Introduction – Our Purpose and Approach
Key
Factors to Consider When Evaluating IP Telephony Providers
IP Telephony Essentials – Keeping Vendor Interactions on
Track
A Common Sense Approach to IP Telephony
In the second section, several topics that frequently appear in
“dueling” vendor presentations and marketing messages are
discussed and clarified. We end the paper by offering some
questions that SMBs can ask prospective providers to help ensure a
common understanding.
The perspectives contained throughout this briefing paper reflect
IntelliCom’s most up-to-date competitive and end-user findings
from our IntelliCom Market Dashboard SM and Enterprise
IntelligenceSM Research Programs. We hope you find these views
helpful in making the right business
communications decisions for your firm.
There are over eight million SMBs in the U.S. today that range in
size from 20 to 250 employees, and that operate in nearly every
industry – from retail and manufacturing, to insurance and
medical services.
Regardless of which vertical segment they are in, though, the
majority of small and medium-sized businesses share a common
perspective on IP Telephony systems and applications: they want the
business benefits that IP technology can bring, but with a minimum
of upfront and ongoing
administrative overhead. Recently, the IT director at a North
American regional bank succinctly summed up their “gain without
pain” perspective:
“Our support philosophy is pretty straightforward. We don’t
want to invest the time to become technology experts. We just want
the systems that are right for the bank, and then we want them to
work. When it’s time to upgrade the technology, we want a process
that is as pain-free as possible.
After ‘kicking quite a few tires’, we found a partner that can
actually deliver this.”
Finding the right system and provider can be a challenging
undertaking, however, given the fast pace of technological change
in the converged communications space, coupled with the number of
vendors that are aggressively competing for SMB market share. In
order to get a clear view of this fast-moving market, we created a
research platform – the IntelliCom Market Dashboard – to
systematically track and evaluate the major providers and their
solutions.
As a potential aid for the reader in choosing an IP Telephony
system vendor, we have selected six key attributes that are used in
the Dashboard to evaluate the relative standing of the major
providers of SMB solutions. Each of these attributes represents a
meaningful topic for SMB personnel to explore with prospective
vendors.
Dashboard scores are continuously updated to incorporate new vendor
developments and evolving market dynamics. The vendor rating
summaries that follow the description of each attribute are based
on October 2007 Dashboard.
The Functional Performance attribute is a composite of several
sub-attributes – all of which are relevant to SMBs.
The Management and Serviceability sub-attribute measures the
relative ease of system management and administration of the
vendor’s SMB solution throughout its lifecycle. This
sub-attribute is a main component in the “ongoing SMB overhead”
that was referenced earlier.
Key Factors to Consider When Evaluating IP Telephony
Providers
Since the supporting details for each vendor would easily be longer
than this entire business brief, we are presenting the summary
findings only.
Six Key Attributes That Contribute to Vendor Differentiation
1) Functional Performance
2) Applications Infrastructure
3) Solution Delivery
4) Deployment Flexibility
5) Applications Positioning
6) Sustainability
Interoperability assesses the vendor’s utilization of industry
standards in their SMB solutions. The degree to which industry
standards are used directly impacts the ability of the solution to
support the functioning of features (so-called “feature
transparency”) across multiple product lines, as well as in
mixed vendor environments. The vendor’s use of industry standards
also increases the likelihood that the SMB will be able to operate
third party communication applications and end-user devices on a
given system.
The Security sub-attribute measures the number of protective
features that are engineered into the actual solution, as well as
the availability of expert security support services offered to
SMBs by the vendor or their dealers. For SMBs (as well as large
enterprises), the protection of customer information
and intellectual property remains a top requirement when deploying
converged technology.
Survivability assesses the ability of the SMB solution to continue
functioning in the event of hardware or software failures, and
evaluates the availability and robustness of key components such as
power supplies, disk arrays, geographically dispersed and/or
clustered call processors, survivable remote
nodes and resilient messaging. These factors play a central role in
SMB decisions regarding the desired degree of business continuity
protection.
The Scalability sub-attribute measures the ability and ease of the
vendor’s solution to accommodate additional end users as a
business grows. This area is of particular interest to SMBs that
have significant expansion plans.
In the Market Dashboard rankings, each vendor is rated with a 1 - 5
score (Figure 1) on each of the sub-attributes, which are then
aggregated to an overall attribute rating.
The Applications Infrastructure attribute addresses the ability of
the vendor’s solution to allow the SMB end user or administrator
to customize the communication features according to personal
preference or particular job function, such as would be the case
for positions in sales or customer care, for instance. Applications
Infrastructure also assesses the ability of the solution to
integrate communication applications with other core business
applications, such as allowing an end user to launch calls from a
company-wide personnel directory that is accessible from their
desktop phone or mobile device. A number of sub-attributes also
contribute to this rating; among them whether the vendor has
adopted a SMB-friendly approach to software licensing, and the
degree to which the vendor’s communication applications can run
on industry-standard media servers rather than on proprietary
servers they alone can provide.
