AUTHOR ARCHIVES: Mark Glover

The installed base of smart electricity meters in North America will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 8.0 percent between 2018 and 2024 to reach 142.8 million at the end of the period, according to a new study.

A research report from the IoT analyst firm Berg Insight also says smart meter penetration among electricity customers in the UK and Canada Over is projected to increase from around 60 percent in 2018 to more than 80 percent by the end of 2024.

“North America has long been at the forefront of smart grid technology adoption and a large share of the major utilities in the region are now either fully deployed or in the implementation or planning stages of full-scale rollouts. The market is however highly heterogenous in terms of penetration. Some states or provinces remain skeptical towards the business case for advanced metering investments whereas others are soon to begin a second wave of deployments”, said Levi Ostling, IoT Analyst, Berg Insight and author of the report.

Canada has reached a high penetration of smart meters through ambitious initiatives in its most populous provinces. Continued growth in North America the next few years will largely be driven by the large investor-owned utilities in the US that are yet to roll out smart meters for their customers. In addition, the large number of smaller cooperative and municipal utilities will also be playing an increasingly central role for penetration growth.
 
According to the report, yearly shipments of smart electricity meters in North America will grow from 8.8 million units in 2018 to 19.9 million units in 2024. Over the next few years, first-wave deployments by utilities such as Consolidated Edison, Duke Energy, Ameren, Entergy, PSEG, National Grid and Xcel Energy will boost shipments. Second wave deployments will gradually make their way into the shipment numbers at the end of the forecast period. “While increasingly powerful meters with edge intelligence capabilities coupled with advanced data analytics software will drive second wave deployments, the utilities are now also looking to leverage their existing RF mesh networks for a wider array of applications beyond metering, bringing an increasingly diverse set of devices onto their networking platforms,” concluded Mr. Ostling.

While attending the Spring Servitization Conference, Mark Glover caught up with Professor Tim Baines (pictured), Director of the Advanced Services Group at Aston Business School. Conversation ranged from the discipline’s origins to the impact of Industry 4.0 and why societal shifts in sustainability and service consumption are key factors behind servitization’s next movement...

When I joined Field Service News one word appeared more frequently in my browser and in-box than any others: servitization. Its resonance was affirmed by my Editor Kris Oldland; who, during one of our early induction meetings, explained the pivotal role it plays in modern manufacturing. Three months’ on, I flew to Stockholm, and then took a two-hour car journey to Linkoping where I was to attend a conference dedicated solely to the discipline.

So, it was during a coffee break I sat down with Tim Baines, Professor of Operation Strategy at the Aston Business School and a significant player in servitization’s evolution. I was pleased to have an audience with someone who could shed some light on an area that to a layman (me) can be slightly overwhelming. We both grabbed a coffee and one of the many excellent Swedish pastries on offer before finding a quiet corner to talk.

I started off (perhaps boldly) by explaining my slight surprise that a whole three-day conference on servitization existed; that universities have whole departments dedicated to its research – many of whom were here in Sweden presenting – and that academic papers on the subject are being circulated widely. “Business researchers observe industry,” Tim said, sipping his drink. “They’re looking for phenomena, which they are trying to conceptualize and describe and test their hypothesis and understanding. They ultimately arrive at a clinical description of what that phenomena is.”

The phenomena of servitization emerged from the marketing community in the 1980s, Tim tells me, with its first research work appearing in the European Management Journal. Sandra Vandermerwe and Juan Rada’s paper Servitization of Business: Adding Value by Adding Service was published in 1988 and the former is now credited with introducing the term ‘servitization’ to represent the addition of services to enhance a manufacturer’s commercial offerings.

However, the discipline went into incubation. That was until the 2000s when Tim, along with Andy Neely from Cambridge University and Raj Roy from Cranfield niversity respectively, were awarded a research grant from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) to resurrect its study. “We all put a lot of effort into it,” Tim recalls. “If you look at the citations; the academic citations on servitization; look at the highest cited papers on servitization, it was really down to our collective work.”

Thanks in part to the funding, as well as the efforts of Tim and his fellow academics interest in the discipline flourished both academically and in practice. Demand for a specialist, academic event grew and eight years ago the Spring Servitization Conference was born; its eight years testament to its growth and popularity. Its first incarnation was a workshop of sorts laying out the basic principles of what the group wanted to achieve; essentially something that was crossdisciplinary within a tight-knit, specialised community.

