AUTHOR ARCHIVES: Ian Davies

Motion Computing's Ian Davies asks whether we can get too obsessed with specs when it comes to selecting a rugged device and why it's important to get the balance right...

When investing in a rugged tablet platform, a business must be confident that the assets can withstand varying weather conditions, wear-and-tear and even unexpected accidents. In particular, field service applications in more demanding environments need assurances that tablet PCs – which are often the one and only work computer for field service personnel – will still continue to function even if dropped from waist-high, left out in a rain shower or given a light dusting.

The IEC standardized markings for Ingress Protection (IP) clearly classify and rate the degree of defences that mechanical casings and electrical enclosures provide against dust and water.  “IPxy” is the default system for showing which mobile tablet is built tough enough for the job at hand. The two numbers that follow “IP” to rate the level of protection guaranteed with each tablet PC, refer to the protection against solid particle and liquid ingress.  The IP ratings seen most often in today’s top performing rugged tablets are IP54 and IP65.

Typically this is best understood when evaluating why a consumer grade unit may not be suitable for life in the field or on the factory floor.  Many businesses are already realising that consumer units simply cannot take the knocks of business use, even when they are placed in cases or shells.

 

Some consumer unit manufacturers have begun to use IP ratings as part of marketing material and this has further increased awareness of the issue of ruggedisation.  As these consumer units have become more rugged, they have put pressure on “dedicated” rugged manufacturers to increase the gap between enterprise and consumer units.

But having too much of something can be just as expensive as not having enough.  In the case of IP ratings, less can be more (in terms of both peace of mind and money) because excess protection can be very counterproductive for mobile workers.

This is far from a statement of the obvious.  “Specmanship” throughout the procurement cycle in many enterprise mobility projects has led to the over-design of many rugged mobile computers, which has quickly led to the completely unnecessary predicament many field service organisations now face: too much or too little protection for the job at hand.

The push for ever more rugged extremes and the impact of BYOD has led to a swathe of examples at either end of the ruggedisation spectrum.  Some projects have ended up with an expensive, heavy mobile tank of a tablet PC that is difficult to incorporate into workflows. Elsewhere, an army of consumer grade devices, such as an iPad, barely survive one month in the field.

 

This extremism is not just an operational concern.  It has substantial impact on warranty discussions and as such affects procurement and finance.

There is however, a third way - a Goldilocks zone situation that can resolve the issues by having “just enough” ruggedisation without drowning in unnecessary specification and cost.

Getting this balance of ruggedisation, cost and productivity right is based in an honest assessment of “Which IP rating is right for this workflow?” This means an accurate consideration of two main factors:

1. How business critical is the process that is enabled by the tablet PC? (The more critical the process, the greater the argument for ruggedisation that will protect the continuity)
2. The actual environment(s) that the tablet will be deployed in (and how the use of the tablet PC may change in those environments)

Many applications substantially over-estimate the amount of ruggedisation needed.   The vast majority of mobile work flows do not require a dust proof device as dust tight will suffice and offers several advantages over dust proof, including reduced thermals (which allows for higher tablet performance).

And when it comes to liquid, how much water is the tablet PC going to be exposed to?   IPX4 exceeds even the heaviest of downpours. Think “buckets of water” equivalent to approximately 10 litres per minute, or a litre every 6 seconds.  The chances are this will cover off 99% of all applications in an environment exposed to water.

Liquid ingress is also a key issue for many markets that need to clean the tablet PC, such as healthcare.  However again, IP54 is more than sufficient for the actual workflows in place.

 

Why does this matter?  Firstly because “excess IP” is expensive.  It not only adds to the upfront cost of the units but also means the device is heavy and bigger, meaning more accessories are needed throughout the workflow. In some cases this will then compromise the mobility offered by the unit and that threatens the entire mobility project being undertaken.  This typically happens when concerns over the environment of the deployment overtake considerations of the process that the mobile technology enables.

But perhaps the biggest threat is that choosing a rugged tablet on its IP rating causes - in any business - a series of compromises elsewhere.

