Optimizing Costs of Field Force Mobility Using Consumer Technology Field force empowerment is critical for brand management, customer service and improving productivity and efficiency. The current trend of the consumerization of IT can help reduce the cost of field force mobility as well as improve productivity in a secure manner.

Executive Summary For over a decade, diverse industries such as retail, manufacturing, logistics, pharmaceuticals and consumer goods have deployed mobile devices for their field forces to enable higher productiv-ity, enhanced customer service, better inventory management and improved sales planning and forecasting. Traditionally, rugged devices from various manufacturers running variants of Windows Mobile (v6.5 or earlier) have been used across all four facets of field operations: field service, field sales, direct store delivery and asset management.

The lack of better alternatives meant that CFOs tucked their high price points into balance sheets as a “necessary premium.” Over time these devices gained the “legacy” label.

However, with consumer technology growing in leaps and bounds and rapidly proliferating across enterprises, this traditional method of empowering the field force is due for a disruption. Organizations considering device replacement are beginning to take a close look at the ROI of rugged devices and assessing the potential

value of replacing them with consumer devices running modern mobile operating systems such as Android and Windows 8. These devices are not just significantly cheaper but are also more functionally powerful. Additionally, the evolution of new business models is opening up oppor-tunities to better manage field mobility costs, beginning with the conversion of capital expendi-ture (Cap-Ex) to operational expenditure (Op-Ex).

This disruption has already begun in growth/developing markets such as India and China where hypercompetition, the need for lower Cap-Ex and the retention of hard-to-find talent are forcing companies to be innovative.

Our industry assessment and research indicates that there is a clear business case for optimizing field mobility costs.

This white paper presents an approach to determine the feasibility of deploying consumer technology in specific field scenarios. Sub-sequently, it proposes a roadmap to deploy consumer devices and improve field productivity, while optimizing costs and ensuring security of apps and data.

• Cognizant 20-20 Insights

cognizant 20-20 insights | april 2013

cognizant 20-20 insights 2

IntroductionFor a long time, the field force has carried sturdy but bulky handhelds that weigh anywhere between 300-500 grams and cost anywhere between $1,000-$2,500. These “rugged” devices are meant to operate reliably even in harsh

conditions. They have been built to withstand extreme temperatures, dust and humidity, and are impact-resistant.

On the functional side, they run applications that enable the field force to perform activities ranging from work order management to field reporting. In some cases, the devices are equipped with I/O peripherals such as

barcode scanners, RFID readers, payment trans-action panels, etc. that enable the field force to perform activities such as asset management and payment collection.

However, given the rise of enterprise-ready consumer technologies, it is time to ask some basic questions.

• How often do rugged devices in the field actually get exposed to the harsh environmen-tal conditions they are built for?

• Do all field force scenarios warrant rugged devices?

• Is consumer technology now capable of executing the same functions as rugged devices?

• Is the inconvenience of carrying bulky devices in the field worth the benefits?

• Is the uni-functional nature of these devices and their lack of seamless multitasking detracting from optimum productivity instead of supporting it?

• Have rugged devices kept up with the latest mobile technologies and platforms, facilitating higher levels of productivity?

• Most important, given the plethora of consumer alternatives available, is the cost of rugged devices worth the benefits they deliver?

Trends in the Field Mobility Space

• According to VDC Research, investments by organizations in consumer devices for field mobility have risen by 14% and 16% over the past two years as compared to a 7% increase

for rugged devices in each year.1

• Even by a conservative estimate, consumer devices are around 33% cheaper than their rugged counterparts. Therefore, the increase in the number of consumer devices on the field has outstripped that of rugged devices.

• Over 50% of organizations that VDC Research surveyed plan to migrate to Android for field operations, while 43% would prefer iOS. The three reasons outlined for these moves are: increased flexibility, limited functional capabili-ties of the current OS (mostly Windows 6.5 or earlier) and preferred devices not running the OS currently deployed (mostly Windows).

• Of the surveyed organizations, 75% cite “intuitive user interface” as the top require-ment for field mobility applications. In addition, 50% cite “improved worker productivity” as the top requirement for the field mobility setup.

• Over 30% of the surveyed organizations are actively seeking ways to reduce field mobility costs. For the past several years, most organi-zations had believed that existing field mobility costs were optimized.

Given the demand for more intuitive field mobility, better worker productivity and a reduction in costs, the switch to consumer devices will only accelerate. However, a few concerns remain:

• Can consumer devices completely replace rugged devices from a functional and oper-ational standpoint? If yes, in which field scenarios is this particularly applicable? If not, what is the best mix?