Tim explains: “The conference is a platform for people to network, to meet each other, to share those ideas, those insights, and to learn from a few carefully chosen manufacturers how they’re seeing the world. I think what we will see in a few years’ time, we’ll have a stronger group coalescing around the key topics. Ultimately, this is a community which could very well define an
equivalent of Industry 4.0 or Industry 5.0.”


“Don’t be put-off by the word servitization... all manufacturers can gain some value through service...”


Industry 4.0 discussions were a key part of that morning’s presentations. Chairing a debate himself, Tim asked panelists if servitization was part of Industry 4.0 or vice-versa? Away from the conference hall I pushed him on his own thoughts. “Most manufacturing companies,” he said, “would associate Industry 4.0 with what’s going on inside the factory. Servitization invariably is what’s going on beyond the factory gate. In reality servitization predates industry 4.0. It will exist concurrently, and in a few years’ time will be still going on and industry 4.0 will have come and will have gone.”

Aligning with the conference’s theme, Delivering Services Growth in the Digital Era, Tim suggests firms feel more comfortable adopting servitization as digital offered a layer of security. “Digital is de-risking, enabling those more advanced services to be offered with lower risk,” he says. “It’s making it easier for manufacturers to do it.”

The other driver, Tim continued, is a broader societal shift around service consumption superseding product consumption. “If you think about servitization; it’s not a question in my mind whether companies will make more money from services or less money from services – that’s an outdated question, an outdated conversation. It’s really a case in the way that society is going. We are consuming more services where the appetite is for more sophisticated services.” Sustainability, another large societal issue is also being bearing down on the servitization sphere.

Tim is hopeful that servitization - and industry 4.0 - can ultimately negate the environmental impact of material-heavy supply chains. He referenced a presentation that morning from Cranfield University’s Tobias Benjamin Widmer, who talked about the de-materialisation of the chain; reducing the consumption of raw materials while still achieving a desired outcome.

From that, our conversation naturally turned to regulation and the influence of Government on sustainability initiatives. Firm polices around electric cars, for example, would Tim Says, have an impact on the supply chains. “If the incentives are there for electric cars, why would you have a diesel manufacturing plant? If you don’t have a diesel manufacturing plant, then your whole supply chain evaporates.”

“Here’s an interesting one,” he smiles. “The number of rotational components in a diesel engine car: about 1,500. In an electric car: about 22. Now what’s that going to do your material supply chain?”

We finish our drinks, aware of the slow movement of delegates at they file back into the conference room, themselves refreshed by caffeine and pastries. I shake hands with Tim and thank him for his time, and we both agree to keep in touch.

The next day, I send Tim an email asking if he could possibly spare a copy of his book he wrote with Howard Lightfoot, Made to Serve. The book is seen as an excellent primer into servitization, and I said as much Tim in my email; how it could enhance my learning on a topic that I was beginning to find rather intriguing.

The book arrived in my mailbox a few days’ later; a good-looking tome with a striking cover. A contemporary, simple image of three factories, the middle one with a striking red path leaving its front gate; fanning in perspective to the base of the cover. I read the book’s preface: “Don’t be put-off by the strange word of servitization,” part of it said, “all manufacturers can gain some value through service.”

I recalled the interview in Sweden, when Tim told me about the early days of servitization; when people queried the term, wondering how you spell it, asking if they would make money out of these advanced services. “Now, we don’t have these questions anymore,” Tim had said.

What is a relatively young area of research, servitization now seems to be an integral cog of a manufacturer’s approach to revenue. As Tim suggested, technology will evolve and eventually become exctinct (Industry 4.0, for example), but servitization, as a theory and practice, will continue to grow alongside and compliment manufacturing. In short, making money from selling spare parts is no longer the revenue stream it once was.

The need for digital transformation – and the challenges facing the UK and global supply chain – were at the heart of the inaugural BT Field Engineering Forum.

The first BT Field Engineering Forum, sponsored by Kuehne+Nagel and held at London's BT Tower on 17 June, covered a wide range of topics on how the sector can move forward.

The host, BBC newsreader Huw Edwards, brought together industry experts to discuss the rapid evolution of technology and how innovations such as self-driving cars, drones, blockchain – and even BT’s own Final Mile solution – can help organisations to improve performance and efficiency.

