, and necessarily so, because their networks were constructed with voice in mind, not broadband data. Cellular networks are undergoing extensive investment to enable third-generation network technologies that will enable broadband data capabilities. Until those advances are completed, though, current technology will limit the amount of data over cellular networks. The brief history of mobile data communications didn’t start in earnest until the advent of the World Wide Web began to bring the Internet to the masses, first with dial-up, and in the last several years with broadband. With wide-spread Internet access came the rise of e-mail as a popular form of data communication, perhaps the first internet killer app. When Intel began to pump out Centrino chips for laptops, and Wi Fi Hot Spots began to appear at Starbucks, the race for mobility was off again on a new and powerful tangent. Hot Spots and home networks could be called the payphones of the 21st Century. The need to find a restaurant or coffee shop to get on-line and check emails is eerily similar to the need to find a pay phone at a gas station or street corner to make a voice call 30 years ago. Now, the need to stay in touch via e-mail and voice mail messages is joined by the need to access social networking applications like facebook and MySpace while on the go. Wireless Broadband networks hold the promise to do for mobile data communications what the cell phones did for mobile voice communications. Along the way, we can expect voice and data to converge on one handheld device, which will require a broadband network over which to transmit the data. Incumbent telecom companies are busy with plans to build out their data networks with fiber to compete with cable, and cable has begun offering Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) to compete with the telecom companies. As municipalities gain steam in building their new high capacity mobile data networks using wireless mesh technology, telecoms and cable companies are taking a second look at the potential of the new wireless broadband technologies that complement their strategic plans. The global telecommunications industry dwarfs most others, because human beings have to connect with other human beings, fulfilling a need almost as strong as the need for water and air. Cities are recognizing a need to be connected to the Internet and to keep their citizens plugged in to the Web on their own terms and in their own time frame. "Netbooks" like the Asus EEE hold great promise, bringing data and voice convergence from the laptop side, complete with Wi Fi access, Skype loaded on the desktop, and video capabilities. Modern Mobility Whatever the ultimate outcome, we can be assured that mobile solutions will continue to find a place together with fixed connectivity solutions. We can say with high certainty that more bandwidth will be valued in more ways over time. And we can see clearly that prices for these mobile, high bandwidth services will decline in time as well. In a way, culture and society from the adoption side have lagged wireless technology developments all along, from the development side. Culture and society tend to lag most any technological innovation. It takes a while for us slow humans to adapt to change, and we suffer from some kind of lag malaise when technology moves too fast - "future shock" was a term in vogue 30 years ago. But technology that moves along with us wherever we may go has always been welcome by the market, and it will always be welcome. So, the march to mobility goes on, and it drives the need for the enabling infrastructure. The challenge for private and public sector leaders is how to get this infrastructure built efficiently and economically. Private sector providers will build a network, but not necessarily a network that extends everywhere, not necessarily as soon as we would like, and certainly not in places where there is no potential for a profit. Public sector providers (cities and towns) become motivated when the private sector does not provide for them, and faced with the need to get networks installed, they have so far tended to partner with knowledgeable and experienced third party providers to ensure that they have networks that work. The vision of the March to Mobility described in this brief is about ubiquitous, mobile broadband access affordable for all, anywhere, anytime on a multitude of devices with variable content at the touch of the fingertip, at the whim of the user. Because of this history, we can easily envision being able to access voice and data wherever we are, indoors or outdoors. It's not a big leap, but it will happen much faster if more people take initiative to move things along. A wireless cloud will in time cover us all. The technologies that will support that wireless cloud will vary from place to place, and they will fade into the background in time. New and wonderful applications and devices will be used to access the network. The job of public sector leaders is to look out for their citizens and work with all parties to ensure an infrastructure that supports the March to Mobility and the many benefits to modern life it will bring. ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT - The reader is encouraged to link to this post and to share this material, with the understanding that they provide an attribution to MetroNetIQ and share any alterations with MetroNetIQ.
Posted on June 14, 2008 at 08:05 PM | Comments (0) The New Three Rs: Risk, Reward, and Resources
Sometimes I'm reminded of my days back in Jr. High, when the boys would stand on one side of the dance hall, checking out the girls on the other side of the dance hall, checking out them. Who would be first to take on the risk of rejection by asking another to dance? These days, city staff and officials, that is, those in the know, eye each other on their side of the public/private dance hall, checking out the vendors and their solutions, wondering who will go first to move into the 21st Century with a program of digital applications running on a broadband network, who will launch a digital transition. You can hear the thoughts, "It already looked risky before, when municipal wireless was brand new, then some cities jumped in and their networks failed. Now, it's not just perceived risk, but proven risk. Why even go down that path. Who needs it?" Problem is, over here on the private side, we feel like we've learned from the failures of the past, rejected the business models that led to failure in the first place, and devised an approach that has in fact, very low risk. But we will need some innovative cities to hear the message and get out there on the dance floor, or else we'll continue this stalemate and sit and tap our feet to the music, wondering what it would be like to be out there dancing. Perhaps this analysis of Risk, Reward, and Resources will help some city leaders to look at risk more analytically.
While some may argue that this discussion is only common sense, decisions on risk, reward, and resources are the lifeblood of a leader, a vital part of the job description. This brief is offered to bring these issues out into the open, hopefully leading to a better shared understanding of the drivers of executive decision-making when it comes to a Digital Transition project. Risk and Reward One of the biggest challenges any new idea, product or service faces is to overcome the resistance to change, which says, "The old way of doing things is 'safer.' " Idioms capture the conventional wisdom: "Better the devil you know (than the one you don't)" or "Look before you leap" or "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or finally, the more modern, "Nobody ever got fired for hiring IBM." All these idioms share two commonly-held perceptions. First, that "Risk is bad." And second, that "The present is safe, while the future is dangerous." What they leave out is the connection between risk and reward, which is one of the most basic tenets of business. Low risk, low return. Higher risk, higher return. And sure enough, there are indeed also idioms to support the alternative view of moving ahead in the face of risk: "Nothing ventured, nothing gained" and "He who hesitates is lost." This is an age old dilemma, with viewpoints on either side, so, unfortunately, conventional wisdom appears to offer little help. The key to sound decision-making then is to understand how risk and return work as a dynamic, find suitable balance to meet one's objectives, and make rational decisions based on resources and particular situations.
Fortunately, we've learned how to manage the risk of future outcomes to improve returns. Managing investment portfolios is a daily task of managing risk for better returns. Both "Risk Mitigation" and "Maximizing Return on Investment" share the same goal: to move outcomes from the upper right or lower left quadrant to the lower right. Minimizing risk (the chance of a bad outcome) or maximizing return (the chance of a good outcome) are like pairing a good defense with a good offense for a win. Resources A third variable, often given short shrift in assessing a risk decision, completes the equation: the amount of resources at risk is a factor in how much risk is tolerable: buying one lottery ticket vs. investing your whole paycheck in lottery tickets, for instance. Risk Mitigation Recognize. Step One in mitigating risk is to understand all possible negative outcomes, and then assess each for degree of risk and reward - what's the trade-off ratio? Plan. Step Two is to craft and prioritize strategies to minimize potential negative outcomes, and maximize potential positive outcomes. Manage. Step Three, often overlooked, is to execute on the strategies through controlled and prioritized activity. Risk Assessment Recognizing the inevitability of risk and accepting the need to take risks to gain rewards are two key steps every decision maker must master. In fact, one could argue that learning to take good risks is the key to good leadership. In assessing any situation, a leader must map risks in four ways: a) degree of risk; b) risk / reward ratio; c) resources at risk and d) type of risk. Degrees of Risk Not all risk is equal. The degree of risk speaks to the size of the potential negative outcome. It's important to assess this factor, because decisions are often subjective, based on the personality type of the leader. A conservative leader may give more weight to the downside, overvaluing risks and undervaluing rewards, while a more adventurous leader may have a tendency to do the opposite. An objective risk assessment will place a value on each risk - set boundaries around the possible outcomes and ascribe a value to "the worst that could happen" and "the least that could happen," a "worst case," "best case," and somewhere in the middle, a "most likely case." Risk can also be subdivided into categories, ranging from trivial risk, to healthy risk, to acceptable risk, to unavoidable risk, to risk that must be avoided at all costs. Trivial Risk. Encountered & dismissed. Trivial risk falls in the green box, healthy and acceptable risks fall in the beige box, unavoidable risks fall in the yellow, and catastrophic risk falls in the red box.
Risk/Reward Ratio In evaluating risk, it is helpful to add in the reward side of the equation to put the level of risk in perspective. One cannot be considered without the other. There is "absolute" risk, what would happen irrespective of circumstances, there is "relative" risk, how risks stack up against each other based on outcomes (see above), and there is "proportional" risk, which brings reward into the evaluation. Resources at Risk In evaluating risk, one must consider the amount at stake. When a small amount is ventured, the outcome is inconsequential. When one’s life is on the line, literally or figuratively, it is an altogether different assessment.
Types of Risk In any Digital Transition project evaluation, risk falls in five main areas, with the first three most subject to project team planning (financial, technological, and business). Financial. In the end, every business discussion can be boiled down to its financial aspects. Money is the universal language of business. Assessing a risk as to its financial impact is for many, the bottom line that matters most. Financial risks may include such issues as recovery of capital expense, management and recovery of operating expenses, and attainment of cost savings and revenue objectives. How these risks are addressed will determine how well the plan tracks to financial objectives in reality. Will we lose money? How much? Business risks may include such issues partner performance, market reactions, management of quality issues, balancing of budgets, management of expenses, etc. How will the parties manage this project together? Can they be trusted to do as they promised?
Legal. Any public entity must consider legal risks as it moves forward. Will we go to jail or be sued? Legal risks are mostly managed in the contract phase and by following the law and regulations, with guidance from attorneys and the legal department; in areas where public entities are involved, the choice is usually very clear cut - no legal risks allowed! Political. The word public implies that business will be conducted out in the open, making it subject to a higher degree of scrutiny and critique. Will I lose my next election if this fails? Political risks, on the other hand, are often the most pressing for elected officials and must be factored into the equation. They may have an over-ride impact over any other decisions or plans. The keys to successful risk mitigation are information and planning. Investing sufficient resources up front, before a project is underway is perhaps the best strategy for mitigating possible risks and ensuring project success. Gathering Requirements. Before undertaking any project, an organization should answer the Why question. Understanding the project goals before beginning any other activities is perhaps one of the wisest ways to start a project. Ensuring that the goals are in alignment with the organizations values is an important complement. Setting Priorities. A good project plan will establish boundaries and set priorities, so that the leaders can ensure that no matter what else happens, their core objectives are accomplished. By setting priorities in a well-organized plan, with provisions for project management, the team manages unknown risks by being prepared to make good decisions. Selecting a Partner or Vendor. Working with outside parties is often one of the biggest risks an organization can face, but such partnering is a key risk mitigation strategy as well. This duality makes this step one of the most critical. It starts with a thorough assessment of the pool of potential partners, followed by a process of evaluation using both objective and subjective criteria A solid Procurement Process provides the most competitive alternatives and best value to meet the project objectives. First, the team should evaluate the simplest procurement methods. For instance, if any of the necessary components for the project are available through a public catalogue or off of an interlocal agreement with another public entity, or through any other non-bid method, the team may choose that option if it is acceptable, as it may save considerable resources (time and/or money). Or, the team may pursue one of two bid options: Financial Prudence. In general, the project that pays the least for the most quality and the best fit ensures the best value and lowest financial risk. Public entities often place much emphasis on competitive bidding, indeed, are required by law to do so, but too little emphasis on opportunity cost and the gain from partnering or aligning with other public entities for a group purchase. Paying the lowest price is one strategy, but quality should not be sacrificed. Having an option to pay over a long period allows payments to be minimal, but also offers the alternative of an early payoff, for less project risk. Technology Selection. With thorough evaluation of project requirements and user preferences, a technology selection is far more likely to be a good fit over the long run. The second risk element to mitigate is to ensure against technological obsolescence, which is best ensured by vendor stability and system design, where modularity allows the technology to adapt over changes in the environment and industry. Other strategies include a preference for standards-based over non-standard, and open systems over closed. Business Management. During the contract phase, a public entity can ensure the lowest risk by a thorough accounting for all contingencies in the Terms and Conditions, and through a detailed Statement of Work. Contractual provisions abound, ranging from insurance, warranties, and bonding, to non-liability and confidentiality. Joint management and oversight, dispute resolution, mediation, and arbitration provide for sound operations and bumps along the road. In general, good contracting is about mutual obligations and a solid give-for-get attitude among the parties. Some issues can be managed in a contract, but the rest must be based on generation of trust mechanisms in the partnership and a shared obligation to make things work for both parties, also known as a win-win attitude/approach. Risk, reward, and resources come together through sound planning, a goal of balancing based on community priorities, values, and objectives; and an objective consideration of timing and the need to move forward and remain competitive while avoiding unnecessary risk. Risk itself is unavoidable; not bad per se, but manageable and necessary for growth to occur. ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT - The reader is encouraged to link to this post and to share this material, with the understanding that they provide an attribution to MetroNetIQ and share any alterations with MetroNetIQ.