 

This may then lead to the sacrifice of features such as input devices that a mobile team simply cannot afford to miss.  Bulky, heavy units are not welcomed by teams in the field and even more so when those units cannot do the job demanded of them; not because the unit is not tough enough, but simply is not equipped with the right kit because of the weight and IP rating of the tablet itself.

Many procurement managers, IT teams and even manufacturers have made a fetish of the IP rating and the subsequent perceived “ruggedness” of a given design for different reasons.  It is now time to correct this early error and realise that not every application demands the toughest possible tablet.

Whilst it is clear that consumer units will not meet the needs of business users out in the field, there is now a clear case to evaluate the specific workflow and environment for a deployment and select a tablet accordingly.  Just as a business would not equip its field service teams with armoured vans but finds the right vehicle; so it should issue tablets fit for purpose rather than excessively laden with unnecessary specifications.

 

---

 

be social and share this feature

Motion Computing's Ian Davies returns to the question of what defines field service...

We have previously discussed the emerging differences between enterprise mobility and field service.  The underlying current of that discussion was which fish would eat the other.

In the cold light of day, it is clear that (from a market and technology perspective at least) field service management will live ‘within’ enterprise mobility.  But this overlooks a critical point of distinction - what does a field service definition of enterprise mobility look like?  What are the actual, tangible hallmarks of an FS deployment and what does this mean for selecting the right technology?

 

Firstly, don’t even look at the technology.  Look in the mirror.  If you are wearing a hard hat, chances are you are field service and much of the discussion around enterprise mobility may not apply to a great extent.

 

Of course, the same reason you are wearing such a fetching headpiece - safety - does need to be reflected in the choice of mobile technology.    This may mean the right IP ratings for ruggedness, the right protection of critical information or the right certifications for specific environments such as explosive atmospheres.

There are other clear hallmarks of a field service deployment, driven by the needs of the mobile worker.  Whilst these can be broadly grouped into connectivity, computing power and security, it is worth bearing in mind what each of these labels mean to the different vertical markets within field service.

Connectivity

Productivity in the field depends on being connected to other people and resources - be they colleagues at head office, other mobile technicians and engineers or databases thousands of miles away.  When a signal connection drops for a consumer on the high street it is an annoyance.  When a signal drops for an engineer on an oil rig, it can paralyse the operation of the whole drilling platform.

Elsewhere, many public safety and utility businesses operate within dense metropolitan areas where network saturation can impact wireless performance - especially 4G.

Not all enterprise-focused mobile devices are compatible with the latest 4G wireless technology, which means signal availability and data speeds can be unpredictable.

One of the arguments recently put forward has been to view the level of ruggedisation that a tablet needs not as a consequence of the environment in which it operates, but as a result of how critical the process enabled by the technology is, to the business.  The same goes for connectivity - if the connection to the back office or elsewhere is paramount to enabling a given task, it must be backed up with redundancy and alternative options.

Computing power

Software applications for use in the field grow ever more sophisticated, incorporating more and more data and handling increasingly complex processes.  At the same time the need for power efficiency (and the subsequent impact on battery life) remains top of the list of concerns for most deployments.

 

For example, the latest 5^th Gen Intel^® Core™ processors (Broadwell) including the i7 vPro™ chipset, provide the power to quickly move through computation-intensive applications, while increasing overall power efficiency. However, again applying the idea that the process, not the environment is the defining aspect of selection, it is important that such technology is paired with the ability to hot-swap the battery in the field.

 

Despite the fact field service is - by definition - away from the traditional desk environment, data processing needs remain the same. Devices must offer the same processing capabilities on devices such as tablets as they do on a desktop or laptop.

Security

From a security perspective, the net result of a more connected mobile workforce with access to increasingly sensitive information is greater vulnerability.  Stories of lost laptops still make the headlines and more endpoint devices offer more openings to malicious attacks on a corporate network.  Part of the answer here lies in greater training and better procedures for field service personnel.