• Do they really offer significant cost benefits over their rugged counterparts when all aspects are considered?

• Is optimization of field mobility costs only restricted to replacement of rugged devices with consumer devices or are there other opportunities available?

Smartphones as Replacement for Rugged HandheldsBy virtue of their significantly lower costs, improving durability, OEM-led enterprise readiness, rapidly evolving onboard technolo-gies, high-quality user interface and widespread consumer acceptance, smartphones are proving to be tough competition for rugged handhelds in a growing number of field scenarios.

The cost structure for field mobility can be broken down into hard costs (tangible and fixed) and soft costs (intangible as well as variable) (see Figure 1).

Not all field jobs require extreme levels of device ruggedness; 21% of field scenarios

do not need any device ruggedness, while 52% need it

only to negate device mishandling by users.

cognizant 20-20 insights 3

The hard costs account for the hardware (device and peripherals), software (application develop-ment/license and back-end integration) and infra-structure (device management and security). The soft costs consist of training, IT support and, most importantly, potential productivity losses due to device failure.

Hard Costs Are Much Lower for Consumer Devices

A comparative analysis of hard costs (see Figure 2) over five years reveals that replacing rugged handhelds with equally capable consumer handhelds can cut the overall cost by 48%. This reduction is primarily driven by the device component which drives most of the hard costs.

In terms of upfront investment, the change is even more significant. While a rugged handheld can cost anywhere between $1,000-$2,500, an

equally functional, enterprise-ready smartphone comes with a list price of $300.

Soft Costs of Smartphones Are Falling Rapidly

One of the arguments against the use of consumer devices in the field has been the comparatively high soft costs due to device failure on the ground leading to lost productivity. However, smartphone technology has evolved from failure rates of 33% four years ago to around 10% now (see Figure 3 on the next page).

Interestingly, a strong argument in favor of smartphones now is the gain in productivity due to their ability to seamlessly run multiple applica-tions, thereby enabling multitasking.

These factors are erasing the soft cost disadvan-tage (see Figure 4 on the next page) traditionally associated with these devices.

Figure 1

Cost Structure for Field Mobility

Hard Costs Soft Costs

• Hardware: »Device. »Peripherals.

• Software: »App development. »App license. »Back-end integration.

• Infrastructure: »Device management. »Security.

• Productivity loss due to failure or downtime.

• Training.

• IT support and maintenance.

48%

60%

57%

25%

-16%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Overall Hard costs Device Peripherals Software Services

Co

st (

Ind

exed

)

Rugged Consumer Cost benefits of replacing rugged with consumer device

Source: Cognizant analysis, based partially on VDC research data.Figure 2

Hard Cost Comparison for Rugged and Consumer Handhelds (Over Five Years)

cognizant 20-20 insights 4

Smartphones Can Be Reasonably Ruggedized at Low Cost

Not all field jobs require extreme levels of device ruggedness. According to a recent survey conducted by Field Technologies Online, close to 79% of organizations believe some level of ruggedness is necessary for devices. However, 52% of the respondents felt ruggedness was essential to offset technicians’ mishandling of the devices while 21% felt the activities conducted by their field force did not require any device ruggedness.2

While smartphones are not drop-proof, the use of “rugged cases” provides durability at a low price. These cases come with screen protectors, are made of durable silicone to absorb shock and have other impact-resistant exterior features. Some cases also enable docking of the device as required. These cases are available for $25-$50 and offer rugged alternatives for all possible form factors.

Peripheral Features on Consumer Devices Can Execute I/O Requirements

One of the USPs of rugged devices has been integrated I/O peripherals such as barcode scanners, cameras, RFID readers and credit card swipers that enable easy asset management, payment collection and product delivery. Half a decade ago, these technologies were either expensive or not up to industry standards. However, given the pace of consumer technology evolution, these I/O technologies have not just scaled up in quality but have also become com-moditized, thus enabling easy and cheap integra-tion with smartphones.

Today a $300 smartphone comes with a 5-megapixel camera that is capable of reading, scanning and processing all forms of digital codes. This capability becomes even more relevant when we analyze the popular I/O functionalities that are actually used in the field. According to VDC Research, over 60% of I/O requirements are linked to camera processing while another 30%

9.0% 8.5% 8.0%

33.0%

16.7%

10.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

2008 2010 2012

Rugged

Consumer

Source: Cognizant analysis, based partially on figures from VDC and SquareTrade.Figure 3

Device Failure Rate

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

2009 2012 2015 (E)

Co

st (

ind

exed

)

Costs Due to Loss of Productivity

Rugged Handheld

Consumer Handheld

Source: Cognizant analysis.Figure 4

Soft Cost Differential Diminishes

5cognizant 20-20 insights

are linked to a 2D imager.3 A low-cost smartphone can easily execute these functionalities.