Posted on June 14, 2008 at 10:26 AM | Comments (0) Wi Fi Mesh Economics: CostsA key conclusion I draw from last weeks activities is that the complexities in Wireless Broadband challenge the decision making process for city staff and elected officials. Four ways of dealing with overwhelming complexity (not an exhaustive list, but a sample) 1. Break the problem and solution set down into smaller pieces so that one may move forward - call this one the Chew On It strategy - Break Down into Bite Size Pieces. 2. Present the rational but complex story to the decision makers and appeal to their rational right brains for a decision "on the numbers," call this one the Let the Numbers Sell Themselves 3. Stress the wonderful developments in technology - call this one the Wow 'Em with Wonder 4. Kick the problem down the road for someone else to deal with - call this one the Throw Up Your Arms strategy - "It's too complex - I can't deal with it." Unfortunately, too many product-oriented types have promoted wireless broadband projects based on #2 or #3, and way too many decision makers are opting for #4 in the face of the complexities presented by a strategic decision regarding wireless broadband, using recent bad news of pioneer project failures as an excuse not to go forward. I recommend #1, and here's why. With a little effort to get educated, the benefits become understandable and they truly are immense, if broken down into bite size pieces for understanding and decision-making and ultimately, for project management. To steer clear of a network-based solution and maintain the status quo of point solutions is to settle for the short-term easy and mundane, and to pass up the longer-term somewhat more challenging but compelling alternative. That's why I do what I do on this website, which can be described as chewing on things to make them make sense. As for Wi Fi Mesh Economics, a topic that bedevils so many, I've taken a stab at breaking a Mesh Network Project down into its key cost components to provide a better understanding of a potential project, and provided a rough estimating tool at the conclusion. The intent is to inject some reality into discussions. Check it out. The Bottom Line on Wi Fi Mesh After departmental assessments show how and why each department would use a wireless mesh network, it becomes time for an organization that contemplates a digital transformation with a network project to perform a conservative financial analysis. When that analysis shows a positive return on investment (ROI) in a reasonable amount of time, the public entity can safely conclude that the investment is prudent. But just what are all the details that impact such an ROI analysis? This briefing document details the component costs a public entity should expect in building out a Wi Fi Mesh network, one half of the ROI equation (revenue from the network constitutes the other side, to be addressed in a different brief). In summary, a rule of thumb in Wi Fi Mesh Economics is as follows: when making cost estimations, Wi Fi Mesh networks will require approximately $150,000 per square mile in one-time costs and approximately $10,000 per square mile in annual operating costs. These estimates increase on a per square mile basis as networks are smaller and more difficult to deploy / operate. They decrease on a per square mile basis as networks are larger and easier to deploy / operate. The table at the conclusion of this brief provides a cost-summary analysis on a 10-square mile basis, as well as on a one-square mile basis. Preliminary Studies and Assessments Before contemplating installation of a wireless mesh network, a public entity should conduct individual departmental assessments for two reasons. First, assessments provide the qualitative information down to the departmental management level on both the potential business process improvements that arise when a wireless mesh network is deployed, and to socialize the potential cultural changes to the organization - these changes are wide-ranging and any organization needs time to absorb and contemplate the impact that a network will have.
Second, assessments provide the quantitative data that will go into any ROI analysis, ranging from business process improvements that change labor inputs to the need to purchase new applications and end user equipment and transition from old processes in order to achieve potential efficiencies. Potential Cost: A consultant is recommended for such activities, with an estimate of $12,500 - $50,000 (approximately 100 - 400 man/hours at $125/hr.) Summary of Network Component Costs A wireless mesh network is a large version of a local area network, or LAN, sometimes referred to as a Metropolitan Area Network, or MAN. In contrast, a cellular telephone network is referred to as a Wide Area Network, or WAN. The wireless mesh network provides wireless connectivity to end users throughout a large area, which in telecommunications jargon is referred to as a Last-Mile Network to indicate that it makes the connection of the last-mile, from the larger network down to the individual households and businesses. Recently, consumer advocates have started referring to this type of network as a First-Mile Network, looked at more from the perspective of the end-user. Either way, the nature of the wireless mesh network is to create an interface between multiple users at the end points, and a larger body of other users via the public Internet (often depicted in diagrams as a cloud, as seen in the diagram below). In between the Last-Mile (or, First-Mile) and the Internet is the Middle-Mile segment, sometimes also referred to as the backbone. The backbone, which can be either wired or wireless, serves to "Inject" bandwidth into the mesh network at points that are alternately called "injection points," "backhaul points," or "gateway nodes." The diagram below graphically depicts the three components of Internet, Middle Mile, and Last Mile. While some organizations may choose to go forward with a deployment without a detailed network design, it is highly recommended that this stage be completed. It is important to design a network based on detailed real-time information. A detailed network design will be based on a detailed site visit, with examination of pole mounting sites, confirmation of available power, orientation of line-of-sight issues, etc. The work product of a detailed network design is a site map and deployment strategy document that provides the deployment team the detailed information they need for a rapid and successful deployment process. Potential Cost: This stage is highly dependent on the nature of the proposed coverage area and the difficulties that may be encountered during the design process, with an estimate of $10,000 - $150,000. Network Equipment MetroNetIQ recommends a multi-radio Wi Fi Mesh access point capable of both 2.4 GHz and 4.9 GHz spectrum operations. Typically this equipment features radio boards mounted internally in a NEMA-rated enclosure, with back-up power supply and mounting brackets. Third party equipment such as cabling and antennae will be needed as well. Coverage recommendations are between 25 and 35 access points per square mile (average over the entire coverage area), depending on the terrain, street design, tree foliage, building densities, etc. The price for each access point will depend upon the brand selected, the negotiation leverage applied, the volume of purchase, and the complexity and quality of the access point. Network Operations Center (NOC) A network operations center or NOC is a vital piece of the installed network: its brains, so to speak. NOC components include servers, monitoring stations, a room to house that equipment, and the labor to provide the oversight of operations. Potential Cost: The potential cost of the NOC depends on how the costs are divided (Will a pre-existing NOC be used to provide the oversight, with a portion of the costs being borne by the new network? Is an altogether new NOC required? Are there opportunities for the city or county to provide free office space to house the equipment, etc.?) Estimates of the NOC cost can thus range from $100,000 to over $300,000 if all costs are added in. Placement of access points in a network design is critical to the ultimate effectiveness of the network. In a perfect world, every streetlight or distribution pole chosen is ready for mounting, with no additional cost to make them ready. Unfortunately, that is seldom the case. For instance, a streetlight that is powered with a photo-optic sensor device, as many are, is inappropriate for mounting, as it lacks power during daylight. If vital to the network design, that particular pole would need to be rewired for constant power. In another case, a distribution pole (electricity only) may be in an ideal location, but to be suitable for mounting, it would need to be refitted with a transformer that would provide power at the appropriate voltage level and outfitted with some means for mounting the access point. Mounting Assets II - Pole Attachment Fees Network equipment can be mounted on any structure that enables the boxes to be placed about 20 feet off the ground, but the preferred mounting structure is a street light in most instances, given the combination of height, power availability, and multiple mounting options. Alternatives include traffic lights, electricity distribution poles, roof tops, and water towers. This particular aspect can be one of the most troublesome for a wireless network, especially if the owner of the mounting assets is not cooperative, motivated, or prepared, which can result in significant project delays and added costs. When electric utility assets are used, a "pole attachment agreement" - a contract to lease space on the structure for mounting equipment - is necessary. Potential Cost: The cost for mounting assets will depend on the owner of the assets and the stated price for mounting, which can vary widely. At this early stage in industry development, one additional cost can be delays in a project that result when a utility lacks a policy, or has only an immature policy, and details must be determined. In other cases, a fee is assigned, but it can vary from as low as $2/pole/month to $500/pole/month. A good average for estimating purposes would be $10/pole/month. Electric Power The good news is that wireless access points do not require significant amounts of power, about 20 watts, or about 20 kWhs/month - about as much as a cable TV set-top box (not much). The power consumption is so low that it makes little sense to meter the power consumption of these units, rather, it makes more sense to set a standard rate and meter a single device to track usage, perhaps providing a true-up if the unmetered rate proves off-base. Potential Cost: The typical power cost for an access point for estimation purposes is about $2/device/month. Deployment Deployment involves several steps, and considerable expense, as the equipment arrives from the manufacturer in boxes and must go through several stages before it is even ready to be mounted, after which it must be installed on the poles. Once equipment is mounted, the system must be assessed for performance and adjustments made before the deployment is considered complete and the network can be tested and "accepted." Staging and Configuration see the equipment assembled from piece parts into integrated mountable units. Two-man crews using bucket trucks perform a relatively simple mounting exercise when the pole is ready, but considerable work may be needed on some poles to enable mounting. Typically, two-man crews can mount a unit in as little as 30 minutes, but a problem pole can take a day or more to complete. Potential Cost: While staging and configuration and simple deployments can cost as little as $200/access point, a fully loaded cost for a network deployment, including problem cases, is more accurately estimated at $1200/access point. Wireless mesh networks provide a signal that is readily available to end users in the open air, but the signal may have difficulty penetrating walls and be less available to receivers indoors. For that reason, a booster device may need to be placed in the window to receive a signal or to transmit signals to and from the network. Such devices are referred to as consumer premise equipment or CPE. These devices are needed primarily for end users in indoor environments, and the cost may be borne by the end user, the network operator, or some combination thereof. In some cases, a governmental user may choose to use a mobile booster for a vehicle mounted in the trunk or on the truck. Bandwidth Bandwidth in an information network is a somewhat abstract concept, but it can be equated with current in an electric or water network or traffic flow on a highway. Bandwidth is the provisioning of information throughput capacity to serve a network. Bandwidth is provided by purchasing such capacity at Megabits/second (Mbs) - millions of bits of data/second - from a wholesale provider. All wireless networks require backhaul capacity - connection to the Internet - but a wireless mesh network differs from a Hot Spot because the mesh network can share a backhaul connection among several access points, while the Hot Spot has a one-to-one relationship between access point and backhaul. A mesh network that uses IEEE 802.11g (Wi Fi) has a theoretical local capacity of 54 Mbs, but practical capacity delivered to end users in a mesh network will range from 1 to 15 Mbs (up and down), depending on local conditions and management protocols. To optimize the use of this local area capacity, bandwidth must be injected at various points inside the mesh. To be able to leverage the full communications capacity of the wireless access nodes and provide the signal quality needed for high-bandwidth applications like voice over IP and video, the network will need a minimum of 100 Mbs bandwidth to be injected at regularly spaced