The Solution Delivery attribute provides a holistic assessment of
the vendor’s ability to position and effectively deliver
solutions to small and medium-sized businesses at the local level,
and includes whether the sales approach of the vendor is oriented
toward providing the SMB with complete solutions or
piece-parts.
The Deployment Flexibility attribute assesses the flexibility of
the vendor’s platforms in meeting the deployment preferences of
individual SMBs, and reflects the evaluations around several
sub-attributes.
The IP vs. TDM sub-attribute examines the degree of freedom that
vendor platforms provide SMBs in utilizing the system completely in
IP mode, in traditional TDM (Time Division Multiplexing) mode, or
in Hybrid implementations with a mixture of IP and TDM. This
flexibility can be important for SMBs that have existing
traditional phone sets that they want to reuse, or if they want to
interoperate with other company locations that will continue to use
in-place TDM systems.
Distributed vs. Centralized evaluates the options that the vendor
provides multi-site SMBs in terms of underlying network
architecture.
While some SMBs may want a network design that has the core system
functions and applications centralized at a main facility and then
accessed remotely through local gateways, some may be better served
by having the functions and applications fully distributed to each
networked site. Others may opt for a blended approach with some
elements centralized and others distributed. Similar to
Survivability, decisions around Distributed vs. Centralized can
have important implications to an SMB’s plans for business
continuity.
The Device and Mobility Options sub-attribute evaluates the breadth
of the vendor’s proprietary device portfolio, as well as their
ability to support third party phone sets and mobile devices.
The last sub-attribute in Deployment Flexibility, Migration
Strategy, assesses the degree of flexibility that the vendor
provides to an SMB if they are migrating their existing TDM system
or systems to an IP platform in multiple steps.
The Applications Positioning attribute (Figure 6) addresses a
number of important considerations for SMBs; among them the degree
to which the
vendor has introduced and emphasizes communications applications
that go beyond traditional TDM functionality and incorporate the
unique capabilities associated with IP-enabled technology.
Applications that fit into this category include Unified Messaging,
multi-media Contact Center capabilities, Presence Management and
Web/Audio/Video Conferencing. This area is significant for SMBs
that intend to utilize advanced communications applications that
traditionally have been restricted to large enterprises.
This attribute also addresses whether the vendor and its channels
seek to position and deliver communication features, functions and
applications that
meet the needs and job requirements of individual SMB
employees.
Rounding out the evaluations, Applications Positioning also
measures the extent to which the vendor has customized its approach
to the needs of
specific SMB vertical industries; including tailored sales and
marketing messages, and the availability of platform features,
applications and end-user
devices to meet those specific needs.
The final attribute, Sustainability (Figure 7), provides an overall
business outlook on the vendor’s current competitiveness and
prospects for future
success. Evaluations include financial and executive leadership
stability, strategic direction, and revenue position in the SMB
segment.
Although a full discussion of each key attribute could easily
consume an entire business briefing paper in it self, we have
offered these summary views so that the SMB reader can, at minimum,
have a heightened awareness of their importance as they go through
the vendor evaluation process.
In this last section, we examine two key and related topics
associated with IP Telephony that frequently come up in our
end-user research as sources of
misconceptions or misunderstandings. After defining the terms, we
offer the reader some questions to ask prospective providers to
help clarify their
perspective and value proposition.
If there is one research finding about which there is a near 100%
consensus, it’s that all businesses want highly dependable
communications technology. The confusion starts when definitions
and measurements enter the conversation.
When talking with vendors and dealers, SMBs often report that the
terms reliability and availability are used interchangeably.
Although closely related, in point of fact they are actually
different measurements.
In the context of an SMB’s IP Telephony solution, the reliability
of that total solution is the likelihood that all the different
components – from the voice call control software, the server
that hosts the software, the network that carries the voice packet
information, all the way to the end-user device on the desktop –
will actually function properly when required.
The unit of measurement for reliability is typically mean time
between failure (MTBF), which is the average amount of time a
business can expect the system to function properly between
failures. When a failure does occur, the average amount of time
required to restore the system to proper functioning is measured in
terms of mean time to repair (MTTR).
The way end users in a business actually experience reliability is
through availability – the expected positive response of the
system when a user makes a request. If an employee picks up the
phone handset one hundred times and there is dial tone every time,
then the user-perceived availability of the
solution for placing outbound calls is 100% for that period of
time.
When people talk about five-nines reliability (some vendors are
even claiming seven- or eight-nines), they are actually referring
to availability, not reliability. The computation is
straightforward…
Let’s use a week’s worth of system performance as an example.
If there are 604,800 seconds in a week, and your new IP solution is
down for just 60 seconds in that period of time, then the mean time
between failure is 604,740 seconds and the mean time to repair is
60 seconds.
The Percentage Availability would be 604,740 / (604,740 + 60) =
99.990%, or in vendor shorthand, four-nines. In order for our
hypothetical IP solution to attain the coveted five-nines (99.999%)
availability over the course of a week, the system could be down no
more than six seconds.
In order to attain five-nines availability over the course of a
year, our solution could not have more than five minutes and 10
seconds of user-perceived downtime. When you consider that an end
user’s view of availability does not depend simply on whether the
core IPT processor (i.e., system) is working, but that all the rest
of the components in the IP network are also working perfectly,
achieving true user perceived five-nines availability is no mean
feat.