 

 However, technology can also help - multi-factor authentication capabilities through a combination of password, fingerprint scanner and smart card readers for environments such as healthcare, public safety and manufacturing - are important considerations.  Likewise encryption is a vital component of an increased security profile, with remote management capabilities and kill switches necessary in some cases.

 

Of course, these three areas are neither exhaustive, nor the exclusive preserve of field service.  But they do give serious points for consideration to those procuring technology such as notebooks or tablet PCs for use out in the field.

The needs of the specific industry must also be taken into account (an aspect as equally applicable to hardware as software) if the field service personnel equipped with this technology are to achieve the productivity savings that drive so many field service and enterprise mobility deployments alike.

Key to these savings are the peripherals that will augment a tablet PC and enable it to fit into the workflows of field service personnel.  Vehicle mounts are a great example, as well as carry cases and charging docks.

These are not just additions that are “nice to have” - they form the bedrock of the tablet fitting in to the jobs being undertaken in the field and improving productivity.  They are also, like hard hats, a great indication that the field service teams have the right kit to get the job done.

 

be social and share this feature

Recent independent research conducted by VDC found that the top criteria for evaluating mobile devices to support applications in the utilities sector are reliability / quality. Ian Davies of Motion Computing explains more...

By comparison, the issues of water / dust ingress protection and drop protection were third and sixth respectively, mixed with large scale issues such as security and specific features such as GPS performance.

The mobile hardware industry does tend to make a fetish of ruggedisation - and rightfully so. The fundamental difference between a consumer unit and an enterprise tablet PC is the need to perform in any given environment. Consequently, the ability to demonstrate the level of abuse these units can take is important and there is a need to know what precisely has and has not been tested in order to map hardware capabilities onto job demands.

But reliability is far bigger than ruggedisation and it is time to put the horse back in front of the cart instead of letting stress test ratings continually define how tablet PCs are understood in the workplace.

Reliability pulls ruggedisation into the wider issue of the units function, not just its features. This focuses attention on the unit being relied upon to do the job it was intended for, not just the ability to pass lab tests.

In the real world, utility workers need to perform these tasks consistently and efficiently, so the technology has to be a proven solution - the real-world definition of reliability is the trustworthiness of a unit to perform.

This includes far more than IP or MIL ratings. For example, features such as the mode of input choices, integration with back office systems, even something as simple as the outdoor visibility of the screen all contribute to the consistency and effectiveness of the unit. Battery life is another great example - it impacts directly on the reliability of a unit but is nothing to do with its ruggedisation - and research has shown that almost 2/3 of business users say that their tablet does not last a full shift.

 

In this context it is easy to see why QUALITY is linked so closely to RELIABILITY. Excellence in the utilities sector is the ability to consistently perform tasks out in the field. That excellence is based on the complete user experience, not just stress tests of the hardware.

Jon Regan, Head of SAP Competency Centre in Thames Water explained how this arose in their selection of tablet PCs: “Our trial included over 200 users and we tracked a range of factors, from general user perception, physical features and battery life to toughness, application usage and screen usability. Positive comments on the ergonomics, size, weight and design of the device, as well as the accuracy of the pen input, the photo editing application and the screen viewing angle were consistent across all users.”

According to VDC, 2014 mobility budgets are expected to increase by 11% over 2013 and it is this interaction of reliability and quality that explains WHY utilities want to deploy mobile technologies so eagerly. The same VDC research showed that improving worker productivity and lowering operational costs were the two top drivers. Whilst the improved productivity is driven by keenly aligned features it is the reliability that leads to consistent performance that can help reduce costs.

It is also worth remembering the sheer scale of this opportunity - the European mobile utility workforce is the fastest-growing workforce segment. It currently consists of 900,000 workers, and by the year 2018, it will reach 1.2 million. Developing a mature focus on a workflow based assessment of activities instead of a feature fetish and chasing ever increasing levels of ruggedisation, will be a hallmark of those companies that lead in this industry

It is practically a given in technology that for every new trend, application and problem solved, somebody somewhere will coin a name to label the solution and market beyond its original boundaries. But this is more than just a matter of semantics when it comes to Field Service Management and it's younger but far bigger cousin Enterprise Mobility Management. Motion Computing's Head of UK, Ian Davies explains why… 

The naming of new industries and their obligatory acronyms is in itself is no bad thing as it leads to the creation and refinement of entire markets.  Once upon a time, someone at Gartner coined the phrase ERP, and that is now a billion dollar industry in its own right.  Likewise the same for CRM.  And even document management.