A key theme was customer service and how the supply chain is responding to a significant shift towards an environment where the customer is central. Keynote speaker and author Sean Culey explored the disruptive technological models that are driving this change, and what businesses must do to deliver the experience that customers now demand.

Throughout the day, speakers and panellists demonstrated the impact of change upon major market sectors such as retail, or specific organisations such as the NHS and the Ministry of Defence.

Crucially, each speaker had practical, proven solutions to these challenges, which they shared with over 100 delegates from across the UK supply chain.

Topics ranged from perceptive fulfilment – using data to pre-empt customer buying decisions – or the use of personalised procurement portals for faster, more efficient operations.

The event also gave BT the chance to demonstrate the power of its Final Mile solution for field engineers. Final Mile is a nationwide network of secure lockers and boxes, used as intermediary stock locations by organisations with large field engineering teams. By storing parts at strategic sites along engineers’ routes, businesses can reduce driving hours to serve customers faster, remove cost and minimise environmental impact.

Stephen Maddison, Managing Director of Final Mile, explained why the Field Engineering Forum was so important. “Not so long ago, organisations only reviewed their supply chain every three years or so," he said. Today, given the pace of change and the exciting new technologies available, businesses need to keep their finger on the pulse continuously.That’s why we created the Field Engineering Forum – a place where industry leaders can tackle these issues head-on, share best practice and forge new partnerships. The supply chain is the bloodstream of the economy, so it’s vital it’s in a healthy state. We’re delighted with the quality of debate and are looking to repeat this event next year.”

STEPHEN JEFFS-WATTS, PRODUCT MANAGER, SERVICE MANAGEMENT, IFS
AR is a far broader topic, with wider use-cases and implications than simply being used for video calls and ad-hoc collaboration.

Slick, fast and easy to carry smart devices have undoubtedly enhanced an engineer’s approach to call-outs. Yet, research and guidance into the ergonomic risks remain thin on the ground. Mark Glover investigates whether a revolution in mobility could have a long-term negative impact...

Digital devices have over the years become more portable. For service technicians this improvement in usability has undoubtedly improved the way in which they work. However, the industry’s swift adoption of these devices has perhaps been too rapid, meaning health and safety guidance is yet to catch-up with the potential ergonomic risks that smartphone and tablet use carries.

I’ve written articles in these pages (and in our recent edition of The Handy Little Book) on health and safety, referencing the potential impact on a lone worker’s wellbeing, given that their work is carried out mostly in isolation. However, another area of the broad H&S spectrum that lone workers or field service engineers are vulnerable too is musculo-skeletal dis-orders (MSDs).

Defined by the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) as “any injury, damage or dis-order of the joints or other tissues in the upper/lower limbs or the back", MSDs, according to a study carried out by HSE for the period 2017/2018, shows 469,000 workers are suffering with cases of work-related MSDs, which includes long and short-term conditions. The knock-on result on productivity is 6.6 million working days lost as a result of the condition, the same research reveals.

The study does not uncover the extent to which lone or mobile workers suffer, although the top three industries where workers are most affected include fishing, forestry, agriculture (grouped together), construction and then transportation and storage (also grouped) will arguably include a section of field-based lone workers. The condition is also common for office-based workers who are vulnerable to neck or back issues, brought on by incorrect posture while using computer equipment at a desk.

It shouldn’t be ignored however, that while field service engineers are desk-free, incorrect ergonomic use of tablets and phones – the tool of the trade for most lone workers – carries its own ergonomic risk.

But with rugged tablet and laptop devices now a ubiquitous part of an engineer’s kit why hasn’t there been more attention on their dangers? It’s useful to look more generally at society’s relationship with smartphones and tablets, which are now commonplace in people’s lives.

It is estimated that five billion people in the world own a mobile device, of which, half of these are smartphones. Indeed, the rate at which we’ve adopted them is staggering which is primarily down to their relative ease of use and in-turn part of the reason why they have found their way into engineers and technicians hands who require rugged devices that perform but also offer a practicality. However, it’s this natural uptake both in public and the workplace that, according to one expert, is enabling risks around their ergonomic use to go unnoticed.

Ed Milnes is Founder and Director of Guildford Ergonomics a consultancy firm in the UK that specialises in ergonomics and human factors in the workplace and has contributed guidance and research into the risks of smartphone and tablet use.
“I think there’s a psychological element to it,” he tells me over Skype. “It’s as if it hasn’t come onto people’s radars because we use these devices so much in our everyday lives anyway. We accept them as something that – because they’re always around – they must be safe that there can’t be any inherent risks with them. When you use them day in and day out, almost every day, it does become more of an issue.”


