Telecom infrastructure sharing

About: Telecom infrastructure sharing is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 442 publications have been published within this topic receiving 2727 citations.

Telecom Players, Regulatory Bodies, International Organizations and Regional Telecom Statistics: Global Overview

Abstract: Technology and regulation are key drivers for telecom growth in emerging economies. Technology facilitates improved services and creates market conducive for growth. The evolution of technology decreases costs and facilitates rapid growth phase that appeals to many industry players. With an increasing number of players, each striving for larger market shares, regulation is critical and necessary to promote growth and harmony in the sector. Regulations ensure that fair practices are adopted by telecom operators in their efforts to increase and maintain market shares.

Next Generation Access Networks: Infrastructure Sharing

Abstract: The migration to Next Generation Access Networks (NGAN) has raised a range of issues related to building wiring and infrastructure sharing. The deployment strategies for operators and entrants are completely different. European Commission argues that infrastructure-based competition is the best and fastest way for broadband development. The arguments are that infrastructure based competition provides efficiency incentives to operators, reduces prices, increase penetration, stimulates innovation, etc. However, civil costs represent up to 80% of the total roll-out cost of NGA. The study deployed shows several broadband access infrastructure sharing solutions.

Compliance driven Cost Control for Telecom Infrastructure Operation Management

Abstract: For a major telecom infrastructure company operating pan India including the state of Haryana, over 400 of their telecom infrastructure operation sites in Haryana had connected running power load more than the load sanctioned by the Haryana State Electricity Board (HSEB). As per the Standard Operating Procedure of this telecom infrastructure company (SOP), these 400 plus sites did not qualify under load upgrade category since the load had been increased without attracting any new tenancy i.e. Base Transceiver Station (BTS) of other telecom operators (service providers). Power load at these 400 sites had increased because of additional load due to sector expansion, cabinet expansion and 3G additions.Since running power load for a BTS cannot be more than the sanctioned load, these 400 sites were non compliant as per HSEB norms. If these sites were to be inspected by State Electricity Board inspectors and identified for non-conformity, it would have lead to heavy commercial penalties and even permanent disconnection of electricity to these sites. This inturn would entail using 24x7 diesel generators to keep sites active, increasing the operation cost manifold and also threatening environment pollution.A business case was prepared for this problem using the Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control (DMAIC) methodology, a Six-Sigma approach. Cause of power overload and its effect was detailed out using root cause analysis and possible optimal remedial solution was arrived at for this project. The total penalties calculated as per the HSEB guidelines came out to be Rs.35 million whereas the total expenditure being involved in complying and coming out of this issue came out to be Rs.12 million approximately, thus making it a net saving of Rs.23 million for the telecom company. It was also observed that for the sites where the sanctioned load was 35%-50% of the required load, net saving potential was more compared to the sites where the sanctioned load was 55%-80% of the required load. A similar business case was carried out by the same company in the state of Himachal Pradesh and found that net saving potential was more compared to the state of Haryana.This was practically achieved by calling different partners (vendors) to discuss this project in an open forum. Non compliant site allocation was carried out on the basis of partner's confidence, band width and operational capabilities to deliver these sites. A reward per site was declared to motivate the partners for quick achievement of the desired results (compliance) with a gate criterion of ≥80% of the total site allocation done. The partners provided power usage receipts from HSEB as a proof of job done and payments were released accordingly. The change in power load was reflected in the subsequent electricity bills. The target set for the change over to the HSEB compliance was three months during which rigorous monitoring and review mechanism was put in place including circulation of Daily Progress Report to all internal and external stakeholders. To ensure that this issue does not repeat in future, the technical guidelines (SOP) was amended in terms of the power load to be upgraded for every new asset being deployed at site.