But within field service, this rush to label activity has led to some confusion.  As mobile computing solutions have become ubiquitous, present throughout an organisation, from the boardroom to the delivery van and beyond, field service has been swallowed up by the name of enterprise mobility.  Whilst it would be easy to fall prey to hyperbole, this is a dangerous development.

Field service - more specifically, field service management (FSM) - refers to a system that is often hosted or cloud-based and combines hardware and software - typically internet services - to support companies in locating vehicles, manage worker activity, schedule and dispatch work, ensure driver safety, and ideally integrate with inventory, billing, accounting and other back-office systems.

FSM usually refers to companies who need to manage the installation, service or repair of systems or equipment.  Typically this means utilities, telecommunications, construction and logistics organisations, though this is by no means an exhaustive list.

FSM is already a pretty mature market.  Gartner research puts the revenue for packaged field service dispatch and workforce management software applications, not including service revenue, at approximately $1.2 billion in 2012, with a compound annual growth rate of 12.7% and Gartner estimates that market penetration for field service applications has reached just 25% of the addressable market.

 

By comparison, enterprise mobility  - or to give it the inevitable three letter acronym, enterprise mobility management (EMM) - is the set of people, processes and technology focused on managing the increasing array of mobile devices, wireless networks, and related services to enable broad use of mobile computing in a business context.  Critically EMM is an emerging discipline that has become increasingly important over the past few years as mobile computing, via smartphone, laptop or tablet has become the norm.

 

Figures on the entire EMM market vary wildly but the incredible growth of tablet manufacturers, mobile application developers and network providers point to a market undergoing explosive growth.    Aberdeen Group highlights that over 1 billion smartphones and 200 million tablets have shipped globally since 2007.

Which fish eats which?

So, the question now becomes one of hierarchy - does FSM live within EMM or the other way around?  Whilst field service management has a greater legacy than enterprise mobility, it is clear that the reach of enterprise mobility will soon far outstrip FSM.  And therein perhaps lies the answer: FSM is essentially a collection of business critical processes that relies upon enterprise mobility in order to get the job done.

Why is this important?  If FSM is just an example of EMM at work, why does it need to be so carefully labelled and kept separate?  Simply put, because the very value of EMM is dependent on the specific business context of the mobile deployment.

For example, it is pointless giving consumer grade tablet PCs, without the right accessories and running cheap, yet unproven software to a legion of field engineers and expect anything other than chaos to result.  The tablets will not be rugged enough and they will break.  The lack of correct accessories will hamper productivity and work flow.  The software will not interface with back office systems and jobs will be lost.  This is nothing against the tablet or the software itself - just that it is not fit for purpose in the FSM context.

Of course, elsewhere that same tablet and cheap app may be ideal - for example in a controlled office environment. The point is that the very value of FSM is that it is a specific example of enterprise mobility, but that the generic nature of EMM will not sit well in the FSM context.

So what does this mean for those field service managers looking to explore mobile technologies?  Firstly it means that they must recognise that they hold the key to a valuable deployment of mobile technology that will bring real ROI.  Traditionally these decisions have lain with IT or perhaps finance - but for EMM to work for a field service organisation, it must be operationally driven.

And secondly it means that field service managers must become well versed in the options available to them.  If the Gartner figures are correct, then the remaining 75% of the field service management market will - over the next three to five years - be intensely active with many enterprise mobility technologies moving into the industry.  Separating those technologies that truly are field service specific - and not just named as such - will be vital.

Motion Computing's Ian Davies looks at the true value of rugged computing and why going for the cheaper option is a false economy...

