|
Feb
08
2010
Luxembourg Reprise and a Visit With Some Revenue Assurance Royalty Posted on 01:43, February 8th, 2010 by adminI once again found myself conducting GRAPA training in the pretty little country of Luxembourg. In my world, ending up in the same city twice in the same year is a real bonus. I did not even have to buy a new SIM, I still had top-up on my “Tango” SIM from the last trip. I think Luxembourg with its castles, cobblestone roads and grand homes in the French royalty tradition, more than many European countries, brings to mind the “olden days”. Yes, Luxembourg clearly speaks to the grandeur of old. It would be easy to imagine fine women in billowing gowns, and aristocratic men in powdered wigs walking the streets. However, I was not here for sightseeing. This time, we had an entire training center full of experienced revenue assurance managers. I really enjoy teaching the Core Curriculum classes. However, when I get a chance to spend a week with a group of experienced revenue assurance managers I really get excited. Just imagine a room full of men of women whose accumulated experience in telecom revenue assurance is over one hundred years. Over a century of expertise was in one room–amazing. Of course, whenever you get a group of seasoned revenue assurance managers together, you are going to have some differences of opinion. After all, being cantankerous and assertive is clearly how we have all been able to survive this long in our high-pressure jobs. However, several things about this group stood out. When we teach our manager class, we still spend time on technical issues and techniques for revenue assurance, but we spend the major portion of the class discussing those things most critical to managers, namely:
It is interesting to sit down and take a good look at where we have come from, and where we are going, in each of our respective groups. The average size of staff for this class was six, with some dealing with startup scenarios and others dealing with departments that have been in existence for many years. This group, like most other groups of managers we have seen had a couple of characteristics in common and that always upset me, to a certain extent. If I were to write a list of some major shortcomings in the typical revenue assurance manager, the list would look like this. 1. Pro bono work 2. Terminal Uniqueness 3. Dirty Laundry 4. The Search for Revenue Assurance Royalty Pro Bono WorkIn the legal profession, there is a special kind of casework lawyers are expected to take on known as Pro Bono work. Pro Bono work is work done by lawyers for free for people who need it, even though they cannot pay. Lawyers are expected to do this kind of work in order to “give back” to the community and to keep their skills sharp. In the revenue assurance profession, we all have our own versions of pro bono work–like when the CFO asks you to do this or that analysis. Or when the internal auditors ask for your help on a special report or an operational manager asks you to analyze revenue reports because they know that when you look at them, they will be correct. Do not get me wrong, I do not think there is anything wrong with revenue assurance teams doing Pro Bono work. In fact, I think it is very important they do this. It is critical to our effectiveness and the management of our relationships and marketing. The problem I see is revenue assurance managers think they have to apologize for doing this work. They assume this kind of work is not in scope, because it does not involve counting CDR’s or building elaborate and often foolish controls over a process that works just fine without. No, in my opinion, the problem is revenue assurance managers need to stop apologizing for doing this kind of work, and start looking for it, and including it in their scope. The problem goes back to understanding exactly what we are supposed to be doing. If our job is to count CDR’s and spend too much money on ineffective systems and solutions, then yes, this is out of scope. However, if our job is to help management and operational managers to understand their revenue risks and to maximize revenues effectively, then the more pro bono work they do, the better. It never fails to amaze me how many revenue assurance managers walk around convinced the situations they face are unique to them. Class after class, whenever we can get revenue assurance managers to compare war stories, we find everyone is facing pretty much the same problems and addressing them in very similar ways. The problem has been, of course, that “alleged experts” in revenue assurance never talk about the real problems that revenue assurance managers face, because they are too busy trying to convince you: a) You are incompetent. b) You cannot do the job without a consultant or software product to help you. c) All of the real problems you face, and real value you add to the busy “don’t count”. Every time I hear an revenue assurance manager talking about these “special projects” they do for the CFO or Interconnect manager (or whoever), they always begin sheepishly talking about it. They are actually afraid people (specifically other revenue assurance managers) will think less of them for tackling these kinds of problems. Ultimately, I typify the situation as a condition where revenue assurance managers are convinced they need to seek out the Revenue Assurance Royalty. They look for the kings, dukes and duchesses of revenue assurance who can bestow the ‘Okay-ness’. Why do we look for the Royalty? I think that is simple to understand. We work in jobs where we are alone. Nobody understands what we do, or how we do it. We move from network to I/T, billing to call center, sales to accounting and back again with equal dispatch. We call no place home. We have no hierarchy and within our companies, we have no peers. Having no one to fly “high cover” for us leaves us feeling unattached, isolated and unsure of ourselves. I have to tell you. In the old days at ATT, we had all kinds of royalty. The Telco Management Team was king. Bell Labs did the research and development. Western Electric built the equipment, and the kings and queens of the telco bestowed their blessing upon the employees like the kings and queens of old. In those days, it was not about competence, or effectiveness. It was about genealogy (who did you know) and proximity. In the modern telco however, the kings and queens are gone. There is no BOM (Billing Operations Manager). There are no Product Managers. Today’s telco, like all other modern businesses is based upon merit and effectiveness, not positioning and sychophantary (kissing up). In the modern telco, it is the revenue assurance manager who survives for more than