Another prominent trend has been the growing maturity of device-embedded, software-enabled I/O processing as potential replacements for hardware-driven execution. With the evolution of software-based payment firms such as Square, more uni-functional hardware (e.g., barcode scanners and credit card swipers) are expected to become obsolete.

However, field operations of all scales and sizes cannot be immediately enabled by software-based smartphone I/O capabilities. For high volume barcode scanning such as in shipyards and industrial delivery, a hardware scanner integrated with a pistol-grip rugged device would still be a better choice.

User Acceptance, Experience and Convenience High for Consumer Devices

A recent survey conducted by VDC Research indicates “intuitive user interface” is the top requirement for field mobility applications, with close to 75% of respondents voting for it.4

Smartphone usage is based on intuitiveness and high-quality user interface. Add to this the comfort level workers enjoy with smartphones in their personal lives, the uni-functional nature and inconvenience of rugged devices weighing up to 500g and user preference becomes even more skewed toward smartphones.

McKinley Equipment, a U.S.-based warehous-ing equipment supplier, has rolled out consumer devices for field technicians primarily for their user acceptance, intuitiveness and popularity in the consumer world. “We wanted a device that would provide all of the functionality we were looking for, but also that our techs would actually enjoy using. There are two major “pros” that led us to the consumer device — the first is its ease of use and intuitiveness. The second major pro is the general, universal appeal of the device,” said Kevin Rusin, CFO of McKinley Equipment.5

Some organizations are going a step ahead and embracing BYOD for their field force — thus making smartphones the only device the field force needs to carry, be it for professional or personal purposes.

Brand Image Enhancement

Traditional rugged devices are prone to slow boot-up, loss of Internet connectivity and issues with I/O peripherals. Consumer devices with their “always on and connected” state and sleek looks

not only enable quick responses to customer requests but also suggest an organization that is keeping pace with technological advancements and is well equipped to serve customer needs in the best possible way.

Field Scenario Assessment: Determining Field Cases for Smartphone Deployment While consumer devices trump rugged devices on elements such as cost, multi-utility scope, convenience, intuitiveness and user acceptance, it would be risky to opt for consumer devices for all field scenarios. In fact, in scenarios with extreme environmental conditions and high volume I/O functional requirements, deployment of consumer devices could backfire, with consequences ranging from significant loss of productivity to instant capital destruction. Hence it becomes critical to perform an in-depth scenario analysis to determine the feasibility of deploying consumer devices in the field.

While the scenarios will vary across organizations, Figure 5 (on the next page) outlines high-level guidelines for such an analysis.

A majority of the field activities relate to sales and service and take place in reasonable operating conditions.

Figure 6 (also on the next page) lays out guidelines for determining use-case appropriateness for smartphones and rugged handhelds across all four facets of field operations. It is important to note, though, that the actual use-case appropri-ateness can only be determined after a detailed assessment of the intricacies involved.

Cost Optimization Through Smartphone DeploymentOnce the decision to deploy smartphones in the field is approved, a detailed assessment should follow. Such an assessment would encompass mobile platform, infrastructure, applications, user requirements, policies and the total cost of ownership (TCO).

Figure 7 on page 7 outlines a high-level approach for organizations looking to deploy smartphones in the field.

Sample Case for Android Deployment

While the cost benefits of Android (in the form of low-cost, enterprise-quality smartphones) and

Seventy five percent of organizations rate “intuitive user interface” as the top requirement for field mobility applications.

cognizant 20-20 insights 6

its popularity among global consumers have con-sistently attracted enterprises, security concerns around the platform have been a deterrent.

However, over the past year or so, Google has tightened the security base of the platform with every new version release while OEMs have realized the importance of making Android devices enterprise-ready. Companies such as Samsung have made significant investments in preparing their devices for enterprise use both on the technology and marketing fronts. The results have been encouraging, with enterprises across industries steadily adopting the platform across lines of businesses.

From a field mobility perspective, enterprise-ready Android devices available for as little as

$300 make a strong case for field deployment and cost optimization. In such a scenario, execution of some of the steps highlighted below can ensure the deployment of secure and enterprise-ready Android devices.

