Posts

The IoT market continues to stabilize, with the overall market growing at a moderate accelerating CAGR of 24.8%

4Q18 Commercial Internet of Things Market Forecast infographic

TBR projects total commercial Internet of Things (IoT) market revenue will increase from $456.1 billion in 2019 to $1.4 trillion in 2024, a CAGR of 24.8%.

Topics covered in TBR’s Commercial IoT Market Forecast 2019-2024 include deeper examinations, such as trends, drivers and inhibitors of the seven technology segments we track (e.g., cloud services, IT services, ICT infrastructure, and connectivity), the 10 vertical groupings we cover (e.g., public sector, healthcare, manufacturing and logistics), and four geographies (i.e., APAC, EMEA, North America and Latin America).

In addition to a more in-depth examination of the aforementioned topics, we also delve into the rise of “bundles” and “packaged solutions,” and how vendor partnering is lowering cost of sales for IoT implementations.

For additional information about this research or to arrange a one-on-one analyst briefing, please contact Dan Demers at +1 603.929.1166 or [email protected].

The IoT market continues to stabilize, with the overall market growing at a moderate accelerating CAGR of 24.8%

TBR projects total commercial Internet of Things (IoT) market revenue will increase from $456.1 billion in 2019 to $1.4 trillion in 2024, a CAGR of 24.8%.

It is important to remember that IoT is a technique for applying technology components, not a technology itself, which leads to certain drivers and inhibitors. Because it is a technique, IoT has an unlimited shelf life. Vendors that invest now and solidify their IoT go-to-market strategy will benefit in the long run. Methods for connecting equipment and solutioning may evolve, but the overarching technique is not going away. However, IoT growth is limited by the components and solutioning that compose the technique, including capabilities, standards and cost. This leads the numerous submarkets and sub-technologies of the IoT ecosystem to experience varied growth.

IoT revenue will accelerate as technological capabilities and standards mature and common solutions appear, culminating in lower cost and complexity.

Graph showing commercial iot market forecast alternative market performance scenarios 2019-2024

TBR believes an emerging growth accelerator is the fact that IoT offerings have evolved from the initial DIY stage to easily integrated components to component kits to, finally, almost complete solutions. At each point in this evolution, IoT becomes less expensive, less burdensome and less risky to customers, while still delivering business benefits. This greatly broadens the market, resulting in market growth and revenue growth for vendors that participate in this evolution.

However, customers remain concerned with the cost of IoT solutions, including the expense associated with transmitting, processing and storing data. The amount of data stored increases as IoT projects remain in operation, and a thoughtful data collection and storage policy is key to maintaining positive ROI.

Maturing offerings, vendors and customers prompt long-term IoT vendor growth

The continued interweaving of the technology component market with Internet of Things (IoT) techniques delivers a well-defined path to long-term sustained growth for many IT and operational technology (OT) vendors, especially those vendors that are best able to differentiate their portfolio and position themselves as critical partners for a wide set of IoT solutions.

The hype surrounding IoT has only served to confuse and overwhelm customers and vendors, but efforts by both parties to cut through the hype is driving the growth of installed IoT solutions. As the hype fades, vendors are better able to rationalize their go-to-market strategies and messaging, particularly around how to assemble IoT solutions, leading customers to better understand how to apply IoT.

However, while it is becoming easier to assemble an IoT solution, it is still challenging to design and implement the IoT technique. We don’t expect a huge explosion of revenue; IoT itself isn’t a “killer app,” but it will enable moderate and slowly accelerating revenue growth for the various components involved in an IoT solution.

In our 3Q18 reports and thought leadership, TBR will focus on three topics that we believe are currently the most impactful on the wider IoT ecosystem: the increasing maturity of the IoT technique, the growing consolidation of generic platforms, and how increasing commoditization around IoT is working in favor of economies of scale and enabling the growth of installed solutions.

IoT is growing up: Increased ecosystem maturity will lead to increased customer adoption

TBR, through discussions with vendors and customers as well as our use case databasing, is noticing growth in installed IoT solutions, whether from net-new deployments or expansions of existing IoT deployments, signaling improved maturity. IoT maturation is not so much about the components of IoT as it is about businesses developing their ability to leverage technologies and techniques that are increasingly applicable to a growing number of business problems.

A major driver of this maturity is greater clarity around IoT techniques, led largely by go-to-market realignment and improved messaging by vendors, organization around IoT by customers, shifts from competition to coopetition by vendors, and general improvements in the construction of the technology that facilitate advanced usage of the IoT technique.

Signals of consolidation appear in the cloud IoT platform space

Infographic discussing signals of consolidation appearing in the IoT cloud platform space

The cloud IoT platform landscape consolidates around largest vendors as customers seek continuity, consistency and the best tools

Cloud services revenue grew 48.2% year-to-year and increased as a percentage of total benchmarked Internet of Things (IoT) revenue from 12.4% to 15.8% year-to-year in 2Q18. Growth is driven by customers, especially those without deep legacy ties, moving their workloads to the cloud. The public cloud ecosystem is beginning to consolidate, with the top vendors competing on best-in-class tools, partnerships and business-problem-solving messaging.