            "It is estimated that five billion people in the world own a mobile device..."


MSD risks are linked to exposure and how long how and how often is spent on activities. In the case of service engineers this does oscilate in line with the complexity and length of a job but as technology advances – with AR soon to play a major role – then engineers will be looking at their tablets and then moving their vision and neck towards the asset and then back to the tablet.
It will, inevitably, place stress on the back and shoulder and other areas.

However, it’s the neck region, Ed tells me, that is most vulnerable to pain when using these types of devices. “The one area that does stand out, where we’re clear that there is an issue is in the neck area and the development of neck pain,” he says. “This is the absolute number one area when it comes to these devices.”

He acknowledges though, given the nature of lone workers, it is difficult to collaborate and collect insightful data. “A lot of the data on discomfort is basically self-reported data, so it’s very subjective. For example, how long people are using the devices for and how often they’re using them. It’s based on people estimating how long they’ve spent on them and very often you get people underestimating.”

Research ambiguity can in part be attributed to the lack of guidance that exists on the topic. HSE who inform legislation around health and safety in the UK, seem to have been caught napping when it comes to specific guidance on smartphone and tablet use. Their L26 guidance document, which advises on Display Screen Equipment was published in 1992 and updated in 1998 but fails to incorporate the mobility trend. “It [the L26] did its best to anticipate the development of things,” Ed sympathises, “but there is no official formal kind of guidance. It’s a real difficulty because you not only have that lack of regulatory clout behind doing anything. But it’s also about the physical aspect. People by the very nature of the work they are doing, are out and about, so they’re not under anyone’s eye.”

Back then to those office workers who receive regular risk-assessments around their display screen equipment (computer, chair etc.). For their mobile colleagues it’s perhaps unreasonable to expect a health and safety manager to attend each engineer’s call-out to ensure they are using a tablet correctly.

Ed does suggest however that companies and management need to incorporate more of a broad-based assessment and take more of an active role in the process, particularly around training, acknowledging the type of work they conduct. “It’s also about the physical aspect,” he explains. “People by the very nature of the work they are doing, are out and about, so they’re not under anyone’s eye. There has to be an understanding on the part of the company, including the health and safety manager who can potentially envisage the workers are going to face and put controls in place; putting devices in place that they can refer to to help them use their own mobile devices more safely.”

“The big thing really is training,” he continues, “which I know is right down the bottom of the hierarchy of control, but ultimately, it’s what you’re left with when everything else doesn’t really stack up as a solution.”

As devices continue to evolve more emphasis will need to be placed on their correct handling. A solution is undoubtedly required which should be driven by concrete guidance.

For now though, employers need to recognise the ergonomic risks associated with the hardware as continued incorrect use could spell greater difficulties for workers’ health later on.

Parsable, the Connected Worker Platform company, have announced the hire of its new Chief Revenue Officer (CRO), Nathan Rader.

As CRO, Rader will spearhead the company's revenue generation and customer expansion strategies, driving deeper collaboration among teams across the company and its partner ecosystem to ensure alignment on all go-to-market initiatives.

This appointment comes at a time of exciting expansion at Parsable. The company recently announced growth in the aerospace industry with the success of its partnerships with Honeywell Aerospace and Daher. It also launched its Connected Worker Changeovers, Maintenance and Safety Accelerators for consumer packaged goods (CPG) manufacturers.

Rader joins Parsable with over a decade of sales experience at Google Enterprise, most recently as head of sales for Google Cloud. As one of Google Cloud's first enterprise sales leaders, he more than doubled revenue and significantly grew a highly cross-functional sales team. Prior to Google, Rader helped launch Oracle's Fusion Middleware technology group, overseeing triple digit growth. He began his sales career at IBM as a client sales manager focused on emerging businesses.

"This is a major coup and milestone for the company. Nathan has an impressive track record of success in enterprise software sales as well as an admirable leadership style that is precisely what Parsable needs at this pivotal moment of growth," said Lawrence Whittle, Parsable CEO. "As the connected worker category continues to mature and as every industrial company in the world recognizes the value of digitally empowering its frontline workers, we have an incredible opportunity to increase market share. We're thrilled to have Nathan on our executive team and expect him to play an important role in our expansion."