Every IT director and line of business manager looking at a tablet PC deployment will, at some point face the question “why invest in a ruggedised solution when we can get two or three consumer units for the price of one ruggedised tablet and just swap them out if they go down?”  Even allowing for the restrictions of consumer devices in terms of software, operating systems and processing power, the initial numbers can - at first - be attractive.

But, speak to any manager or director who has then faced the issues of deploying and managing non ruggedised hardware and those numbers soon evaporate.  In fact, research shows that the total cost of ownership for non-ruggedised tablets is three times greater than ruggedised alternatives over a three year period.

A recent survey from VDC highlights the causes of this expense in using consumer grade units.  As part of a research project among IT decision makers at 215 companies managing a mobile device deployment, VDC discovered that the leading cause of device failure was that the tablet had been dropped.  The second cause was software issues but this was only marginally ahead of exposure to water and liquid (and just over 1 in 4 tablet PCs will face such exposure). Other leading causes of failure include excessive heat / cold, dust exposure and vibration.

Summarising these factors, when respondents were asked to rank their satisfaction with various tablet features, the level of hardware ruggedisation around dust and water was ranked lowest.  By comparison, satisfaction around issues such as operating system was far greater.  Simply put, we now have the level of tablet deployment that means customers are facing the issues of fragile, non-ruggedised tablets as they fail in the field and that those issues have become the dominant concern, especially for those applications involving wet environments.

  do such factors around device failure matter?  Because each device failure can cost an organisation upwards of 200 minutes in lost labour - a little under three and half hours.  This can be seen in a loss of productivity, the time spent to redeploy a new unit and the time spent in between with diagnosis and any necessary repair. And it is worth noting that these costs are per device failure - in a fleet of hundreds of units, this can soon amount to weeks of downtime.

 

Even without incidences of failure, it is worth noting that these softer costs make up a substantial amount of the TCO of a unit.  Initial and ongoing user training, system maintenance, technical support, upgrades and application management all contribute to TCO and for a consumer unit, these can be substantially more than a dedicated enterprise tablet.

However, factoring in the incidences of failure, the research found that IT costs and loss of productivity accounts for 89% of the TCO of consumer grade tablet PCs. To put that into hard figures, on an annual basis, a ruggedised tablet will have a TCO of around €2000.  By comparison a non-ruggedised tablet costs in excess of €4000.  That is despite the fact that the initial hardware cost of a ruggedised tablet will likely be double that of a consumer unit.

Figures such as these show the increasing importance for strong metrics such as ROI and TCO to not only validate investments but to track and measure use of mobile solutions within the enterprise throughout deployment. Furthermore it is clear that, because line of business mobile solutions are often mission critical, organisations need robust and reliable solutions to support them.

It is critical to align the right mobile solution with the users and application environment. But amidst the flood of consumer technologies in the enterprise that has driven a spike in failure rates, it is important to remember that consumerisation of IT all about introducing consumer experiences – NOT technology – into the enterprise.

Recognising this, many businesses now see that the cost of supporting and managing a device post deployment is just as - if not more - important that the upfront device investment.   There is much more to consider than the initial set up costs of the mobile solution. Organisations demand that IT investments deliver tangible benefits and incur predictable costs.  From platform consistency and sustainability, to the impact of device failure in various use scenarios – it is critical to understand the actual cost and impact of your mobile device deployment against the choices available and the increased interest in low cost consumer grade tablets.

 

Want to know more? Ian will be discussing this topic in further depth at this year's Service Management Expo on June 17th - 19th in London's ExCel. To get your complimentary pass click this link

 

 

 

Find out more about Motion Computing in the Field Service News Directory. Click here to visit their page

 

 

Ian Davies, UK Country Manager for Motion Computing looks at the importance of GIS to the utilities field and what we need to consider if we are going to get it right...

The utility worker today

Within the UK, approximately 473,000 people are employed in energy and utilities and approximately 30% of them are mobile workers.  This is hardly surprising given that there are over 13,000 energy and utility locations.  But what is less widely known is that these employees, both in the office and out in the field, deliver some of the greatest added value to the UK economy, often far in excess of other sectors.