six months in the job, who develops the trust of operational managers, CEO’s , CFO’s and product developers who represent the real thought leaders. The “old school” thought leaders of our industry (the people who get paid by over-rich telcos) who sit around and expound on what “revenue assurance should be like in the perfect world” or “how revenue assurance used to be done in the good old days”, are quickly being displaced by the hard-bitten, battle proven revenue assurance pros who know what the game is really all about and survives the many different “trends” we are forced to deal with, while still delivering true, hard value to the firm. Revenue assurance managers are learning what they need to do to find true royalty in our profession is to either: a) Look in the mirror or b) Get on the phone and call a peer at another pock. That is exactly what GRAPA is all about. The reason we exist. To help revenue assurance managers come to realize it is, in fact they who are the thought leaders. The biggest problem most revenue assurance managers have, is themselves. They have been so focused on delivering value and fighting the good fight, they have lost sight of the fact that this investment has turned them into something more than what they were. It actually turns them into the very Revenue Assurance Royalty they were looking for. So the next time you have the urge to feel like, “surely there is someone who can tell me what to do in this situation,” try looking in the mirror. You might be surprised at what you see. So for me, the week ended, as so many of my weeks do, with a who room full of new friends, associates and colleagues, yet another set of fresh perspectives and of course, and a renewed respect and admiration for the men and women who make revenue assurance work on a daily basis. Until next time , this is Rob Mattison saying, be safe. There are those who feel there is no place for these two words in the same sentence. After all, why would regulators care about revenue assurance, and why would revenue assurance people care about regulations and regulators?
There is an old saying; if you talk before you think, you will probably end up with your foot in your mouth. This is certainly the case when it comes to our experiences talking with Regulators around the world about revenue assurance.
In order to appreciate exactly how revenue assurance and telcom regulation are coming together, it is important to develop a basic understanding of what telecom regulation is about. First, when it comes to regulations and telecoms there are two distinct sets of regulatory bodies that apply.
Financial Regulators and RA
First, there are financial regulatory bodies. These groups oversee the telecom’s financial reporting.
Nonetheless, almost every telco has much to deal with, and must comply with a whole raft of regulatory requirements as defined by these agencies. In the good old days when revenue assurance meant ‘CDR herder”, these regulations were immaterial and meaningless. Financial regulations and regulatory reviews were confined to the general ledger and the accounting offices. What happened in the “real world” of switches, CDRs and IN’s was regarded by accountants and regulators as irrelevant.
However, SOX changed all that. Since the great Enron collapse, telcos have been required to comply with an ever more stringent set of regulatory requirements when it comes to revenue management. Revenue assurance finds itself repeatedly involved in issues of financial regulatory compliance in several key areas:
Because the major responsibility for financial regulatory compliance falls to accounting and internal/external auditors, the trend is for revenue assurance to be assigned responsibilities in these areas.
Telecom Industry Regulators and Revenue Assurance
When most people think of telcos and regulators, they do not think of the financial regulations, but of the industry regulators. They are the people who set tariffs, mediate interconnect disputes and otherwise make telco executives uncomfortable. This is the area of regulation where revenue assurance and the regulators are beginning to see a lot more of each other. However, in order to understand how this odd relationship has been developing, we need to take a step back and better understand the telco regulator’s job.
Since the earliest days of telecommunications, governments have been involved. Telecommunications, like roads, postal services and other public services, are understood to be a government responsibility. In fact, in the olden days, telcos were the regulators of the industry in many countries.
The need for governmental involvement in telecoms is clear. Wireline telcos need government backing to obtain the right-of-ways and egress/ingress required to “wire up” a country. Wireless companies need to purchase leases on frequency to make sure not everyone tries to use the same bandwidth at the same time (so that nothing works).
Many people think this is the extent of the job of the regulator; to license frequency and regulate eminent domain. However, this is only a very small portion of the regulator’s job. While there is no actual authority over the practice of telecoms in an individual country other than the regulators themselves, the ITU (the International Telecommunications Union) – a division of the United Nations, is chartered with setting the regulatory environment for the global telecommunications network.
The ITU has no (for all practical purposes) enforcement capabilities, but serves more as an adviser than a regulator. Largely, the major conduit for delivery of effectiveness on the part of the ITU is found in the templates it provides for the establishment of treaties between nations on the management of international traffic.
Under the ITU guidelines however, a National Regulator has a number of proscribed responsibilities, and in many countries, the local government has endowed their regulators with additional powers. These powers are best understood in terms of the two P’s: Protect and Promote. National Regulators as Protectors
Undoubtedly, one of the primary responsibilities of regulators is protection. This includes the protection of:
These protections can take many forms. Typical consumer protections include:
Generally, regulators are “police-persons” that make sure telcos do not lie, cheat or steal from customers. Not only do regulators protect consumers, but also the telcos themselves receive protection from:
Included under both categories is a specific fraud called “Averse Accessory Fraud”. This is when a third party abuses both the telco and the consumer through practices like SIMBOXes, clones, terrorism, police and law enforcement, counterfeit top-ups and others.