If a vendor intends to propose the best possible IPT solution for
your business, expect that any discussion on the topics of
reliability and availability will invariably transition into the
related areas of business continuity, resiliency, redundancy and
failover.
First, definitions. Business continuity is the state of a business
to be able to continue functioning during an unexpected (or
expected) outage condition. This is similar, but distinct, from the
topic of disaster recovery, which addresses the steps a business
can take to restore business functioning following an outage
condition.
In the context of our discussion, Resiliency is the capability of
the IP solution to continue delivering an acceptable level of
service should normal operations be interrupted for whatever
reason. The term survivability will often also come up in these
discussions, but it usually refers to maintaining resiliency in the
specific situation of a natural or man-made disaster such as a
hurricane or explosion.
A resilient IPT solution is one that can continue to operate
normally (thereby delivering continuous user perceived
availability) even if solution components fail. A best practices
approach to achieving resiliency is achieved through three primary
means: (1) Redundancy (the selective addition of
equipment that can perform the task of a failed component); (2) a
well-designed solution and underlying network architecture that
eliminates potential single points of failure (which by definition
result in interruptions of availability); and (3) proper systematic
maintenance of the solution.
Failover is the planned capability of the solution to shift over to
using redundant components in the event of an outage condition. By
definition, failover occurs automatically, as opposed to
switchover, which requires manual intervention.
My Redundancy is Your Duplication
• Ask them to show you the computation that led them to that
conclusion.
• If someone says that “the MTBF of our system processor is 20
years”, ask them how that was measured.
Was it an actual test result (meaning someone observed it for 20
years), or was it a theoretical number that was modeled based on a
list of assumptions? If so, what were the assumptions?
• When a “nines assertion” is made, ask them what components
were included in the calculation. Was it genuine user-perceived
availability that reflected the proper functioning of the entire
solution, or were they referring to one piece of the total
solution?
• If you actually encounter a vendor claiming five-nines or more,
ask them what that means in terms of expected continuous
availability. If they come back with some statement like “50
years”, ask them why you should bother buying a maintenance
agreement for the system.
What to ask when you hear statements like
“Our system is more reliable than their system…” or “Our
solution delivers six-nines…”
In addition to IP-related topics like reliability and redundancy
that SMBs find are prone to confusion or misunderstandings, we also
get feedback on other areas of vendor interaction that many SMBs
are critical of.
SMBs should be cautious about claims that new entrants to the
market can innovate faster than those vendors who have a background
in TDM telephony. Many of the traditional vendors have not only
rearchitected their solutions but have also added additional
IP-specific capabilities to their already extensive list of
features Instead of being a tangible indicator of vendor stability
and a sustainable business model, they try and equate longevity
with an inability to innovate.
Old Is Bad, New Is Good
• Ask them to explain from a design perspective what the
difference is between “redundant” and “duplicated”.
• If someone says that their system has failover capabilities,
ask them whether that is a truly automatic event or requires human
intervention.
• When a vendor touts the superiority of their system management
software, ask them to explain in detail what happens if the server
that hosts the software fails. Is there built-in failover? In some
vendor’s solutions, it’s a non-event; in others, essential
functions like call processing and voicemail will fail as
well.
• Also ask them to address the security features surrounding
their system management software. Some vendor’s have fortified
their software with encryption technology; others leave the
software unprotected and potentially vulnerable to unauthorized
access or hacker attacks.
What to ask when you hear statements like
“Our solution has redundant components, theirs has duplicated
components…”
or
“Our system management software is better than their system
management software…”
• Ask them to compare, point-for-point, the features and
capabilities of their IPT solution vs. the competitor they are
disparaging.
• When the “Our R&D is better than their R&D” point
is made, ask them to show you their calendar for
releasing new and generally available (GA) applications and
functionality over the past three years.
Then ask them to do the same thing for the “slow to market”
competitor.
• When it comes to innovation, we’ve found that a comparison of
the different vendor’s approaches to providing specialized
applications such as those for remote or “at home” workers can
be very instructive.
Since more than 30% of the SMBs in the U.S. report that they have
employees that work at least occasionally from home, this type of
application is definitely not restricted to larger enterprises. If
the innovation topic comes up, ask them to explain in detail how
their remote worker application works vs. that of the
“uninnovative” competitor.
What to ask when you hear statements like
“All they did with their IP system is re-use all of the old code
from their TDM switch…”
or
“We can innovate faster than they can because we’re not
burdened with all that old code…”
A Final Thought on Vendor Selection
Although the price of a communications system is definitely on the
short list of care-abouts for the majority of SMBs, our research
has shown – overwhelmingly – that the factors having the
greatest impact on an SMB’s satisfaction with their vendor over
the long run are not a cheaper price tag but the combination of
expertise, responsiveness, professional integrity and a genuine
desire on the part of the vendor to see the customer’s business
thrive. From our perspective, keeping these characteristics in mind
during conversations with prospective vendors can help ensure that
the right choice is made during the selection process.