intervals, and this need should be considered dynamic - bandwidth injection will need to be managed to meet demand on the mesh network as it grows over time. Potential Cost: A good estimate for bandwidth injection is at least one injection point for each mesh segment of between 20 and 80 access points, depending on the effective ability of the mesh network to transfer backhaul capacity between its access points in the mesh. For cost estimation: using one injection point every two square miles, at market rates, the cost will depend on the local cost of bandwidth, which can range widely from market to market, between $100/mo and $1000/mo for a 100 Mbs connection. Operating Expense (including Network Monitoring & Maintenance) Operating expenses are dependent on the nature of the operation. At a minimum, either public sector or private market operations will require monitoring the performance of the wireless mesh network, providing basic maintenance and repair when physical breakdowns occur, providing upgrades to the network as needed, and providing customer support in the form of website maintenance and a phone call-in capacity (i.e., Help Desk) for technical support. A network that is used not only for supporting public sector needs, but also for providing services to a wholesale and retail market will require significantly more operating expense - in that case, operating expense resembles that of a telecommunications company. Potential Cost: A cost estimate for annual Operating Expense will depend upon the size of the network, but it should range from a minimum of $60,000 ($5,000/month) for basic services for a small network with shared facilities to as high as $1,000,000 for a substantial full-market operation of a mid-sized network. Applications The number and variety of applications to be used on a wireless broadband network is limited only by the imagination of the marketplace and the ability of companies to meet the perceived need as awareness of the versatility of a broadband-based platform grows. Driving the growth of wireless broadband applications are two principal factors: 1) the need for broadband users to find efficiencies and cut costs; and 2) the declining costs of Wi Fi client chips - as the price drops with growing production volumes, it makes economic sense to make more and more electronic devices 'Wi Fi compatible" by adding Wi Fi capability. The benefits of a Wi Fi Mesh network do not stop with a Wi Fi laptop that extends office functionality beyond the traditional fixed connection boundaries of a corporate network or the cable and telecom ISP, although such mobile data access is a huge improvement and a vital component of the value equation. In the end, Wi Fi technology offers more versatility to devices and enables applications that did not make sense without the ubiquitous network that a Wi Fi Mesh solution brings. Public sector application options provide a variety of cost savings that can be used to provide the financial justification to invest in a Wi Fi Mesh network: - Dual use smart phones that can choose the most efficient network to lower telecom costs Private market / consumer & business application options provide a variety of revenue generation opportunities that enhance the financial justification to invest in a Wi Fi Mesh network: - Dual use smart phones that can choose the most efficient network to lower telecom costs Potential Cost: A cost estimate for wireless broadband applications is widely variable, and will depend on the actual solutions chosen and vendor provisioning and pricing. Application costing should be developed separately to provide a key component of the ROI calculation for any network project plan. The chart below provides general information on networks, estimated expenses, and coverage.
Posted on June 14, 2008 at 06:37 AM | Comments (0) The Lowest Risk Publicly-Owned Network: The Case for Public OwnershipIn San Antonio, most people I talked with assumed that Municipal Wireless was dead. RIP. It's amazing how the brand had faded. So, I thought, why argue. In fact, my credo is more regional (Metropolitan) and independent of technology (Broadband), so it gives me a little liberty to agree and then stress the things you can do with the new technologies. It's about applications, and I got no argument in San Antonio this week. The clear focus is on two principal areas: Public Safety (Police Department) and Utilities (Automatic Meter Infrastructure or AMI). One thing that is compelling is that when one focuses on applications like Public Safety and Utilities, one quickly totes up a list of benefits that more than compensates for the price of the supporting network and applications. Thus, we get to the next in our series of executive briefs, this one focused on Publicly Owned Networks. More after you click through! The case for public ownership of a wireless broadband network lies in these six areas. Invalid Private Sector Solutions. Private sector solutions have mostly proven invalid to date - the industry remains immature and public sector entities have not had success in finding reliable partners that have adequate financing, experience, risk tolerance or motivation to invest the needed capital for a reliable network and still provide the service to the public sector at an acceptable rate (i.e., the pool of private sector owners is inadequate and their service offers have been largely unattractive). Network Strategic Plan Given these circumstances, a network strategic plan begins with a goal to optimize public control and benefit by owning the network. But that doesn't leave the private sector completely out of the picture. The lowest risk venture will bring in private sector partners in a Public Private Partnership through a solid Procurement Process that provides the most competitive alternatives / best value. If any of the necessary components are available through a public catalog or off of an inter-local agreement, or any other non-bid method, those options should be evaluated against two bid options: Following a vendor selection process and negotiations to arrive at the best price and solution, the remaining strategy component is a focus on cash flow, rather than capital expense, when considering network infrastructure cost recovery. Long-term financing takes advantage of an option available to public sector entities, but also shifts the emphasis on financing to an operations budget. We recommend a long term, 7-8 years, to align the annual network financing goal with anticipated annual cost savings. Network Cost Recovery A strategy to align annual network payments with annual operational budget savings, provides management with an annual savings target. Budgeted cost recovery is the most conservative approach: it focuses full cost recovery where public management is in complete control.
An added benefit of public ownership is excess capacity: public uses of the network bandwidth can be expected to range between 5 and 25% of network capacity, depending on the amount of high-bandwidth applications like video. The first step in a budget approach is to identify potential savings in operations and then set annual departmental targets, with the total meeting or exceeding the annual network capital expense. Savings from network operations fall into two categories: Managers should develop prioritized departmental assessments & strategies: When the network project is structured in this manner, the focus is on annual and sustaining efficiencies through integrating departmental wireless network applications for departmental budget savings. The management goal is to recover network costs through tighter management, using annual goals to meet or beat annual network cost targets based on departmental challenges. Surplus savings can be used to finance additional applications or end-user equipment, or to pay off the network asset in advance of original project goals, providing added efficiencies and/or less project risk. Managed correctly, this process should produce a long-term, sustainable, virtuous cycle of benefits and efficiencies that releases operational budget savings for continuous improvement. Full Use of Network Asset The primary plan for network capital cost recovery through operational budget efficiencies, Plan A, produces excess bandwidth after government needs have been met. Plan B for cost recovery is available by leveraging the excess bandwidth capacity after government needs have been met. Such a Revenue Enhancement Option affords the public entity an alternative plan not only to support a back-up network cost recovery strategy, but also to provide a new resource for community needs.
This network resource can be leveraged in a variety of ways, but it's important to note that unlike most revenue options available to the public sector, it does not involve a tax. Sales of excess bandwidth provide a non-tax resource, best achieved through offering a portfolio of wholesale and retail access service offers. To provide the most benefit to the taxpayers and the community, the public network owner’s ultimate goal should be to achieve full capacity utilization. As with other resources with finite capacity, any slack capacity can be priced at marginal rates to optimize potential revenue. The focus of this review so far has been on recovery of network capital costs, with no mention of the operating costs necessary to provide services and network maintenance. Because the wireless broadband network constitutes a natural monopoly, at least for the short-term, it provides an attractive resource that the public network owner can trade to an interested potential partner for low or no-cost services. The lowest risk path is to recruit a private partner to operate and maintain the network in exchange for a long-term lease to use the excess bandwidth to make a business. Additionally, a deal may be struck with that partner to share any revenue generated from using the network in exchange for taking responsibility for operating expenses, offsetting further risk. Besides the public network owner itself, potential alternate anchor tenants include: Network capacity optimization is most likely with a strategy to pursue local stakeholders, most notably incumbent Internet Service Providers, which currently lack such a metropolitan area mobile wireless broadband resource. Further, new Internet Service Providers, those most likely to pursue niche strategies by buying small amounts of network capacity without the need to make a large capital investment or to win a public bid, bring new competition to the local market. And in conclusion MetroNetIQ believes that public entities are in an enviable position when it comes to taking advantage of new communication technologies and applications. The strategy outlined in this brief is the lowest-risk, highest-return means for a public entity to leverage its unique position in the marketplace and improve the long-term social and economic prospects of its community by bringing in a new communications infrastructure resource. The Bottom Line By owning the network and operating it as a public infrastructure whose principal goal is to benefit the community and all its stakeholders, the public entity can take much of the risk off the table, open up new opportunities that would otherwise be unavailable and provide a winning solution that benefits the entire community in a sustaining manner. ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT - The reader is encouraged to link to this post and to share this material, with the understanding that they provide an attribution to MetroNetIQ and share any alterations with MetroNetIQ.
Posted on June 13, 2008 at 09:51 PM | Comments (0) Don't Forget Water Utilities - They Can Be Connected TooI posted a long (8 page) brief I had written on electric utilities, broadband and municipalities this morning, and yet that leaves out many of the conversations I had this week about water conservation and the role that broadband connectivity and AMI can play to help to stimulate movement in a positive direction when it comes to a dwindling water resource. The theme of supply and demand and constrained resources kept coming up everywhere this week. It's a big issue with electric utilities, of course, given the rising cost of fuel, constrained transmission resources, climate change, and pending carbon tax issues. On the radio, Texas Public Radio broadcast in San Antonio had a discussion/debate on the Diane Rehm show about surface transportation policy and US Transportation Infrastructure, with differing opinions on whether we should focus on mass transportation, rail, and an integrated intermodal system, with information providing feedback on user behavior (demand side management), or whether that is doomed and what we really need to do is spend more money on building highways (supply side management). But water is a huge issue and will get bigger and bigger as we move forward. I even had a discussion with a guy at dinner who is selling traditional water meters to water utilities in Louisiana that - sit down for this one - don't even have any meters at all on their accounts! They sell unmetered water as a service! That is a traditional outmoded approach that assumes that the commodity of water is too cheap to meter - a flat rate is just fine, thank you very much. The problem with flat-rate services in general is that they end up with onerous cross-subsidization issues, where high consumers are subsidized by low consumers. With very cheap costs of commodity and very cheap transport costs, this may not matter, but the commodity cost is rising, and operation costs are rising as infrastructure needs upgrading and labor costs go up...there needs to be some rational mechanism to tie costs with revenue, and ultimately, to tie costs with benefits. High users should pay more than low users. More below on the growing issues around constrained water resources and the need for better and smarter utility management.
