With Thanksgiving coming up invariably there will be controversial subjects discussed at the family dinner table. Although I am one to revel in fabulous Thanksgiving stories - and we've all had them - I am not one who will bring up a topic just to see the sparks fly. That's just wrong.
However, if you asked many people what the term "net neutrality" is or what it means, you might get a blank stare. If you ask people in the communications industry, you will unleash a torrent of opinion and emotion. Net neutrality is a very hot topic right now as changes are being proposed that will affect service providers and Internet users.
So what is "net neutrality"? I do not claim to be an expert on this subject but have done some research and have a simple understanding of the concept. Net neutrality is what we have today - an open Internet that allows all types of content to be available to anyone who can access it. At its core, the Internet provides us with access, openness, and a conduit for innovation. Take Google for instance. It us unknown when the company name became a verb, as in, "just Google it". Through Google, we can learn about any topic quickly and easily through our phones, tablets, or laptops. How many school projects have been researched through tools such as Wikipedia? This openness allows all opinions on a subject to be given the same treatment and respect. When researching a topic, one can see all sides presented and make informed conclusions. In terms of innovation, where would Amazon, Netflix, and Facebook be without open Internet? All of these companies have relied on the ability to reach a broad number of users to further their product and with an open Internet, have become incredibly successful.
So, what's the problem? Here's where things get sticky...many of the uses of the Internet take massive amounts of broadband capacity to deliver - think Netflix and YouTube. It has been proposed that users of these types of applications can be charged more for taking up much of the Internet Service Providers (ISP) capacity. This sets up a "pay for play" scenario that flies in the face of access for all as some may not be able to afford these services going forward. ISP's are in favor of this as it would produce huge revenues for them. Opponents say that the ISP's could control the content and restrict information flow to end users.
This issue has made it into the judicial system with a case in early 2014 affirming the FCC's authority to regulate broadband Internet access. However, the FCC is asking for public comment on new rules to be established for the Internet.
Ultimately this is a subject that will affect us all - especially you, dear reader, as you are accessing this blog via our wonderful open Internet. We are wise to learn more about it and make sure our voices are heard.
In the years that I’ve been talking to customers and vendors
alike about energy conservation and sustainability, at least 75% of the time,
the discussion quickly devolves to “Cost Savings”. I also notice that a
combination of wrong assumptions, lack of perspective, and in some cases
desperation leads to the incorrect correlation between the price of a service
and the value to an organization. One could reasonably argue that the internet
has a lot to do with this. Without an ability to talk with a prospect, to let
them examine the merchandise (so to speak), it does focus on price only – and
we, as consumers accept this. That attitude bleeds over into the procurement
world of B2B sales and services.
Recently, before I even had a chance to evaluate what a
company MIGHT need from energy services, they immediately wanted to skip the
diagnosis and jump right into the treatment/price. I had to stop the discussion
and explain to the customer “You’re looking at it wrong.”
I’m a believer in humor and analogies – so here’s a moment
of humor. A game show “blooper” from Catchphrase – a show where you have to
guess a popular phrase with an incomplete view. As you will see, in some
circumstances it’s almost impossible to NOT see it wrong.
One thing that I try to work through with my customers is
what actual value and benefit will a customer receive if they follow our
suggestions? I don’t include intangible benefits either. If I’m not willing to
do the work of helping identify and apply an “intangible benefit”, chances are
my customer won’t either. If they don’t see the “benefit” and can’t “feel” any
impact; it’s not really a “benefit”, is it? In addition to describing and
applying a perceived/possible benefit – it’s our job as the seller….as the
expert….as the “partner”….to quantify that benefit and provide the means to
validate the claim later. (Those of you in energy will see where this is headed
in setting up Measurement & Verification).
Let’s focus for a moment on cost savings only. In this
example, a combination of energy projects in a facility is projected to save 5%
of the energy spend. If today’s spend = $3.00 per square foot, that equals a
savings of $.15/sq ft in the facility. That’s not exactly staggering, is it?
Even if we have 5M square feet under roof, we usually guess there should be
something more effective given the effort/disruption that will be required.
This is why procurement organizations aren’t jumping all
over themselves to run out and spend money for a series of projects that have
no relation or connection to each other than:
the Vendor on a Purchase Order and,
most of the "solution" focuses on the movement of electrons.
Without a clear vision, a roadmap, assigning resources
(internal or external/hired) and constantly measuring progress; without the
commitment to see it through – all of it is wasted energy and wasted effort. That’s why we believe there is room for discussion and new approaches on how we
define “best practice” when it comes to the optimization of energy by
enterprise organizations.
Today we’ll introduce one of our Benefit Points, an area
where we differentiate ourselves by focusing on identifying and quantifying
benefits to an organization – and how to distinguish Value from Cost. Today we
introduce the 3-30-300 Rule.
The 3-30-300 Rule
The 3-30-300 Rule works like this. The average
domestic organization spends:
a.$3.00 per square foot in Utilities
b.$30.00 per square foot in Facilities (Rent, etc)
c.$300 per square foot in Payroll
Using our 5% energy savings example above, the energy projects will deliver a savings of $.15 per square foot, BUT....there is a correlation between utility cost per square food and "Facility".
A properly designed and functioning "Energy Management System" may show that a planned capital purchase to expand cooling capacity is unneeded due to excess capacity already in the system.
Reducing the usage of the system reduces wear and tear, which reduces expenditures related to facilities.
The list of “projects” that will provide value to the
organization is long - Daylight harvesting, replacing multiple RTUs with a
centralized plant, generating onsite power, etc – all of these provide
value outside of “reducing fixed costs”. And the exponential or multiplier
relationship between utility cost and facility cost means that the $.15 savings
could result in an additional $1.50 in value – whether through productivity
gains, avoided capital expense projects, etc.
The next correlation – of Facilities to Payroll – involves
efficiency of operations, the satisfaction of employees who decide to stay, who
are healthier, who are happier and more productive. By connecting energy
savings to sustainability and sustainability to corporate culture, and by
truly following through with an effective strategy and policy that engages
H.R., management and employees – the benefits that can be achieved could well
exceed the $15/sq ft over time. That sort of positive and transformational
change within an organization can lead to publicity, to engagement
opportunities with customers, with the public. All of that…stemming from
deciding to do more than change light bulbs.
When Telamon decided to enter the energy services space, we
spent the “Time & Treasure” to design an enterprise-focuses solution that
is:
Complete – Our end-to-end solution is ready to go and it was
designed that way from the beginning. We don’t make commitments to our
customers and then hope we can “figure it out” later. We do not present
unnecessary risks to your credibility and capital.
Standards-based
Architecture – compatible with existing & legacy investments to reduce
implementation AND integration costs
Flexible – We customize around your needs and processes, not
ours.
Transforming your business and culture is not an easy task.
In our increasingly competitive global economy, I believe it is necessary and
can make the difference as to whether a company survives or collapses. Telamon
has a unique strength and advantage through the diversified services offered by
the different business units. These services and solutions can be combined and
customized, magnifying the original value proposition into something that is
truly unique and distinguishes you from everyone else. It is part of our “One
Telamon” vision and we would love to share that vision with you.