• Tight integration of the devices with globally renowned MDM tools (such as Airwatch, SOTI, etc.).

• Selection of Android devices that either run on the latest platform version or can be upgraded.

• In-depth assessment of the field application portfolio for data security, encryption and transmission over the network. Since Android has been prone to malware, it is this data that needs to be secured first.

Figure 5

Guidelines for Scenario Analysis

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3Take Stock of the

Operating ConditionsAssess the I/O Requirements Analyze the Use Cases

Determine the level of exposure to extreme temper-ature, dust, shock, vibration, water and scratches.

Based on the exposure, determine the suitability of consumer devices.

Map the durability of the rugged cases to the ground conditions to check feasibility.

Determine the volume and nature of I/O requirements (barcode scanner, card swiper, etc.).

Map the volume of I/O execution to the consumer device’s execution capacity (e.g., speed of I/O processing) to determine feasibility.

Grip and use of accessories (e.g., wearing gloves) will also determine the choice of device.

Accurate mapping of field use cases with device capabilities is the single most important step in choosing a consumer device over a rugged device.

Consumer devices are more suitable for customer interaction, access to informa-tion, scheduling and intuitive data entry.

Field sales and field service have higher scope for consumer device usage as compared to asset management.

Field Segment Use-Case Appropriateness

Field SalesAccess to product information and customer data, field reporting, product promotion and customer engagement make a stronger case for smartphones.

Rugged devices are more suitable for scenarios such as high-volume industrial sales.

Field Service

Smartphones prove more effective for requirements such as instruction manuals, work-order management, scheduling, access to warranty details, maintenance history and SLAs.

For executing field service in fragile conditions such as shipyards and remote locations as well as for high-volume data entry, rugged devices are more suitable.

Direct Store Delivery

Order processing, low volume order delivery, access to cross-selling and up-selling informa-tion and address detectors make smartphones a better choice.

For industrial goods delivery, payment processing and card swiping, rugged devices are a better option.

Asset Management

Rugged devices typically tend to dominate this area of field operations. High-volume asset tracking, RFID tag scanning, scanning under poor visibility make strong cases for rugged devices.

Smartphones though do see application in low-volume asset management.

Figure 6

Guidelines for Determining Use-Case Appropriateness

cognizant 20-20 insights 7

• Installation of mobile anti-virus and anti-mal-ware on the devices.

• Outlining of appropriate governance and secu-rity policies to tightly regulate Android usage.

Alternative Means of Field Mobility Cost OptimizationIdeally, with the right assessment and appropri-ate cost modelling, the potential cost benefits of smartphone deployment should be evident right away. However, there could be scenarios where the TCO for rugged is not very different from that for smartphones. Some of the reasons could be:

• Selection of a comparatively expensive device (the iPhone, for example), the cost of which gets compounded due to a high refresh rate.

• The current device might be durable and not necessarily rugged. Durable devices have moderate ruggedness and are available in a price range of $600-$1,000. While the minimum price of these devices is still twice that of an equally capable smartphone, the compara-tively high refresh rate for smartphones could narrow the TCO benefits.

• Inaccurate assumptions about either hard or soft costs. Soft costs are especially difficult to forecast owing to their intangible nature, and this may result in overly conservative cost/benefit assumptions.

Renting Field Mobility — Converting Cap-Ex to Op-Ex

Given mobile technologies’ rapid evolution, more and more organizations are now looking for

means to avoid heavy upfront costs and make gradual “value-based investments” instead. This not only makes it easier for business units and CIOs to pitch for mobility investments but also allows them to experiment with mobile advance-ment at minimal risk by future-proofing them.

While the switch from rugged devices to reasonably priced consumer devices does reduce the upfront cost significantly, there is a large chunk of field mobility investment (including the smartphone costs) that still goes on the balance sheets as capital expenditure. However, newer business models now enable these costs to be converted into operational expenditure. The entire stack of field mobility deployments are handed over to service providers who charge on a per-user/per-month basis. This includes:

• Sourcing of device, data plan and voice plan from the carrier, which charges a fixed amount per month per user. All major carriers support such a model for smartphones across all forms and pricing for various OEMs. This is not the case with rugged devices, which need to be procured directly from OEMs as a full-device purchase.

• Sourcing of the field mobility app suite and the associated support and maintenance from a technology services provider.

• Sourcing of the back-end infrastructure (MDM suite, servers and cloud services) from a technology services provider.