NPR commentator Frank Deford had a segment this morning about golf courses, in which he cited a Golf Digest poll showing that 41 percent of golfers believe global warming to be a myth. [See Water-Thirsty Golf Courses Need to Go Green] This number struck me as surprisingly high. But then I did a little digging and discovered that, while an April Pew poll found that 71 percent of Americans say there is "solid evidence" the earth is getting warmer, only 49 percent of Republicans now believe that to be the case. More intriguing, Pew found the number of Republican skeptics to be on the rise - up 13 percentage points from a similar poll conducted in January 2007. So if you assume that most golfers are Republicans, the stat makes perfect sense. Well, if the rising of ocean levels means larger water hazards, Michelle, perhaps we'll see a shift of opinion on the links ... Few Greenies on These Greens By Tobin Harshaw Until we can start to acknowledge reality, no matter how painful, change will remain extremely difficult. Denial is a powerful concept when it comes to human behavior and psychology, and denial is at its strongest when a change of facts - a new reality - threatens a comfortable lifestyle. It doesn't surprise me that golfers would be in denial, as a class, because they're very fond of their beautiful, lush courses and it's a great lifestyle to be attached to. The Country Club Life, if you've ever experienced it, is marvelous, but one must acknowledge, it really is an alternate reality. Few get to enjoy hanging out in beautiful circumstances where one is waited on hand and foot, where every whim is anticipated and met. Not that there is anything at all with that - I personally love country clubs (and I'm an avid golfer, whenever I get a chance). But to live in a bubble and yet not realize that one is living in a bubble takes a special form of cluelessness - it's a rather lazy outlook on life, IMHO. And selfish too. My mama taught me in no uncertain terms that lazy and selfish are no ways to go through life. In that same segment, there was this item as well: Drought Hits California's Already Tight Water Supply. If you open your eyes and look, open your ears and listen, more and more you'll hear stories about water shortages and conservation, but it's amazing how many managers at water utilities can't see the forest for the trees. They're still behind the curve in implementing an automated meter infrastructure (AMI) system that will give them detailed digital data, which can be used not only for revenue measurement purposes, but also to improve their management of their systems and lower the wasted water that leaks from old pipes that have been buried in the ground for decades. It reminds me of the Stephen Covey story about "sharpening the saw" - a euphemism for taking time out for personal regeneration. As the story goes, the man is sawing away, but not making much progress. An observer stops him and asks, "why don't you take a break and sharpen the saw, then you could cut faster?" The guy looks at him with disgust, "silly idea, take a break! I'm too busy to take a break!" Too many managers of infrastructure - pick the infrastructure - see their jobs as maintaining a status quo. Dramatic changes look scary (negative economic outcomes followed by negative political outcomes - lost job, anyone?), and so emotional arguments are made against suggestions like AMI and broadband. "We could never afford the capital investment of thousands of meter end points" is the most common objection. Even when a financial analysis shows a reasonable payback, it is too often dismissed, not for rational reasons, but as an excuse based on irrational fear of risk. As a public policy issue, we must all grow more aware of how we address the issue of shrinking resources. Otherwise we'll end up in a society where a privileged few enjoy dramatically more than the underprivileged masses, and that is a recipe for political instability, where all end up losers. Data communication systems, which include both wireless AMI and wired and wireless broadband, provide society with the information it needs to manage more effectively its scarce resources and to ensure politically equitable outcomes and a sustainable economy, the twin pillars of a civilized society. Posted on June 13, 2008 at 07:56 AM | Comments (0) Utility Field Digital TransitionAs I continue to process conversations from this week, another thing that jumps out at me is the concept of living in a constrained environment. I wrote a post earlier this week titled The Clouds on the Horizon are Chickens Coming Home to Roost that really summed it up, but I believe that its going to take some time for this message to sink in here in America. We've had it quite good for quite some time, to the point where we've come to accept as normal a lifestyle that wastes resources. 1. Resources. We're moving from a period of abundant resources to one where our behavior is constrained by economics and shortages - reality is, we have to do things differently. Here's the brief I wrote about Utilities and Broadband. Transforming Networks Wireless Broadband holds the promise of bringing ubiquitous high-speed Internet access and mobility to cities and their utilities, providing citizens universal access and governments lower cost services and increased security. It is no surprise that the potential for broadband has been compared to the wave of excitement that swept over the land when electricity came to cities one hundred years ago. Just as we now recognize electricity as a foundation of our digital economy, it's not hard to envision broadband networks becoming a new foundation for a digital transition that will change the way we do business and live our lives. Building a National Network At the start of the last century, finding the capital needed to bring electricity to communities was a huge challenge: it wasn't just the construction of power plants, but also the electricity transmission and distribution networks that would extend for miles to reach homes and businesses in neighborhoods to deliver the excited electrons. Large holding companies raised the vast amounts of capital needed to build investor owned utilities (IOUs) for the larger and more populated urban markets. Smaller municipalities that weren't able to raise sufficient IOU interest created their own electricity production and distribution systems with municipally-owned utilities (MOUs). Rural communities waited for years to get electricity, even as their urban cousins began to take for granted the modern creature comforts made possible by electricity. Finally they formed electricity cooperatives with help from the federal government. Fast forward one hundred years and municipalities and MOUs that decide to build their own broadband networks rather than wait to have their needs met over time by incumbent providers merely reflect an approach ratified by history long ago. Metropolitan broadband pioneers today have an advantage over their predecessors though: the historic electricity model as a guide. While any electric utility may choose to deploy a metropolitan broadband network, many still resist, sensing a departure from their core business of supplying power. But there's a different perspective to consider, so read on. A Natural Alliance Electric utilities and municipalities have a long history of working in unison to bring benefits to the communities they serve. Larger IOUs work with municipalities throughout their service territories, supporting economic development activities as a means to retain and grow their revenues. Similarly, the smaller but more numerous MOUs serve a valuable economic development role when they transfer payments to city government budgets to support city operations and keep taxes low. As municipalities consider wireless broadband networks, power supply and mounting rights are critical to successful network designs, and a lack of either can stall a network plan. It is natural for electric utilities and municipalities to act more proactively, under their traditional economic development banner, to deploy networks that offer mutual advantages. Such a city/utility team, working together with third party service providers, represents the best deployment scenario imaginable for communities that lack broadband access from traditional providers, that desire to help their underserved, or that seek greater business efficiencies & economic development opportunities. While early fiber municipal networks tended to focus on digital divide issues, bringing telephony, ISP, and video services to smaller communities that had few options, the next wave of wireless broadband municipal networks has been more focused on mobility applications for public safety and public services. Most often working with a private sector partner, cities find they have a win/win when they mitigate risk for partners by serving as anchor tenants for network services. Electric utilities can also act as anchor tenants, using broadband applications to provide themselves an array of services to achieve operational savings for utility managers (see insets).
The relative novelty of some digital broadband applications and supporting network technology makes this a very fresh approach for electric utilities, but early movers have already started deploying solutions to leverage wireless digital broadband applications & networks. The remainder of this brief explores the connection between electricity and telecommunications and the growing need utilities have for such a digital transition to broadband infrastructure. When utilities focus on their own digital transition to broadband, their initiative is a catalyst for other municipal departments and communities to realize the potential of their own digital transition. Bringing Two Essential Networks Together What does electricity have to do with communications infrastructure? Electric utilities have invested a tremendous amount in fiber optic capacity over the past two decades because complexity demands that managers operating distributed power grids have access to detailed real-time, technical information, such as the status of voltage levels, power quality measurements, etc. Utilities use such communications infrastructure to bring data from sensors in their networks back to their control centers, where that data helps them keep voltage levels balanced and power flowing. But increasingly, current infrastructure is perceived as inadequate to meet the management requirements of tomorrow. The Electricity Supply Chain The traditional electricity supply chain features: 1) electricity generation from turbines powered by steam produced by water heated by burning coal or gas, or through nuclear activity; and to a much lesser degree, water, not to mention the growing but still small wind, solar or biomass; 2) electricity transmission over long-distances at high voltage levels; 3) electricity distribution in local areas at lower voltages; 4) wholesale energy operations and 5) retail energy operations including metering, billing, and customer service. This traditional supply chain is evolving to include alternative distributed generation sources, enhanced transmission and distribution grids, and competitive retail services. A new, expanded supply chain brings with it new demands on the supporting communications infrastructure.
The Electricity Grid GridWorks, a program activity in the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE’s) Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, aims to improve the reliability of the electric system through the modernization of key grid components. As described by the DOE, the nation’s power grid is comprised of interconnected, independently-owned transmission/distribution grids, operated by regional Independent System Operators, with North America divided into a Western grid, an Eastern grid, and a Texas grid, known as “ERCOT.” As stated above, individual electric utility grids are managed locally with utility-owned telecommunications networks that provide data to support the control and monitoring functions of grid management. Control centers maintain constant voltage levels by balancing generation (supply) to match load (demand). Coordinated demand side management (“DSM” – also known as “demand response”) allows utility managers to forgo running expensive peak generation during peak consumption periods by getting consumers to consume less, but without two-way communication with customers, DSM remains an unrealized goal, although DSM is gaining new attention recently.
A Grid at Risk In this land of plenty, we don't tend to notice our bounty of electricity until it is threatened or stops flowing altogether. Electricity, or the lack thereof, certainly becomes the primary topic of conversation during a blackout. Since the power shortages in California in the late 1990s and the Northeast blackout in 2003, the reliability of the nation’s electricity grid has been under increasing scrutiny. Years of under-investment have left our national grid increasingly inadequate to provide sufficient capacity to meet the growing need for high-quality power for digital customers, and at increased risk of catastrophic failure, like severe outages or blackouts. Regional infrastructure inadequacies are highlighted by location of renewable resources such as wind towers in remote locations, where they require transmission capacity to transfer the renewable power, much in demand, to populated areas. Demand Increases, Capacity Falls Regulatory uncertainty has been cited as a key reason for the failure of investment in transmission and distribution infrastructure to keep up with demand growth (projections in load growth by 2010 are 20%, compared to a 5% projected growth in transmission and distribution capacity during the same time period, leaving a shortfall of 15% to compound current short-comings). Government and research groups (i.e, DOE, FERC, NERC, EPRI, CEIDS) have begun to raise awareness in the electric utility industry about a U.S. power grid increasingly vulnerable to periodic and expensive disruptions, even including terrorist threats, and the impetus to act to address the situation is gradually emerging. Utilities Under Pressure Amid a growing awareness of the grid's vulnerability and the need for industry reform, electric utilities are squeezed by a number of market forces and face a sea change in the architecture and operational processes that drive their industry. First, traditional utility equipment and technology are growing more antiquated, providing less control for managers in an industry where operational control is mission critical. Second, traditional monitoring methods (limited SCADA augmented with physical inspection) are becoming too expensive and provide insufficient information. Third, reactive maintenance of aging infrastructure is increasingly expensive and provides unpredictable reliability. Fourth, regulatory priorities have migrated from cost-plus ratemaking to integrated resource planning to free markets to their current focus on enhanced security and reliability requirements. Finally, supply agreements pass along costs to distribution utilities that lack any control over their demand side, and demand spikes cause uncontrollable increases in the cost of power.
A variety of electric utility programs enhance reliability and better manage the transmission and distribution grids (SCADA, AMR, etc.), enable new sources of electricity ("green power," solar, wind, etc.) and promote conservation and efficient energy use among end users (Demand Response, Demand Side Management, etc.). In most utilities, these programs are delivered by separate departments and when they need communications infrastructure, it is provided independently. A utility communications infrastructure upgrade provides a common shared broadband network to the benefit of all such programs. By overlaying a ubiquitous information communication network on the power distribution network, an “energy internet” not only constitutes the foundation of a more reliable and functional power distribution system, but also enables a revolutionary new communications link between the utility and its customers, between the municipality and its citizens. A "Smart Grid" Transforms the Utility Advanced technologies are the path to improve a national electric system whose engineering design is over 50 years old according to EPRI, which sees digital automation as the "heart" of a "smart digital system" whose foundation is modern communication architecture. Development and integration of distributed energy resources and storage capabilities are key elements, with additional power electronics-based controllers & market tools. But any revitalization of the electric utility starts with a modern communication architecture.
