|
 |
(Click
for larger view)
A wise colleague once told me, “Selecting a geospatial
technology solution is like going to the ice cream parlor. You have all
sorts of flavors, toppings and a million different sizes … the goal is
to make a great sundae from all of these choices.”
This advice has stuck with me through the years and today it is more
relevant than ever. Given the current market of Web services, numerous
geographic data content providers, server side engines, low cost
thin-client applications and CD-based products, the choices can become
nearly overwhelming. Not to mention the new 'mash-up' concept that
enables data to be draped over a map-based Web service. (Wait, they
even have mash-ups at the ice cream shop now - this analogy really has
aged well!)
The sometimes confusing composition of the geospatial marketplace is
particularly apparent when dealing with those newly acquainted with the
technology, and newcomers are more common than ever as the value of
location intelligence becomes more compelling to the business world.
When presenting possible solutions to those new to the technology, an
extensive education period is almost always required.
But as the number of software and content offerings proliferates, it is
not just the newbies who require advice - even veterans must grapple
with the multitude of technologies available. In fact, (and I won't
name names!) the sales forces of leading vendors seem to be
experiencing some sort of disorientation with the number of products
their companies offer and the niches they fill. Too often, conflicting
advice is given by different professionals within the same company.
The potential for confusion seems particularly great with commercial
clients, who are more frequently new to GIS and its possibilities.
While the public sector faces some of the same challenges in selecting
from the complex array of vendors, software products and data
offerings, it is often a less daunting undertaking since GIS is more
entrenched within government; dedicated staff are available for
planning and managing GIS. But more and more, commercial organizations
are tasking their corporate IT departments with procuring and managing
spatial technology. The challenge for these professionals is to
effectively select the optimum technology mix given the large selection
of possible solutions.
Even if an organization has already selected a preferred vendor, the
product lines within many companies can be exceedingly confusing. There
is functional overlap between individual applications and in some
cases, product names that seem to have been conceived for confusion.
Think of Paul P. Procurement when he asks, “How do we show our
customers on a map?” and the confusion that ensues when he discovers
the 1,001 possibilities for accomplishing this. Of course, we can't
blame software companies for wanting to add features or diversify their
product lines. This is Marketing 101 -- witness the birth of purple
ketchup or take a quick look at the toothbrush aisle. Still, I can
think of no other domain within IT that requires such expertise to
properly grasp the wide assortment of tools and products.
The diversification of GIS technology has become more rapid in recent
years. While GIS was formerly limited to desktop and workstation
products, organizations are now faced with an array of server-based,
service-oriented, client, and mobile GIS product offerings. Add
to this mix the complexities of acquiring GIS data. Newcomers often
express dismay that map data is not part of a package they buy. This
situation has improved with a la carte Web services and software
packages that include 'canned' datasets.
Yet potential customers should be cognizant of many critical questions
when determining a data solution. Is there a need for custom data? Will
free sources of data be accurate or sufficiently attributed? Can 'flat'
files be used or should spatial geometry be stored in a relational
database? Could Web services be leveraged for savings and maintenance
benefits? How is pricing affected when a proprietary data set is
deployed over the Web? When beginning a GIS implementation,
organizations are typically faced with a myriad of questions such as
these, and the answers are seldom evident.
While decision-makers would be well served by obtaining a certain level
of expertise, the complexities therein should not discourage prospects
from investigating spatial solutions. The value of spatial technology
can be well worth the time invested in making the right decisions.
Rising fuel costs, homeland security concerns and emergency
preparedness demand improved location intelligence processes. Site
selection, facilities management and delivery routing services are
among the applications that increase efficiency. Location intelligence
can be strategic for businesses as well. A wide range of data including
sales figures, customer profiles, competitor information, demographic
profiles, and targeted mailing lists can help a business gain a
competitive advantage. Location is also being used as a premium in
industries facing commoditization. Wireless carriers and car
manufacturers have long understood that consumers will respond to
location-based features.
The value of location intelligence is clear, so how do businesses go
about planning a location intelligent solution? What are the key
considerations? A number of factors (true of any technology) are of
concern, such as cost, maintenance requirements, and the need for
training. There are, however, issues which have a particular relevance
to GIS. Among the first choices to consider are selection of the right
mix of commercial off-the-shelf products vs. custom-built solutions,
staffing resources, cost/licensing optimization, and the availability
of a suitable technology infrastructure.
So, how do organizations make a sundae out of location intelligence and
all of its possibilities? What can organizations that see location
intelligence as mission critical or value-adding do to ensure that they
are making prudent investments? Tactics favored by conventional IT
projects such as proofs-of concept, phased deployments, and standards
adherence can minimize the potential for risks. But another approach
has gained credibility as the complexity of available technology
increases; the establishment of a 'trusted advisor' who maintains a
cross-vendor and progressive perspective on the industry. This advisor
assists with the establishment of a vision, assists with key purchase
decisions, reduces research and development costs, and helps
pursue a coordinated and cost-effective location intelligence
investment strategy.
The notion of a trusted advisor to help navigate the maze of location
intelligence technologies is not dissimilar to the ideas presented by
Hal Reid in The
Missing Department, where he suggests the need for an
intelligence office within corporations. We have already seen this with
the creation of the Geographic Information Officer (GIO), but
organizations with smaller efforts or focused systems do not merit
creating a dedicated internal position. Here, in these most common
situations, it makes sense to outsource this advisory role to a
professional, unbiased by an agenda to sell software or a binding
relationship to a particular vendor. This does not necessarily mean a
full-blown needs assessment is required for every implementation
(although in some situations, scope and complexity merit a contracted
research effort), but rather an expert who can be called upon to
provide direction and guidance as issues and questions arise.
In part II of this article, which will appear on June 7, I will expand
on some of the factors a
competent advisor would explore when making recommendations on location
intelligence and demonstrate this through a scenario frequently
encountered within the commercial sector: Should an organization
'self-host' their data or subscribe to a Web service for geospatial
content?
Decisions on location intelligence technology will continue to present
challenges and require careful planning, but with the right expertise,
organizations can end up with a sundae rather than a mixed up
hodge-podge that yields more headaches than return on investment. But
for the record, in the ice cream world those mixed-up messes can be
pretty tasty.
More about this author...
|