• The task of identifying relevant use-cases for field mobility and driving those that have a

Step 1 Identification of the appropriate smartphone platform (iOS, Android, Blackberry, Windows, etc.) based on cost, security and enterprise integration specifics.

Step 2 Assessment of the organization’s IT and field infrastructure for security and mobile platform fitment.

Step 3 Creation of reference architecture incorporating gap-plugging measures for “secure” mobile platform deployment and device management.

Step 4 Field application portfolio assessment for app security, data security and mobile platform fitment.

Step 5 Field user requirements identification specific to app usage, field environment, user maturity and user preferences.

Step 6 Device identification based on field requirements, inclusive of OEM assessment and accessories identification.

Step 7 Governance, usage and security policy formulation.

Step 8 TCO identification and benefits encompassing expected cash outflows and returns annually as well as over an appropriate period of time.

Figure 7

Phased Approach for Smartphone Deployment

About CognizantCognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH) is a leading provider of information technology, consulting, and business process out-sourcing services, dedicated to helping the world’s leading companies build stronger businesses. Headquartered in Teaneck, New Jersey (U.S.), Cognizant combines a passion for client satisfaction, technology innovation, deep industry and business process expertise, and a global, collaborative workforce that embodies the future of work. With over 50 delivery centers worldwide and approximately 156,700 employees as of December 31, 2012, Cognizant is a member of the NASDAQ-100, the S&P 500, the Forbes Global 2000, and the Fortune 500 and is ranked among the top performing and fastest growing companies in the world. Visit us online at www.cognizant.com or follow us on Twitter: Cognizant.

World Headquarters500 Frank W. Burr Blvd.Teaneck, NJ 07666 USAPhone: +1 201 801 0233Fax: +1 201 801 0243Toll Free: +1 888 937 3277Email: inquiry@cognizant.com

European Headquarters1 Kingdom StreetPaddington CentralLondon W2 6BDPhone: +44 (0) 20 7297 7600Fax: +44 (0) 20 7121 0102Email: infouk@cognizant.com

India Operations Headquarters#5/535, Old Mahabalipuram RoadOkkiyam Pettai, ThoraipakkamChennai, 600 096 IndiaPhone: +91 (0) 44 4209 6000Fax: +91 (0) 44 4209 6060Email: inquiryindia@cognizant.com

© Copyright 2013, Cognizant. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the express written permission from Cognizant. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. All other trademarks mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners.

About the AuthorsVinod Venkatasubramanian leads Cognizant Mobility for Asia-Pacific, advising customers on their mobile strategies. He has worked with clients in the U.S., as well as in China, Hong Kong and Singapore over the past 11 years. During this period, Vinod has helped a number of clients with multichannel commerce and marketing strategies. Vinod earned his engineering degree in India and an M.B.A. from HKUST-School of Management, Hong Kong. He can be reached at Vinodrv@cognizant.com.

Ashutosh Didwania leads advisory engagements for Cognizant Mobility in the Asia-Pacific region. He helps clients define and execute their mobility strategies in the context of their larger business goals. Ashutosh has valuable business consulting experience in the sales and marketing domain. He has helped industry majors in pharmaceuticals, consumer goods and retail lay out their digital approach, leveraging emerging technologies such as mobility and social media. Ashutosh holds an M.B.A. in strategy and information systems and an undergraduate degree in computer science engineering. He can be reached at Ashutosh.Didwania@cognizant.com.

Footnotes1 “Strategic Insights 2012: Field Mobility Solutions,” VDC Research, September 2012.2 “Field Mobility 2013: How the latest technologies & trends are transforming the mobile workforce,”

Field Technologies Online, December 2012.3 Total Cost of Ownership models: Field Mobility, VDC Research, 2010.4 “Mobilizing Enterprise Applications: Executive Brief,” VDC Research, April 2012.5 Q&A: What’s the iPad’s role in Field Service?, Field Technologies Online, December 2012.

strong business case and can be handed over to service providers.

Service providers take ownership of the entire stack from organizations, coordinating with partners, providing services in collaboration with them and charging a fixed fee per user per month.

ConclusionWith greater cost pressures and ROI expectations in companies, consumer devices based on modern platforms are being deployed or considered for field force use where appropriate. When

combined with new business models that enable conversion of the associated cost from Cap-Ex to Op-Ex, this approach opens up significant oppor-tunities for transforming field operations in a cost-effective way.

While rugged devices will continue to add value in specific field scenarios, a careful assessment of the applicability of consumer devices will yield use-cases for their deployment, resulting in cost savings, increased productivity and even increased morale.