A New Day Dawns Utility communications infrastructure initiatives can be roughly divided into two types: 1) smaller utilities, which more often use communications infrastructure to offer comprehensive services (Cable TV, voice telephony, broadband ISP); and 2) larger utilities that tend to focus on utility efficiency benefits, and then enjoy enhanced communications capabilities that can also be used to provide broadband access and/or to lease to third party service providers. Many projects begin by optimizing core utility activities (e.g., SCADA, meter reading), and then use any surplus communications infrastructure for other services (telecom, broadband access, cable TV). Most 20th Century projects were based on fiber optic networks, and many are well established. Pioneer utility communication projects (Burbank, Provo, Tacoma) were all wired, using hybrid fiber/coaxial cable (HFC) and fiber optic lines. Newer projects reflect newer technologies, integrating fiber-optic trunks with different wireless technologies (Sun Prairie, Alexandria, Braintree, Owensboro, Rochelle). Wireless technology for metropolitan area networks is a rapidly developing field, as new projects increasingly use newer wireless broadband technologies like Wi Fi Mesh (802.11a, g, n) and WiMAX (802.16d, e). (e.g., Corpus Christi, TX). By leveraging their unrecognized advantages as communications providers to meet their critical business needs, electric utilities can create a converged infrastructure and services business that provides ubiquitous wireless digital information to revolutionize not only their own utility operations, but how cities and citizens interact. Wireless Broadband can serve not only to upgrade grids for better reliability and enhanced energy services, but also to realize the latent broadband communications potential of existing power networks. The Path to Synergy Digital transition to wireless broadband applications running on metropolitan networks represents an attractive solution to the critical business issues and pains facing an electric utility, and municipalities face a unique opportunity to align with their community's trusted monopoly infrastructure company - the electric company - to explore network-based solutions to their own business problems. By working together, the utility and the municipality discover a lower risk, less expensive, more rapid road to a ubiquitous digital transition that will not only lower their costs and improve their services, but also bring to ratepayers and citizens new digital-based services and an improved quality of life. As a municipality examines its prospects for bringing broadband to its community, this analysis would point that municipality to their local electric utility as Step One: its best natural ally in the long road ahead. ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT - The reader is encouraged to link to this post and to share this material, with the understanding that they provide an attribution to MetroNetIQ and share any alterations with MetroNetIQ.
Posted on June 13, 2008 at 06:49 AM | Comments (0) Public Safety Digital Transformation: "To Protect and Serve"There were several noteworthy trends in my conversations the last two days in San Antonio at the Texas Association of Government IT Managers (TAGITM) 30th Anniversary Conference. 1. Municipal Wireless is Dead - more on this later - but seriously folks, that brand is in the trash nowadays. Text of the second document, after the jump.
The nature of maintaining public safety is to maintain a visible presence by putting highly mobile patrol officers out in the field. Ready access to data is increasingly vital to allow patrol officers to do their best in their difficult and dangerous task to protect and serve. Public Safety: The Key to Better Government & Society Primary Cost Drivers. In any Police Department, the key cost drivers of the budget are labor costs for patrol officers and operations costs for patrol vehicles and ancillary equipment. Both of these cost categories are inflationary, rising over time; the challenge cities face is to maintain a high level of public safety and not go broke doing so. Unrecoverable Administrative Time. Police department budgets suffer a process inefficiency: "unrecoverable administrative time" of as much as 30 minutes per hour of the patrol officer's typical day, which opens the door for savings. Simply put, much of the patrol officer's time is spent waiting, driving from one place to another and documenting activity in written reports. Vehicle Costs. The costs to own and operate a police cruiser are being driven up by the rising cost of gasoline. Better Public Safety Means Lower Costs AND a Safer Environment
New Field Digital Processes, Applications and Equipment Field Digital Processes. Access to broadband data in the field lets police officers a) identify criminals for more arrests; b) automatically write tickets and generate more revenue; and c) use slack time in the field to compile reports, allowing them to stay on patrol longer each shift. Transformation by the Numbers This sample quantitative analysis of police department business processes and business case projection demonstrates the dramatic savings available when the tasks of protection and service are viewed in new ways. Labor & Operations Efficiency Step One: Analysis. A departmental review of business processes and costs shows the following: Annual Cost of one patrol officer: Cost of one missed ticket: Cost to fight one frivolous lawsuit for false arrest: Step Two: Strategy. With an integrated wireless broadband network, enable a) patrol officers to complete reports in the field to avoid overtime; b) more efficient dispatch to reduce drive time; c) reduction of crime & lawsuit costs through video surveillance cameras; and d) automatic tickets through license plate recognition software & cameras to generate more revenue. Step Three: Running the Numbers. a. Reduce Overtime Costs Summary: Savings & New Revenue As the Police Department gets more effective with these new tools, we can add one more assumption: in Year 3, the planned addition of one more officer to the force is canceled, which results in five years of savings, for an additional savings of $70,000+5*($110,000) = $620,000.
ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT - The reader is encouraged to link to this post and to share this material, with the understanding that they provide an attribution to MetroNetIQ and share any alterations with MetroNetIQ.
Posted on June 12, 2008 at 10:19 PM | Comments (0) Good Government Management: A Balancing ActI've started summarizing Lessons Learned and this week I rolled out several marketing pieces at the Texas Association of Government IT Managers (TAGITM)'s 30th Anniversary conference in San Antonio. It was a great two days, at the beautiful Westin La Canterra Resort, and my hat's off to those folks. They do what they do well. Lots of interesting conversation and dialogue with city officials and a variety of vendors, wandering around the trade show floor. More on that later, but for now, here's the first document that summarizes my assessment: Cities are in for a world of hurt with the slumping economy and the old ways of dealing with slumps are, well, pretty miserable. There's a better way. Across the board salary cuts, RIFs, wage freezes ... "sharing the pain" - "we've got to buckle down until times get better." Yechh, I can just hear it. My conclusion from all that's happened in our industry, is that there's a better alternative to the traditional way of managing a downturn in the economy. There's a better way than the two options of simply lowering costs or raising taxes when everything heads south...there's a Door Number Three to consider (thanks to my friend Ed Braddy for that one!)... And behind Door Number Three is a Field Digital Transition - the first brief then, after the jump...
The key to sound city government management is balancing costs with revenues...but city budgets are under growing pressure from increasing costs and decreasing revenues, leading to traditional belt-tightening: cutting back on jobs or services, or both. Alternately, balance is possible by using new tools and new processes to work smarter. A Perfect Storm of Bad News A perfect storm of negative economic trends threatens city budget managers in cities both large and small with direct and indirect consequences. Rising Fuel Costs. As the price of gasoline soars, unbudgeted city fuel expenses must be accommodated. Given such bad news, city management is left with few options under traditional business practices. Budgets will be scrutinized, salaries and wages frozen, and across the board reductions implemented. Pain must be shared. When governments fail to keep the books balanced, bankruptcies are rarer than with individuals or businesses. Cities continue to work through their problems until they find a solution. Pinned Down by Old Assumptions People and Processes. Bureaucracies use labor to deliver services to citizens. One view of those in government is to keep a tight lid on costs, no matter what, while others would deliver services to those most in need. A rising economy eases pressures, while a flat or sinking economy sees tensions mount as factions argue over how to adjust to increasing pressures and still meet goals. Old assumptions limit solutions to variations on painful belt-tightening, but thinking about old problems in new ways unlocks win/win solutions that improve on belt-tightening and ease tensions.
Field Digital Transition: A New Set of Tools and Assumptions New Digital Processes, Applications and Equipment for Efficiency in the Field Under the twin shocks of uncontrollable added costs and reduced revenues, the standard response is to cut labor costs and reduce services, but that leaves the city weaker and provides citizens less. The urgency of added budget pressures provides an opportunity for a better way of looking at government operations, which introduces new digital processes, applications, and equipment to make the city stronger and more productive. Digital Processes. New technology lets us look at old problems in new ways. Sending staffers out into the field in cars and trucks to gather information, returning to the office when necessary, is inefficient, when alternatives exist. Transformation by the Numbers A quantitative analysis of current business processes sets a benchmark for improvement. A straightforward business case projection demonstrates savings by challenging assumptions and looking at things in new ways. Step One: Analysis. Transformation starts with a departmental review of select business processes and costs, with a focus on mobility and activity in the field.
