Subscribe to Newsletter
Tell a Friend
Print this Page
09/21/2007Missing the Point About Government's Role in Telecommunications
Many of the discussions regarding the deployment of technology get snagged in business-case analyses and loud rhetoric about the role of government in telecommunications. Bloggers like David Strom decry that "governments already have too much control over the means of communication.” The debate rages furiously about the competition between the telecommunication industry and governments, and the end result is that deployments are slowed, technologies do not get deployed and our nation continues to lag dramatically in broadband penetration when compared with other nations.
These debates miss an essential point: Instead of focusing on broadband signal, we should be looking at what we do with the signal. Unless you are in the business of manufacturing equipment, you and the millions of other Americans who are tuning in or out of the debate do not have an end goal of broadband! They want to use broadband to achieve some primary need — get a bus schedule, say hello to a child far away or authorize a project. And when we look at that primary need, the role of government is quite clear! Government services are slow to deploy, expensive to maintain and energy-intensive (i.e., guaranteed to go up in price as fuel prices go up). A telecommunications-based strategy using ubiquitous signals and open-access systems can help municipal workers provide strong, responsive services.
And more than governmental service support, Wi-Fi and future technologies still on the delivery plate of industry will make one additional contribution. They will permit the direct connection of the residents of our communities to their governments. Whether rich or poor, mobile or homebound, English-speaking or not, everyone can find wonderful support streaming in through the airwaves! It is this connection between government and the people which the canopies of fast, clear and secure signal can offer, and at a price point that appears to beat other technologies.
So where did we go wrong? In my mind, the model of monetizing Wi-Fi investments through offering simple Internet connectivity has been the wrong turn taken which led us down the path of disagreement and has given us the impasse we face today. If we can backtrack and relaunch the discussions about municipal Wi-Fi and WiMax offerings based on the “enhanced” signal of connectivity AND bearing governmental services to the people, the financial pro-forma will improve quickly and the partnerships necessary for the deployment will flourish.
I would ask those who still hold out for a consumer-driven deployment model to reflect a bit on the win-win attraction of governmental services and consider switching sides! Let’s hear from you!
Costis Toregas is President Emeritus, Public Technology Institute, and a lecturer at George Washington University. He chairs the Business Processes reengineering Roundtable at the W2i Digital Cities Convention.
back
Related Items:
• Groningen
• W2i Finalizes Program Agenda for Digital Cities Convention in Washington, DC
• City Services Drive Network in St. Louis
• New-Technology Rollouts: Avoid Putting Lipstick on the Pig!
• Doug Townsend, IT Director, Medford (OR) - Part 2
Comments
Anne-Rivers Forcke
Thanks, Costis, for pulling back the reigns on runaway expectations. Gartner refers to this somewhat disturbing pattern of technology difusion as the "hype cycle" - this rush to embrace a technology as if the technology alone will resolve some social and/or economic challenge.
Governments must operate - just like commercial firms. They have to deliver products and services and - in many ways - they must compete for the loyalty (we call it residency) of their customers (we usually call them constituents). As a means of streamlining the costs of operating their organization or improving operating processes, Wireless municipal networks more often than not make sense. The calculus can further be enhanced if the government can monetize the value that constituents would place on being able to interact with the Government online - something the commercial sector would do through market research in support of what might be called a "Channel Strategy." Again, more often then not, constituents will tell the government exactly what their priorities are for interacting with the government, along with when, where, how and how often they'd want those interactions to occur.
The hardest part of any municipal WiFi project is - truly - the due diligence which must occur up front; for governments to keep their focus on the "big bang" impact they can have on their own operations and not be seduced by the "bling" of the technology.
11:25 PM, 10/03/2007
Post new comment:Only registered users can add comments.
Please Log-in
| 