The Regulator as Promoters
Not only is the regulator required to protect telcos and their customers. More critically for most countries, they are expected to ensure the development of a solid, robust and low cost telecommunications infrastructure available to all citizens. UN studies have shown repeatedly that countries with the best telecommunications infrastructure outperform those without many times over. These are the reasons regulators get so involved in rates, licenses, service offering, profiles etc… because they are working hard to ensure telcos lower their margins (or at least lower their prices) and maximize benefit to the nation.
Revenue Assurance and Regulators
So what does revenue assurance have to do with regulators and their missions? Well, frankly, it depends upon the country, the regulator and the situation. As the complexity of the telcom business model increases, regulators are finding that they, just like the people within the telcos themselves are getting more confused by how things work and where they (the regulators) need to be looking. Regulators, just like internal auditors, are finding that they cannot do their jobs, or that they can do a much better job if armed with a detailed understanding of exactly how telcom revenues are generated, managed and reported. In other words, there are quite a few areas where the regulator’s curiosity aligns closely with that of the revenue assurance professional.
Revenue Assurance Domains of Interest to Regulators
While clearly not all revenue assurance domains are important to regulators, there are several where the overlap and requirement is clear. Let us consider a few of them here.
The obvious consumer billing related cases:
The obvious interconnect, roaming and content related cases:
In other words, to do their jobs well, that is:
The regulator must, in effect, become a specialized form of revenue assurance analyst. In fact, the relationship between the regulator and the telco is similar to that of the Virtual Network Operator and their supplier. The Regulator needs to know how the telco generates its numbers in order to validate whether they are doing it correctly or not.
So before you start pooh poohing and saying that regulators do not care or have no place in the revenue assurance domain, be careful, they may be visiting you soon. And when they do, do you want them to understand the numbers you are producing or not?
2009 saw the attendance of several regulators (and many, many internal auditors) in GRAPA training and certification classes. In 2010, we expect to see many more. So, just in case you thought you had already figured out all the angles that we as revenue assurance people need to cover, here are a few more!
Until next time, this is Rob Mattison saying, Take care and be safe.
Jan
11
2010
Revenue Assurance: Professional Perspectives for 2010Posted on 10:23, January 11th, 2010 by adminWith the beginning of a fresh new year, we are seeing a lot of new exciting growth for GRAPA and for revenue assurance professionals around the world.
Revenue Assurance Professional Staffs Growing At Astronomical Rate
The biggest single landmark for revenue assurance has been the almost continuous growth in the size of revenue assurance departments around the world. As the latest generation of entrant telcos staff up, and as companies continue to see the incredible benefits of revenue protection, risk amelioration and new product development support that professional revenue assurance teams can offer, CFOs around the world are saying, “I need more people to do this job”.
Scope of Revenue Assurance Expanding and Maturing
While it is great to see the increased numbers of revenue assurance professionals, more significant is that these teams continue to see an expansion in the scope of what the revenue assurance professional is expected to do. New product development support, margin and market assurance, network asset utilization maximization: the list continually expands as companies (and revenue assurance professionals themselves) become more systematic and mature in their approach to the biggest problems telcos face.
Formalization of Roles and Responsibilities Continues
GRAPA is not standing at the sidelines during these exciting and critical times. We continue to work aggressively with members from around the world to understand better what people are doing, how they do it, and how we can help formally define these functions, roles and responsibilities and integrate them into our standards/procedures and standard controls libraries.
New Certification Programs For 2010While the certification program in 2009 was a huge success, (much better than expected), there are several positive suggestions for critical improvements that we need to make. The biggest change is the use of the term “Bachelors”. Our piloted 40-hour programs will no longer include the word “bachelors”, but there will be no change to the critical aspects of market value of the certification. At the same time, we will discontinue a few that did not see a lot of demand, and we will submit a final report to the membership for ratification and formalization.
New Telco Fraud Officer Program Launched
While the progress of revenue assurance has been phenomenal, feedback from the membership indicates a serious fraud management training and certification program is badly needed. Most telcos face a huge risk of fraud, and while good revenue assurance practices can help, ultimately, the fraud management job is much bigger and quite different in many key areas. 2010 will see the launch of our new Telco Fraud Officer initiative, geared towards the aggressive, systematic and comprehensive addressing of this much-needed addition to the revenue assurance arsenal.
Standards and Benchmarks Work Continues
We know the real value and core of the service GRAPA delivers is our ability to poll the membership, gather meaningful, accurate and independent information about how things can and should be done, and report that information back to you. Our standards and benchmarking committees continue to work at this critical job, and the information continues to be gathered and distributed.
Social Networking Programs
One of the big surprises for 2009 was the success of several of our social networking efforts. The GRAPA Blogs (English and Spanish Language), podcasts, newsletters (Consensus and Voices) and the LinkedIn group are a huge success. If you have not looked at these yet, try them. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Overall, 2009 was a fantastic year, and 2010 promises to be a true adventure in terms of the places we will be going. Stay tuned!
Until later, this is Rob Mattison, President of GRAPA wishing you a Happy New Year.
|
|
 |
Tags: 
Posted in 