Posted on June 12, 2008 at 09:32 PM | Comments (0) From Valley to Beltway: New Dealer, New Deck, New GameI'll tip my hat to the new constitution YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH! Meet the new boss If "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow" was the song that fit the occasion at the Democratic Convention in 1992, when Bill and Hillary, Al and Tipper stepped out amid cascading confetti, highlighting the Baby Boomer transition of power, could "Won't Get Fooled Again" be the song that captures the mood this year, as another generation steps up? While the energy in this video is amazing, and the lyrics some of the angriest and most powerful ever cranked out - pure Rock N Roll genius...it's still just a little too - shall we say, Revolutionary? Angry? Nahh, not gonna happen, too radical ... but it'd be cool if it did. "Won't get fooled again" and the rest of the lyrics certainly seem to capture our national mood - does mine. I sensed a little of the potential power behind this nascent political movement last Tuesday night watching Barack Obama's speech in Minnesota, and since then, there's been plenty of analysis on how the primary unfolded the way it did and how the insurgent campaign of Barack Obama was able to defeat the once and still formidable Clinton machine. The best explanation I've seen so far of "how it happened" has to do with how Silicon Valley helped make Barack Obama the candidate by leveraging the power of the Internet and social networks to fund raise and activate an army of committed ground forces in every state. I wrote about it last week in Grasshoppers v. Ants, the Power of Networking. I offer three articles today that analyze further how this insurgency happened and what such change portends for the general election and beyond. First, Blow Up the Beltway by Internet pioneer Dave Winer. But back to my point. As much as I believe in the idea of Obama, if he doesn't live up to it, I'll still believe in the idea, because I always have. I don't want to be an insider, I don't want the insiders to rule, I don't want there to be insiders at all. I want to distribute opportunity and acknowledge intelligence and goodness where ever it appears. I fought against the centralized Inside The Beltway way of doing things in Silicon Valley, and we won. Of course a new aristocracy pops up but their power is as thin as the people whose power got popped in every bubble that came before. The Internet destabilizes every hierarchy it contacts. It erases every barrier to entry. The only way to win is to point off-site, in every way you can think of. Win by offering better value, not by locking users in. People will become instant refugees to escape your clutches. Think you're immune? Think again. In Meet the new boss, nothing like the old boss, on his weblog, Doc Searls, one of the authors of the 1999 groundbreaking Cluetrain Manifesto, elaborates. But we're done with that. I think even the talk radio addicts who hate all Democrats by reflex know the old gig is up. The reason has nothing to do with partisan politics and everything to do with Democracy 2.0. That's the one where the threshold of participation narrows toward zero. We're not there yet, but we're headed that way. Obama is leading the way, but it's not just about him, or his candidacy, or his policies. It's about the Net. And the Net is us. It's all outside, not inside. And it's not just about elections. It's about governance. How we do it matters more than what we do with it. And we've hardly begun to visit that one. Micah L. Sifry on his site, TechPresident, provides perhaps the best technical analysis in But there's another big reason why Obama's victory is so important. He is riding herd on the largest and most potent new political organization anyone has seen on the American landscape in at least sixteen years. He's probably got anywhere from four to eight million email addresses on top of his 1.5 million donors and 800,000 registered users of my.barackobama.com, his social networking platform. What happens with this organization if Obama wins? What will he do with it? And what will it do with him? For us here at techPresident, a website that is focused on how the candidates are using the web, and the web is using them, by the time November rolls around, this could be the billion-dollar question. This isn't the first time this question has arisen in modern American politics, by the way. And usually the answer is "Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss." It's just that the internet should force us to think about the possibilities of a different answer. Not only that, I think Obama is thinking about a different answer. Sifry details how sustainability and impact happens when a man creates and promotes a movement beyond himself, as he claims Obama has done, rather than subordinating the movement to the ego of the man, as he reflects on the potential of three candidates who preceded Obama: Jesse Jackson, Ross Perot, and Howard Dean. Further, he outlines the formula we can expect to see more of: 1) Create the best organization; and 2) Add internet-powered transparency. Sifry concludes: By building the "best political organization in America," one in which millions of people are in touch with each other online, activated and inspired, and then by putting more information out there about what the government is trying to do (and who is opposing it), Obama seems to envision working with his organization, as well as internet-powered transparency, to overcome the institutional special-interest choke hold paralyzing Washington. Personally, I find this vision pretty breathtaking, even if we don't know all the details yet. It is challenging my hard-earned cynicism about leaders and political movements. Will it work? And will Obama's activists follow him wherever he leads? (When his campaign tried to weed out some of the more independent activists in his California operation earlier this spring, that boneheaded move led to an instant web-based rebellion that caused Obama campaign manager David Plouffe to reverse the decision within 24 hours.) These could be the most important questions facing what is already the most audacious and successful insurgency to arise in American electoral politics in my lifetime. I can't wait to see what happens. Stay Tuned, there's more here than meets the eye! I think we may need to revisit and edit that cynical concluding line penned by The Who 37 years ago ... more like "Meet the New Boss, Not Like the Old Boss..." Posted on June 09, 2008 at 10:12 AM | Comments (0) The Clouds on the Horizon are Chickens Coming Home to Roost
It's a gloomy time in America, as dark clouds move in. The economic conclusion is becoming inescapable, the chickens are coming home to roost. The fact of consequences is an age-old truism - see it here in this biblical quotation: "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." Galatians 6:7 KJV It's right there in the headlines in the paper of record, the NY Times, as the stock market takes it on the chin yesterday ... Job Losses and Surge in Oil Spread Gloom on Economy. We've been kicking the can down the road for some time now, delaying the inevitable comeuppance of our lifestyles. We are, it seems, our own worst enemies. I don't subscribe to a victim mentality, so I can't make the leap that so many others seem eager to do, as they cast about and see the US as a nation of victims. We just have so much going for us in the first place to ever claim victimhood: we're smart, we have resources, and we have a history of leading ourselves out of disaster, finding a way out of the dark, into the light. And the way we generally pull ourselves up by the bootstraps is thus: there comes a time when we finally have to face the facts and let our innovation, creativity, and diligence lead us out. How did we get to where we are today? The signposts were there, had we only heeded them. Oh, hindsight really is 20/20! First we saw the rise of the two-income household in the 1970s - "good, you might say, at least we were willing to work to support our improved lifestyle." But why did we need more and more money just to buy more and more stuff? (See The Party Never Ends ... Cartoon Lemonade and The Story of Stuff from back in January) Then, back when it was "Morning in America" in the 1980s, we saw a resurgence of the stock market AND a resurgence of gas guzzling SUVs with our newfound wealth - "Maybe we could pump oil out of the ground forever ... at least, we felt rich back then!" But then what did we do? We shorted ourselves on long-term investments like alternative energy and infrastructure and instead spent our money on short-term lifestyle improvements. Cars got bigger, trucks got bigger (our waistlines got bigger) and houses got bigger and bigger. Where would this path take us? How much more could we consume? This song from Austin's own Timbuk 3 seemed to capture the spirit of the times back in the early 80s... The Future's So Bright, I Gotta Wear Shades. Man, those really were the days...I love this song! Then came a rise in borrowing against the equity locked safely away in homes in the 1990s and 2000s - "We're still rich! Whoaa, even richer, when you count all the extra cash I just pulled from my house!!" Now, in rapid succession, we've had the following over the past few years ... yechh! At the root of much of this bad economic news is a little bit of fate and a whole lot of self-inflicted damage, human behavior that resists living according to principles and understanding boundaries and limits, and resists reality. More on the jump. Consistently, we Americans have resisted the call to conserve and live within boundaries. It's as if it's in our national DNA to squander resources and deny the rule of consequences, which as we know, in our heart of hearts, is as inevitable as the law of gravity. "Saving and living conservatively? That's for saps, not us!", at least that's what our inimitable Vice President says: "Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy." Vice President Dick Cheney, April 30, 2001 Just as an aside, on how things can always get much, much worse, we would do well to remember those innocent early pre-9/11 days of the Bush administration when there was slight news coverage of VP Dick Cheney's meetings behind closed doors with oil executive buddies to forge an energy policy. Hmmmm, don't you just wonder what they said, back when oil was 30-something dollars a barrel (now at $140/barrel and heading north with a bullet) ...those meetings were a sign that few of us heeded. And then along came 9/11 and the Iraq War to put things in perspective. It all began to spiral out of control ... But it's not all gloom and doom today because - at least in my own skewed world view - there's always a door back at the end of the room that offers us all a way out, or at a minimum, a bit of sunshine and a way to take some personal control - written on that particular door is "Integrated Digital Transition." More about that in a minute. The first challenge we each must address in the face of such daunting bad news these days is to overcome feelings of hopelessness, powerlessness, and despair. It's not unusual to get depressed when such bad news hits home - and it's going to keep on coming at us, folks. The bad times seem to stretch out endlessly into the future and that realization can lead to paralysis and even, denial. It's too easy to shrug one's shoulders and say "Oh well, what can I do ..." and keep on doing what you've been doing, hoping someone else will take the reins, or maybe the problem will just go away. Fact is, we've done that already, for too, too long, and guess what, the problems don't in fact go away, they stay, and they get worse! In fact, there's lots we each of us can do, each one of us, and it starts by taking a personal inventory of how we live our lives. We each need to look at our current set of assumptions and challenge ourselves to do things more economically and less wastefully - that's acknowledging reality. Little acts of conservation and redirection have big impacts when looked at collectively, and they have a way of lifting each of us out of the funk the bad news drags us down into. We have done things the same way for so long that we don't realize how wasteful we can be and how far we can go to make things better. First, I recommend paying more attention to leaders and choosing leaders that "get it." The old ways of doing things won't cut it any more. At the local, regional, state, and federal level, we should be picking leaders who are poised to adapt to change and do things in new ways. Personally, I like Obama, not because he's an inspiring orator, and he most certainly is, but because he appears committed and ready to try new things and new ways to solve old, vexing problems and take us in new, positive directions. Second, we should each take a long hard look at what we do and why we do it as a society. We can start to align our priorities and spending with our values and available tools to ensure that we are spending our money and our time in the right places, for the right things, as effectively as possible. We can start to prepare for some sustained hard times, which will come with the sustained high prices of all goods and services brought on by expensive oil. Instead of moaning for government intervention to lower gas taxes temporarily, for instance, as Hillary and John McCain would have had us do a few weeks ago, why shouldn't we start contemplating how we could live good lives with expensive gasoline? The Europeans somehow manage that feat, after all! On that note, I bought a Civic Hybrid one year ago (love it - 40 MPG!) and I'm trading in my Ford Expedition next month when the lease expires for a new Honda CRV. My little actions won't change the world, far from it, but they make me feel more in control and bring my behavior more in line with my values, and in my own little way, I get to lower my carbon footprint while lightening the load on my wallet. What's so bad about that??? So next, by substituting investing for spending wherever possible, we can begin to reap some savings over time. That's what I'm doing when I invested in fuel efficient vehicles that would lower my operating expenses over time. And that's what city government leaders should be doing with digital applications, new business processes, and broadband infrastructure - attacking labor and service expense by investing in broadband applications and network infrastructure - investing in Integrated Digital Transition. Finally, by taking control of our destiny, by taking control of ever more details, we begin to forget how depressed we were , how put upon by external events, and we start to develop the very important skill of getting more out of less. The skill of efficiency doesn't come naturally, but it feels good the more you do it. After months and years of wringing out inefficiencies, you stop and look back and wonder how you ever could have been so wasteful! With a paradigm shift from wasteful consumption of resources to doing more with less, it no longer feels like you are deprived and are suffering under adverse economic conditions. Rather, it feels like this is a new, normal state, and it's natural to scrimp and save and get the most out of what we have. As the proverb advises us, "Waste Not, Want Not." As individuals, as a society, as a nation, we can do far better than we've done in the past. We just have to have sufficient motivation to change our old ways of doing things and to take on new lifestyles and business practices. Left to our own devices, we'd just keep on keepin' on. Why not? The good news is - it now looks like the economy is about to give us all the motivation and incentive we need! Since we're consulting proverbs, why not turn to one of the best sources of wisdom around, closing out this post the way we came in? The Bottom Line Looks like we've got good news and bad news .. the bad news is: The Economy Sucks!!! The good news is: With our wasteful lifestyles and business practices, we've got a long, long way to go, with lots of fat to cut along the way... So don't worry folks - WE WILL SURVIVE! UPDATE: Sunday Morning comics echo my comments...