Consequently geospatial and GIS data is indispensable to utilities.  From the back office the data provides essential views and information about the service territory on which critical value-added decisions are made. Leveraging that data out to the field provides even greater benefits like streamlined regulatory compliance, operations and maintenance.  There is no real argument on whether or not to empower utility field crews with GIS – the question is how to empower them.

Technology has a key role to play in answering this question within the UK.  The energy and utilities sector is very capital intensive industry and much future success depends on its ability to adapt to new requirements through the introduction of new technologies. This is creating demand for skills at the intermediate level in terms of operation and maintenance - those roles most typically found “out in the field”.

The right tools for the job

So from a technological perspective, the right hardware and software will make a big difference on getting the most of utility field crews.  In order to select the right hardware and software, businesses must start by taking a look at how the utility worker performs his work.

For hardware, this is critical.  Mobile workflows vary greatly - what environment is the worker primarily in?   How remote are employees?  Can they rely on “an always connected” application, or do you need “store and forward”?  Do they need a higher amount of power, specific carrying case or a vehicle mount?  Is a barcode scanner or camera needed?  What operating system is needed to run all the software systems? Can data entered more easily with a keyboard, a stylus or by touch? How sensitive is the work being performed and what level of security is needed?

Among all these variables, there are some characteristics to a “typical” mobile workflow - the requirement of a mobile device that can be easily docked and undocked in a vehicle, easy to carry and use, but rugged enough for the field environment.     In addition, utility workers regularly use bar code scanners, RFID readers and magnetic stripe readers to complete their work.  Hardware will also need to include external battery chargers and wireless connectivity as well as run an operating system that supports the software.

That software also needs rigorous assessment.  It can have a huge impact on how the field worker actually works.  What features will truly enable field teams to get the most out of the GIS?  Is it intuitive, quick and simple to handle? Does it need large, frequent updates? Is it based on real world experience?  In addition to being easy to use on the front line, the application should provide automated data replication, have a seamless interface and deliver both high performance and configurability for the teams back at base.

Getting GIS right

Applied to GIS, this means better maintenance of assets that have a rapid and profound effect upon the bottom line of utility companies and can improve customer service quickly.  Utility assets are often very expensive and GIS can substantially increase the return on this investment.  As part of the business case to justify GIS - and secure these benefits - the right mobile tools are a powerful part of the optimal solution.

 Find out more about Motion Computing in the Field Service NEws Directory, Including product videos, news & features features.

 

Against a pan-European backdrop of regulatory change, increased consumer awareness of price and choice and concerns over energy security, the utility sector is facing many challenges and opportunities over the next decade.  Motion Computing's Ian Davies discusses... 

Within the industry itself, the concerns of customer service improvements, the aging workforce and enabling a more responsive field workforce are driving many utilities to re-evaluate key business operations, processes and the technology that supports them.

Core to many of these initiatives and achieving new levels of service and field worker productivity is ensuring seamless access to critical asset and customer data. Research has confirmed a strong correlation between a highly productive mobile workforce and ensuring utility networks deliver continuous service and meet customer service standards.  As a result, empowering a mobile workforce is now a key concern for many utilities.  As both the workforce and utility infrastructures age, many utilities are considering wireless technologies to help manage information, assets and workers.

Mobile workforce applications in utilities:

Connecting your mobile workforce with the information and human resources they require delivers many strategic benefits to utilities.  These can be grouped into three main areas - reduced operating costs, improved asset life and increased customer satisfaction.

At the tactical level these benefits are seen in metrics such as increased on-time responses, greater “wrench time”, and more job completions. Travel to the next job is less which not only saves time, but also reduces vehicle emissions, and cuts down missed appointments.

The financial savings of this increased productivity are seen in decreased crew hours and overheads. Further improvements to the bottom line can be realised by automating the work order process to help reduce operating costs.

