Service providers' network planning in need of an overhaul

Operators are struggling to keep up with the demands being placed on their networks. Greater competition, quicker introductions of new services and uncertainty regarding their uptake are forcing operators to reassess how they undertake network planning. 

These are the findings of an operator study conducted by Analysys Mason on behalf of Amdocs, the business and operational support systems (BSS/ OSS) vendor.

Columns (left to right): 1) Stove-pipe solutions and legacy systems with no time-lined consolidated view 2) Too much time spent on manual processes 3) Too much time (or too little time) and investment on integration efforts with different OSS 4) Lack of consistent processes or tools to roll-out same resources/ technologies 5) Competition difficulties 6) Delays in launching new services. Source: Analysys MasonClick here to view full chart.

What is network planning?

Every service provider has a network planning organisation, connected to engineering but a separate unit. According to Mark Mortensen, senior analyst at Analysys Mason and co-author of the study, the unit typically numbers fewer than 100 staff although BT’s, for example, has 600. 

 "They are highly technical; you will have a ROADM specialist, radio frequency experts, someone knowledgeable on Juniper and Cisco routers," says Mortensen.  "Their job is to figure out how to augment the network using the available budget."

In particular, the unit's tasks include strategic planning, doing ‘what-if’ analyses two years ahead to assess likely demand on the network.  Technical planning, meanwhile, includes assessing what needs to be bought in the coming year assuming the budget comes in.

The network planners must also address immediate issues such as when an operator wins a contract and must connect an enterprise’s facilities in locations where the operator has no network presence.

“What operators did in two years of planning five years ago they are now doing in a quarter.”

Mark Mortensen, Analysys Mason.

Network planning issues

• Operators have less time to plan. “What operators did in two years of planning five years ago they are now doing in a quarter,” says Mortensen.  “BT wants to be able to run a new plan overnight.”

• Automated and sophisticated planning tools do not exist. The small size of the network planning group has meant OSS vendors’ attention has been focused elsewhere.

• If operators could plan forward orders and traffic with greater confidence, they could reduce the amount of extra-capacity they currently have in place. This, according to Mortensen, could save operators 5% of their capital budget.

Key study findings

• Changes in budgets and networks are happening faster than ever before.

• Network planning is becoming more complex requiring the processing of many data inputs. These include how fast network resources are being consumed, by what services and how quickly the services are growing.

• As a result network planning takes longer than the very changes it needs to accommodate. “It [network planning] is a very manual process,” says Mortensen.

• Marketing people now control the budgets. This makes the network planners’ task more complex and requires interaction between the two groups. “This is not a known art and requires compromise,” he says. Mortensen admits that he was surprised by the degree to which the marketing people now control budgets.

In summary

Even if OSS vendors develop sophisticated network planning tools, it is unlikely that end users will notice a difference, says Mortensen. However, it will impact significantly operators’ efficiencies and competitiveness. 

Users will also not be as frustrated when new service are launched, such as the poor network performance that resulted due to the huge increases in data generated by the introduction of the latest smartphones. This change may not be evident to users but will be welcome nonetheless.

Study details

Analysys Mason interviewed 24 operators including (40%) mobile, (50%) fixed and (10%) cable. A dozen were Tier One operators while two were Tier Three. The rest - Tier Two operators - are classed as having yearly revenues ranging from US$1bn and 10bn. Lastly, half the operators surveyed were European while the rest were split between Asia Pacific and North America. One Latin American operator was also included.