Posted on June 07, 2008 at 10:25 PM | Comments (0) Grasshoppers v. Ants, the Power of Networking
The disruptive effects of the internet are really quite incredible, when you think about it. (See the series of posts I did on Structural Change, starting back in early February.) While so much has been made about Obama's capturing the Democratic nomination - a truly historic event for this country for a major political party to nominate an African-American candidate - much less has been made of the incredible organizing and fund-raising effort of his campaign, founded in large part on leveraging the tools found out on the internet. (I covered that aspect pretty well in Top Down v. Bottom Up on May 26.) That's how innovation works - while any of the candidates could have used these tools, it took Obama and his group of innovators to actually do it and show the rest. This bodes well for our political future, I think. What strikes me about Obama, setting his progressive politics and potential for real change aside for a moment, is that he seems to capture the magic that Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Michael Dell did when they launched Microsoft, Apple, and Dell and built billion dollar fortunes and business empires. Consider: Similarly, in Another Contrast, blogger John Cole explores the impact of the Obama campaign on organizational dynamics in today's politics and in Compare Speeches, the power of group movement v. identity politics orientation. Time Magazine does a good job exploring the Obama campaign and its potential impact on politics in How Obama Did It. More than seven months later, that faith has been rewarded. The 2008 presidential campaign has produced its share of surprises, but one of the most important is that a newcomer from Chicago put together by far the best political operation of either party. Obama's campaign has been that rare, frictionless machine that runs with the energy of an insurgency and the efficiency of a corporation. His team has lacked what his rivals' have specialized in: there have been no staff shake-ups, no financial crises, no change in game plan and no visible strife. Even its campaign slogan - "Change we can believe in" - has remained the same. How did he do it? How did Obama become the first Democratic insurgent in a generation or more to knock off the party's Establishment front-runner? Facing an operation as formidable as Clinton's, Obama says in an interview, "was liberating... What I'd felt was that we could try some things in a different way and build an organization that reflected my personality and what I thought the country was looking for. We didn't have to unlearn a bunch of bad habits." First, I'd reflect that having the ability to bring together a team and execute as Obama did with his campaign is a sign of strong leadership. Second, having the confidence to strike out in a new direction as Obama did, to "try some things in a different way ..." is the hallmark of an innovator and a leader, a bona fide change agent. The campaign is the first test and demonstration of a potential president's leadership style, character, and ability, so his execution in going down a different path and accomplishing a stretch goal in an unconventional way gives me confidence that he will be able to apply that same methodology to other problems that vex our society and have success. I don't for a minute think that he will not suffer failures and mistakes along the way - the problems are too great to think that - but I admire his spirit, respect his abilities, and believe that this approach that he took with his campaign is about the best we can hope for in a political leader, given our current circumstances. Keep in mind - we may be electing a president (an individual), but we're getting an entire executive administration and an approach to governing (a team and a movement). His choices so far have worked out pretty remarkably. Let's hope that the trend line continues. And for a rather different perspective on structural change, but somehow linked to this discussion when we think about the impact of digitization on culture, see NY Times Op-Ed Columnist Paul Krugman's Bits, Bands and Books, Paying for Creativity in a Digital World. This year, it just keeps getting more interesting... Posted on June 06, 2008 at 01:06 PM | Comments (0) Science for the Masses
When we consider the ubiquity of cellphones, iPods, personal computers and the Internet, it's easy to see how science (and the technology to which it leads) is woven into the fabric of our day-to-day activities. When we benefit from CT scanners, M.R.I. devices, pacemakers and arterial stents, we can immediately appreciate how science affects the quality of our lives. When we assess the state of the world, and identify looming challenges like climate change, global pandemics, security threats and diminishing resources, we don’t hesitate in turning to science to gauge the problems and find solutions. And when we look at the wealth of opportunities hovering on the horizon - stem cells, genomic sequencing, personalized medicine, longevity research, nanoscience, brain-machine interface, quantum computers, space technology - we realize how crucial it is to cultivate a general public that can engage with scientific issues; there's simply no other way that as a society we will be prepared to make informed decisions on a range of issues that will shape the future. Put a Little Science in Your Life The last few weeks, I've been in the process of honing an economic argument for broadband applications, business process improvement changes, and metropolitan broadband networks. And I think it grows more compelling by the day. See Putting the Cart Before the Horse for more details. But here comes an OpEd from the Sunday NY Times by Brian Greene, a professor of physics at Columbia, and author of The Elegant Universe and The Fabric of the Cosmos. He makes an argument that science is at the center of our lives and indeed, understanding science not only makes life more worth living, but it unifies us as we come to understand its wonders. His thoughts spurred in me an equally compelling, if more eloquent argument to my economic one for why we need to become ridiculously connected to all the world's information - we need robust broadband in our lives so that everyone, literally, can have the ready access to information that some of us have come to enjoy through the Internet and the marvelous search engines, social networks, blogs, and websites that make this rich world all so accessible. We desperately need more rational thought in our society. Science has become such a big part of our lives, and too few in our society appreciate its many intricacies. Much of Greene's article focuses on the teaching of science, and how our schools and teachers, with best intentions, drive kids away from science. He argues that we should start with instilling wonder in the marvels of the universe and science by teaching the big picture first, and then going back to build the fundamentals using that wonder as the energy to keep kids engaged. In contrast, most teachers today subscribe to the pedagogical approach of first teaching the building blocks, getting kids to first master the fundamental details so that the bigger ideas that follow can be better understood. Problem is that in practice, by the time teachers get to the really sexy stuff, they've lost many kids' interest. I'm with Dr. Greene - we need to grab 'em up front with the sexy stuff - win their hearts, then their minds will follow. At times I feel we've become in such a hurry in our busy lives to solve vexing problems, make money and satisfy our many needs and desires (all very serious adult pursuits, after all), that we easily lose sight of the wonderful world we live in and all that there is to experience and enjoy (the child's viewpoint). But the future can be a bright one. If we can just find a way to power through this decidedly unsexy phase, where we must build the infrastructure that under girds the information society, we will come out on the other side with a new world where information is literally and figuratively right at our fingertips, there for the asking, there for the taking. When that day comes, those who enjoy the benefits of ubiquitous broadband connectivity may not understand the struggle of those who went before them to build the underlying infrastructure, but they will enjoy the fruits of our labor. And we who built it will know that it was our efforts that made it possible. We will have lit up the world with information, just like our forefathers lit it up with electricity and light. And we used science to make it happen. These are the deeper motivations that keep me going in this quest to build broadband into our lives. The last word to Dr. Greene: Science is the greatest of all adventure stories, one that's been unfolding for thousands of years as we have sought to understand ourselves and our surroundings. Science needs to be taught to the young and communicated to the mature in a manner that captures this drama. We must embark on a cultural shift that places science in its rightful place alongside music, art and literature as an indispensable part of what makes life worth living. It's the birthright of every child, it's a necessity for every adult, to look out on the world, as the soldier in Iraq did, and see that the wonder of the cosmos transcends everything that divides us. Posted on June 04, 2008 at 05:36 AM | Comments (0) Digital Transition v. Municipal WirelessThe astute reader of this website will notice a change in the upper left corner of the main page...I don't get around to changing the "Featured Topic" section nearly as often as I should, and the "Exaflood" topic had cobwebs hanging from it. Mea Culpa. Managing this site is not unlike managing a household, or your desk. Sometimes you can overlook a desk drawer, and forget that it has a purpose other than to catch all the stray things that don't have a proper place. Maintenance of this site is an ongoing challenge, and I tend to focus on the blog posts, leaving the edges on their own. So, its news to me when I shift my focus and address a lingering issue. I've updated the Featured Topic with what I think is a very important discussion item - Digital Transition. I've added this new term to the glossary, and consider this a key point and new direction for us all. Digital Transition -The term "Digital Transition" describes the process all organizations must go through in the 21st Century, as they leverage new technologies that provide new options for Applications, Equipment, Processes, and Networks that make them more effective. In contrast, the term "Municipal Wireless" is limiting. It puts the network technology ahead of the application and process changes that drive the business case. A good way to understand this issue is to consider analog v. digital. Analog technology was revolutionary in the 20th century, when radio and television changed the landscape through exploitation of better understanding of how radio frequencies behaved. But with the advent of the transistor and the integrated circuit, a digital alternative was born and it matured in the second half of the twentieth century. As this digital progress was employed with the internet at the turn of the century, the potential of the transformation became apparent, and private sector companies began to leverage the new tools to be more competitive. Public sector organizations are lagging now, and have much ground to make up to be more effective. Thus, the "analog" approach reflects a 20th century mindset that still relies upon paper-based data, labor inputs, and manual processes. A "digital" approach demonstrates a 21st century perspective that takes advantage of low-cost, high-power digital computers and storage devices, VOIP communication devices and broadband networks to transform the potential of organizations. Undergoing a digital transition is a complex task that starts with a paradigm shift regarding the nature of the job, and a rewriting of the processes used to accomplish business objectives. Because digital technology evolves rapidly, a digital transition is more of an ongoing process than it is an event with a beginning and an end. Is it such a big deal what you choose to call something? Actually, it's a bigger deal than we realize, because how we define an issue drives the discussion. As long as we refer to "Municipal Wireless," we're stuck talking about cities and mobile technology. Private uses of wireless broadband, and FTTH are left out, technically, when the title is "Municipal Wireless." When I relaunched this site in January 2006, I recognized even then the limits of the term "Municipal Wireless," and the name of my original website, "UnwireMyCity," could be. I began to talk instead about Metropolitan Broadband, expanding the discussion to include regional perspectives, beyond the boundaries of municipal initiatives, and shed the limits of "wireless" to include all broadband technologies. Little did I realize at the time how limited even that term, "Metropolitan Broadband," would be. Because now I believe that has become limiting, and the larger issue is not networks, regions, or broadband. It is getting work done in the most efficient manner with the best tools. The challenge we face is that we have all focused on the network so far, when the act of changing requires that you first capture the attention of those needed to accomplish the change. And wrapping one's brain around the complexities of broadband networks has proven to be too big a leap for the general public. What is far more relevant to decision-makers, and far more common to so many more people, is the impact of digital technology on our lives, and the opportunity to use digital technology to make our lives better. Here's a slide from a keynote presentation I delivered, believe it or not, back in September 2005, titled "The Future of Community Broadband." With this slide back then, I was making a point about the trend to Mobility, which is an aspect of Digital Transition. These two columns demonstrate the switch from analog to digital.
