Mobility: An Essential Tool Of Trade, Not A "Nice To Have"

The United States lags behind when it comes to adoption of enterprise mobility applications - when will that change?

By Mary Brittain-White, CEO, Retriever Communications

I have two dogs, one is a Retriever who thinks bliss is eating and the other is a Terrier whose happiness is determined by whether he can get a bite at the postman. So we see every day in life, different levels of development but strangely technology and its use is described as a universal truth. The reality is that sophistication of IT usage varies not only by company but by country. Why would this be? In the main I believe it is due to regional circumstantial differences rather than entrepreneurial factors. Let me explain by example.

In my home market of Australia we are challenged by the tyranny of distance, and as a result mobility flourished here a decade before the United States. This has cascaded down into business usage, so today an HVAC company bidding for a corporate account cannot win without demonstrating an ability to take an electronic signature for a work order and to transparently make this electronic documentation available to the customer immediately. Eight years ago the conversation was very different – we would discuss end user ability to adjust to the technology and a strong focus on the return on investment. The fundamental change, which was the decision that mobility was an essential tool of trade rather than a ‘nice to have’ technology, occurred because the HVAC’s customers demanded the capability, rather than the HVAC industry deciding that the business case for investing in the technology was overwhelming. This is of course in line with a standard bell curve of market adoption, the majority of a market moves with the market not ahead of it.

So is the US the Retriever or the Terrier?

The development of cheap and accessible broadband in the United States led the world and may have contributed to the slow development of mobile access and lack of competitive United States mobile pricing in the 90’s. Whatever the cause, United States enterprise mobility as a market today remains a number of years behind the equivalent European and Australasian markets. Evidential proof is the market penetration of line of business apps remains under 20 percent and conversations remain focused on end user adoption and the validity of the business decision. When the market matures to the next level, the acceptance by end users is assumed and the mobile capability a requirement for competitive positioning and company survival.

The real strategic problem in waiting for a fundamental market shift is that by definition you are behind your competitors. The advantage is that the solutions should be mature and the technology risk will have diminished.

Ever hear the saying “It’s not the size of the dog in the fight, it’s the size of the fight in the dog?” Let’s talk about the fight in the dog.

The cultural advantage in the United States is that once an advantage is identified, companies adopt quickly, more so than European companies. Competitive advantage has much stronger currency; winning is important.

My personal forecast for the United States enterprise mobility market is that the conversation will become more sophisticated over the next 12 months. Taking advantage of mobility development experience overseas, United States companies will realize that line of business apps and particularly in field service environments, the need is to ensure compliance in technician activity and not just simple data capture. To this end, workflow management will become the conversation; by example ensuring that safety checks are made before the asset is maintained, or similarly demanding that parts are attributed to the job before it is closed rather than simply hoping the tech will remember to make the entry.

Quality of service is the goal, not just electronic paper.

So the fight in the dog? Lets talk about it again come Halloween.