Additional benefits include enabling seamless, real time and interoperable communications with field workers, centralised support staff, utility management and first responders in emergency situations.  Management is improved by incorporating training, work administration, and performance monitoring.  And by improving collaboration and enhancing knowledge transfer, utilities can begin to address the challenge of an aging workforce.

The applications to enable these benefits can be covered off in three main categories:

Next Generation Asset Management and Analytics

Advanced analytics draw on powerful analysis platforms to present data and complex interrelationships in a manner designed for the business and operational needs of different types of utility employees. From the field, to the asset manager, to the board room, asset analytics provide critical intelligence to ensure that appropriate decisions can be made in real time.

Modern mobile versions of asset analytics provide utility field crews with a thorough understanding of an asset’s inspection and maintenance history and help field crews better understand the importance of the accuracy of data they are capturing.

Real-Time Scheduling

Customer service in the utility sector has been lagging and much of this has to do with how customers engage with their local utilities.

While many experienced field technicians generally know their territory and the likely duration of different tasks, the same does not hold for less experienced workers and frequently, schedules developed by less experienced workers, can result in productivity decreases. Mobile workforce applications that include real-time scheduling prevent this productivity drop-off. As the crew finishes its emergency tasks, real-time schedulers immediately produce new schedules that start from the current location and follow rules for task priority and drive time.

Job Training and Monitoring

Experienced workers carry in their heads the correct safety techniques and job structure. Mobile workforce software incorporates that knowledge and makes it accessible via tools like checklists and context sensitive help. It ensures that less experienced crews meet utilities' safety and compliance guidelines.

As a result, mobile workforce management software can standardise tasks and guide newer employees through each step, decreasing the time it takes to become productive.

These applications also enable better and more accessible asset records, improved documentation, and integration with video and image management solutions to provide remote support capabilities.  Integration standards also enable efficient cross-departmental business processes.

The right platform

A variety of mobile form factors are being used to support field workers in the utility sector, and tablets represent an increasingly viable choice.  The tablet provides a strong balance of a highly portable device with sufficient display real estate to support the graphics rich applications common in the utility sector.

As a result of these benefits, according to research by VDC, over six in ten utilities are either currently using tablet PCs or are evaluating tablets for use among their field workers.

While much of the attention directed towards tablets has been for consumer-oriented devices, consumer devices have limitations when it comes to enterprise-use cases.  The challenges end users express with consumer tablets in the enterprise span everything from core device functionality to management of these devices by enterprise IT departments and their security limitations. The ability to seamlessly interact with backend systems and integrate with legacy applications including support for capabilities such as rapid updating also rank highly in this list of concerns.

For utility service technicians, critical requirements of a successful mobile platform include:

• Durable, yet lightweight design. Failure rates are a critical concern as they can substantially disrupt workflows. Devices designed to withstand inclement conditions and the potential for occasional drops are ideal. Another key requirement is the ability to interface with the display with wet hands or in wet conditions.
• Display daylight visibility. While consumer device displays are visually appealing, in sunlight or ambient light conditions they wash out. A display that can be easily read in these conditions is a key benefit, if not essential
• Application suitability. Many back-end utility applications are designed to operate in a Windows environment. Leveraging these platform investments and ensuring forward compatibility is critical for many utilities.
• Input/output configuration options. Mobile workforce management applications require a variety of input/output configuration options ranging from signature capture, bar code, GPS, image and video capture, multi-touch interface and magnetic stripe readers.
• Embedded wireless functionality. With more data moving to the cloud, a seamless wireless network connection, carrier (3G/4G) or Wi-Fi is critical.
• Unobtrusive, yet robust security.   Security requirements are becoming even more stringent due to increased regulation.  For mobile devices this likely means both hardware-based encryption, trusted boot functions, data-at-rest encryption, and remote lock and wipe capabilities. While security – especially for mobile insurance solutions – needs to be unobtrusive, sacrifices for the sake of ease of use cannot be made. [/unordered_list]

Based on these demands, and the driving force of customer service improvements, an aging workforce and a need to reduce operational cost, the tablet PC is set to become a stable fixture across the utility sector, especially out in the field and on the front line of service.