The 21st Century will see a transition from analog to digital. And we will see a computing transition from a fixed activity where one is tied to a cord in the wall, to a mobile activity where the computing device goes along with the person. That is what I call the "March to Mobility." The reason we'll see both of these transitions is because they are liberating changes, saving both time and effort, providing more for less. As we come under increasing pressures to do more with less, we will collectively turn to new tools, and the pressure to undergo a Digital Transition will grow greater and greater. At some point, the Pain of Change will become less than the Pain of Staying the Same. When that point hits, organizational leaders will turn to new digital solutions to transform the way they do business. Better to start now, go through the change, and come out better equipped to deal with the problems of modern life, than to deny the changes needed and hold on to the past. Posted on June 03, 2008 at 09:11 AM | Comments (0) In a National Leadership Vacuum, Local Leaders Slowly EmergeHere's an excerpt from a February 2005 interview with FCC Commissioner Michael Copps on Why our broadband policy's still a mess (Hint: It's STILL a mess, 3 years and some change later! Copps is expressing a minority opinion - no power to change things given the current make up of the FCC). What makes sense in terms of a national broadband policy? I think Congress is going to have to work through that. If we are going to fix the Universal Service system, which is predicated on the idea that everybody should have access to comparable communications at comparable and reasonable prices, we have to ask, is our advanced telecommunications part of that or not? Is broadband a part of that or not? So before we start fixing every little problem with universal service I think we ought to have some kind of a philosophical or national purpose or national objective discussion about where does broadband fit in. And when I talk about central-infrastructure challenge, you know it seems like each generation faces an infrastructure challenge. Before the Civil War, we had infrastructure challenges and building internal improvements of highways and turnpikes and canals. After the Civil War, it was building transcontinental railroads. With the Eisenhower years, we built the national highway system. I think our (challenge) is broadband. At the same time, the state legislature in Indiana recently shot down a bill that would impose significant restrictions on municipalities for launching their own broadband infrastructure services. It's not an easy thing if you're the leader of a hard-pressed, cash-strapped municipality - as all of them are in this day and age - to take on additional burden of providing broadband to your people. I think we do a grave injustice in trying to hobble municipalities. That's an entrepreneurial approach, that's an innovative approach. Why don't we encourage that instead of having bills introduced - "Oh, you can't do this because it's interfering with somebody's idea of the functioning of the marketplace." And then the marketplace is not functioning in those places. This interview states the problem well, but there's no other way to put this, we have a de facto policy to let the duopoly cable and telecom companies provide us broadband, and we get what they give us, in essence. But that's not always enough, so we are seeing metropolitan networks emerge, ever so slowly, against great odds. The economic opportunity cost of such policy neglect is high. This well-written, in-depth article from a year after that Copps interview (more than two years ago), Let there be Wi-Fi: broadband is the electricity of the 21st century - and much of America is being left in the dark describes the problem well. The countries surpassing the United States in broadband deployment did so by using a combination of public entities and private firms. The Japanese built their world-class system by ensuring "open access" to residential telephone lines, meaning competitors paid the same wholesale price to use the wires. The country is also establishing a super-fast, nationwide fiber system via a combination of tax breaks, debt guarantees and subsidies. But of particular note, the Japanese government also encouraged municipalities to build their own networks, especially in rural areas. Towns and villages willing to set up their own ultra-high-speed fiber networks received government subsidies covering approximately one-third of their costs. Unfortunately, the United States has pursued the opposite policy. President Bush has called for "universal, affordable access for broadband technology by the year 2007," and FCC Chairman Kevin Martin claims broadband deployment is his "highest priority." But they have made no progress toward these goals; in fact, they have rewarded their corporate cronies for maintaining high prices, low speeds and lackluster innovation. Federal policies have not merely failed to correct our broadband problems, they have made them worse. Instead of encouraging competition, the FCC has allowed DSL providers and cable companies to shut out competitors by denying access to their lines. And whereas the Japanese government encourages individual towns to set up their own "Community Internet," Washington has done nothing. Fourteen states in the United States now have laws on the books restricting cities and towns from building their own high-speed Internet networks. No wonder America is falling behind its Asian competitors. Hmm, that is a grim picture ... well, maybe it will improve in time? Not so much, I'm afraid, although there are glimmers, as noted in this article, Broadband: It's a Community Thing, written two months ago, nearly two years after the previous article. This article also focuses on FTTH, rather than Wi Fi. Overcoming challenges FTTH access has been mostly relegated to the larger urban and suburban communities. Looking to get a good return on their investments, service providers target communities with higher densities. Unfortunately, this leaves most rural communities without much more than a dial-up connection. That's not saying bringing broadband into rural towns isn't fraught with challenges. Take Minot, N.D.-based SRT Telecom. Like many independent telcos, SRT's territory spans both metro and rural areas and varied service domains (it offers everything from ADSL2+ data, voice and cable TV to wireless service). Taking part of its name from the Souris River, one of the telco's main challenges is its diverse service territory. In its traditional metro network area, it plans to continue leveraging its existing copper plant via ADSL2+, bonding and VDSL2, while using active Ethernet-based FTTH in its rural sections. "We have targeted FTTH in our rural areas," said Shawn Grosz, SRT's director of network technology. "I am not talking rural towns, but the very rural: out to the farmsteads where, in some cases, we have loops of 20 miles where broadband is very difficult to reach. We [serve] those customers who can't be served with fiber." While Grosz admits carrying fiber out to these remote locations is initially expensive, SRT believes making targeted investments in both its existing copper plant and FTTH will pave a high-speed path to future services such as IPTV when ready. Along with paving a road for future services, community-based initiatives - despite the legal challenges they face from incumbent operators who take issue with public entities providing telecom services - can become an economic attraction to local businesses. As one of the first U.S.-based utility companies to offer FTTP services, Bristol, Va.,-based BVU Optinet was able to attract large government systems integrators such as Northrop Grumman. What’s more, businesses with FTTP-based access are able to offer their employees more effective teleworking opportunities. Teleworking not only can reduce the amount of office space a company needs, but also cut down on automotive emissions since it reduces the amount of cars traveling on the roads. (See: Green to go for fiber) Finally, there's this summary out today, As a result, in most markets in the U.S. there have been only two broadband providers, one telecom and one cable company. While some countries were aggressively trying to catch up to the U.S. Internet lead, "not much changed in the U.S.," said Susan Crawford, a professor of Internet governance at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. Change is finally starting to happen, as cable and telecom companies compete more aggressively in each other's traditional businesses. Bills are now making their way through Congress to remove the state barriers to municipalities offering broadband. Verizon Communications Inc. is in the midst of a $23 billion project, called FiOS, to bring fiber to the homes of more than half of its 33 million customers in 28 states by 2010. Comcast last month began boosting speeds on its network, and estimates 20 percent of its customers will have access to faster speeds by the end of the year. Still, these ultrafast networks are destined only for certain parts of the country, such as major urban areas, at least for the foreseeable future. In large swaths of the U.S., providers consider deploying broadband less profitable. In downtown Chattanooga, James Busch, a radiologist and medical-software entrepreneur, said when he opened his business, he couldn't find an Internet service that was fast enough. Comcast's plan was too slow, and AT&T said it would take three months to build a dedicated higher-speed connection to his business, Busch said. AT&T said it now offers small businesses a download speed of 6 megabits a second, and upload of 512 kilobits a second. Busch's clinic consists of 10 radiologists who provide remote diagnoses for rural hospitals. Transmitting the high-resolution medical imagery often requires a very fast speed, which he said the power board's network provides. "Information technology means a smaller country with fewer people can now do the same amount of work as a larger country," said Busch. "If we don't become more efficient, we lose our big-country advantage." Last month, the power board raised $219 million through municipal bonds, which it said will primarily be used to upgrade its existing electrical system. The upgrade will involve laying a fiber network to create a so-called smart grid, which will allow the utility to remotely monitor and control how power is distributed, DePriest said. As we can see from these four articles, the broadband theme has evolved over time, even as many aspects have remained constant. Where there was much focus on wireless four years ago, now there's more interest in Fiber, it seems. Economic development more than connectivity for social purposes has emerged as the driving factor for communities to get active. And applications drive the business case these days. But resistance from incumbents remains a constant, as does the lack of national broadband policy and the absence of national leadership, or even, for that matter, any sense of urgency in the Congress or at the FCC. Absent the activity we've seen at the local level, we would have little to rejoice in when it comes to progress on national broadband infrastructure, as the big boys would continue to move at their own pace and the US would fall ever more behind their global competitors. It's not too late, and I'm banking on a resurgence of interest in broadband infrastructure after the presidential election in the fall. Let's hope. Posted on June 02, 2008 at 11:32 AM | Comments (0) Putting the Cart in Front of the Horse
Not many city officials will understand why they need a broadband network, especially these days, after they read two or three of the ever prominent emails circulating about the debacles in Philadelphia, San Francisco, Portland ... "those didn't work, why the hell do I want my city to be the next one in the next series of emails? No Thanks." But those same officials do know about the continuing need they have to get their tasks done, and they're interested in new and better ways to "get 'er done" and always, always, they want to save money while doing it. They better. It's high time we quit talking about networks and network technology, and start talking about Digital Applications and Digital Transformation: Getting work done faster, more effectively, more efficiently, by using newly available tools and doing things differently than the way they've always been done. That is the nature of Digital Transition: we all have to go through it, and those who go through it sooner will reap rewards sooner and be more competitive than the laggards. Big words, simple concept. Through the use of new digital technologies, city workers can be far more effective, doing more work in less time. In time, the city manager can shrink the size of city government, or meet the demands of growth with a flat hiring strategy. Rather than throw bodies at their problems, the city manager can add technology and keep staff levels the same. The result is better services at less cost, with more options for the city down the road. Good Government Management is a Balancing Act The key to sound city government management is balancing costs with revenue ... but city budgets are under growing pressure from increasing costs and decreasing revenues. The traditional solution is belt-tightening, cutting jobs or services, or both. But there's another way to bring back balance, a better way: using new tools and new processes to work smarter. A Perfect Storm of Bad News A perfect storm of negative economic trends threatens city budget managers in cities both large and small with direct and indirect consequences. Rising Fuel Costs. As the price of gasoline soars, unbudgeted city fuel expenses must be accommodated. Sinking Home Values. Real estate values have dropped at unprecedented rates. Declining Sales Tax Revenues. As people quit spending, the revenue from transactions contracts. Declining Property Tax Revenues. With sinking property values come lower revenues for city coffers. In the face of such bad news, city management staff have few options under traditional business practices. Typically, departmental budgets are scrutinized, salaries and wages are frozen, reductions are implemented across the board. There will be pain, and it must be shared. Because when governments fail at their job of keeping the books balanced, they can't just shut down and start over, like individuals or businesses. They must continue to work through their problems until they find a solution. We're stuck with the problem and the only way out is to work out a solution. Pinned Down by Old Assumptions People and Processes. Governments are bureaucracies that use labor inputs to deliver services to citizens. Taxes and Fees. Governments raise money by taxing and charging fees. The classic argument in government is between those who believe in keeping a tight lid on costs, no matter what, and those who believe in delivering services to those in society most in need. A rising economy eases pressures, while a sinking economy sees tensions mount as factions argue over how to adjust to increasing pressures. Sticking with old assumptions limits the range of solutions to variations of painful belt-tightening. Thinking about old problems in new ways unlocks new win/win solutions that improve on belt-tightening and ease tensions. Under the twin shocks of uncontrollable added costs and reduced revenues, the standard response is to cut labor costs and reduce services, but that leaves the city weaker and provides citizens less. The urgency of added budget pressures provides an opportunity for a better way of looking at government operations, which introduces new digital processes, applications, and equipment to make the city stronger and more productive. Digital Processes. New technology lets us look at old problems in new ways. Sending staffers out into the field in cars and trucks to gather information, returning to the office when necessary, is inefficient, when alternatives exist. Digital Applications. From Voice over IP (VOIP) to Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR), a variety of digital applications are enabled by new communication options that enable mobile workers to cut out inefficient steps and added costs, to do their jobs more effectively. Digital Equipment. Converged dual-use cell phones (iPhone, RIM Blackberry), wireless "netbooks" (Asus EEE), and wireless video surveillance cameras are only the first wave of new digital equipment that leverages new communication options to transform traditional business processes. Step One: Analysis. Transformation starts with a departmental review of select business processes and costs. Step Two: Strategy. Departmental managers strategize to transform operations with new digital technology. Step Three: Focus. Key benefits will accrue in three distinct areas. Folks, the smart city management will be reading the tea leaves and already be thinking outside the box, along the lines of the argument presented above. The rest, well, the rest will realize at some point that it's all gone to shit, but it will be too late for them. They will be stuck digging out and enduring the pain of slashed budgets, spread across the board to all departments, as they suck it up to bull their way through the bad times and hope for good times ahead. Yechhh. There's a better way, and that is using technology to do things differently. First, you invest in a network, either city-owned or privately-owned, that will depend on the particular circumstance of the city. Then you pay yourself instead of others - you quit buying services from outsiders. Second, you change the way you do what you have to do - quit driving around and wasting gas and time - start doing the work out in the field and recognize that each trip back to the office costs big bucks. We'll see how this goes, and who steps up to grab the brass ring. Times have changed - the first organizations to realize that fact and make changes will be the first ones to reap the rewards and thrive. Posted on June 01, 2008 at 10:11 PM | Comments (0) |
METRONET VENDOR DIRECTORYMY OTHER BLOGSMetroNetIQ E-Store - Be sure to visit the MetroNetIQ E-Store and pick up a copy of The ABCs of Community Broadband: How Digital Transitions Will Transform America's Communities, One at a Time. The E-Store will offer special discounts on this valuable guide for community leaders, discounts that won't be available to the general public on Amazon! |
|||
| Powered by Movable Type | ©2006 MetroNetIQ.com | Website Design by zilkoweb | |||