Software, while still a sizable portion of benchmarked revenue, is experiencing slowing revenue growth, from 19% year-to-year in 2Q17 to 4.2% year-to-year in 2Q18. Software, along with ICT infrastructure, will continue to play a role in IoT solutions with the advent of edge computing, but as providers’ cloud platforms mature and tie-in deals with application partners are cemented, demand increases.

ICT infrastructure revenue grew 14.1% year-to-year in 2Q18 due to increased IoT deployments as well as hybrid IoT becoming an increasingly common IoT framework. ICT infrastructure gross margin rose 80 basis points year-to-year. TBR believes the increase stems from the need for more specialized or powerful hardware to handle the more advanced needs of IoT and its components, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine vision. Despite the increased utilization of ICT hardware due to hybrid IoT and the need for specialization, the long view for ICT infrastructure will be complicated by commoditization. TBR expects most ICT infrastructure companies to deeply invest in software and service components to buttress the profitability of customer engagements as the threat of commoditization looms.

Vendors across the technology spectrum are all fervently trying to crack the code for the “killer app” within specific verticals that can solve common business problems and be widely adopted by customers. The vendors that win with building the first widely accepted solutions will be set up for success, while others in the oversaturated market will at best become acquisition targets and at worst become history.

For more information, contact Analyst Daniel Callahan at [email protected].

Increased market clarity drives 16.1% year-to-year growth in commercial IoT revenue

Technology Business Research, Inc.’s (TBR) 2Q18 Commercial IoT Benchmark recorded revenue growth of 16.1% year-to-year, to $10.3 billion, in 2Q18, among the 28 IT and operational technology (OT) vendors we benchmark. The revenue growth is largely a result of continued implementation of Internet of Thing (IoT) and growth of installed IoT solutions.

The dousing of rampant IoT hype, which only served to confuse and overwhelm customers and vendors, is helping drive the growth of installed IoT solutions. As the hype dies out, a wave of increased clarity and maturation is forming with vendors rationalizing their go-to-market strategies and messaging, leading to customers better understanding how to apply IoT and vendors learning how to assemble solutions. Packaged solutions are emerging as vendors cooperate, focusing on their strengths, and assemble components sets that solve verticalwide challenges. TBR believes these factors are driving tactical business-focused IoT projects to supersede overambitious projects stuck in proof-of-concept limbo.

However, while easier than in the past, IoT design and implementation are still a challenge. TBR does not expect a huge explosion of revenue beyond midteen growth going forward.

Total 2Q18 commercial IoT benchmarked gross profit increased 16.6% year-to-year to $5.1 billion. Reduced complexity in IoT due to increased knowledge around building and applying IoT as well as the streamlining of portfolios as a result of increased partnering is improving vendor profitability. Also, vendors are leveraging specialized tools, such as artificial intelligence (AI), to justify higher pricing.

 

TBR’s Commercial IoT Benchmark highlights current commercial IoT revenue and gross profit for vendors. TBR leverages financial models and projections across a diverse set of IT and OT components. Additionally, the benchmark outlines the major vendor drivers and trends shaping the market.

IoT Customer Spotlight: Colfax survived the stormy seas of IoT after righting its ship, and its story can serve as a navigational aid for peers still caught in the squall

Colfax is an industrial conglomerate with two operating companies under it, ESAB and Howden. ESAB produces equipment and filler metals for most welding and cutting applications, and Howden delivers precision air and gas handling equipment for numerous industrial applications. Both are worldwide industrial suppliers with multiple manufacturing plants and globally distributed support apparatus.

I learned about the conglomerate during a PTC customer panel at PTC’s LiveWorx 2018, where Colfax was represented by Ryan Cahalane, the company’s vice president of digital growth. I found his story, among others, to be an intriguing view into the development and deployment of Internet of Things (IoT) applications by an actual customer of vendor IoT solutions. Often, the real stories get lost in the marketing morass of the larger IT and operational technology (OT) companies pushing solutions. Cahalane and I connected over our thoughts on the importance of solving “the business problem” (and our intriguingly similar last names), and I took the opportunity to learn about Colfax as a customer (one could argue it could increasingly be placed as an ISV) and its experience implementing IoT.

Colfax began its journey like many of its peers: IoT was the buzz, and the company tried to react as fast as it could. Like many manufacturers or those in heavy industry, Colfax’s leadership kicked around the idea of harnessing IoT to drive new growth and differentiate from peers in a competitive marketplace, primarily via new IoT-enhanced products or digitally enabled service offerings. However, Colfax ran into challenges.

Internally, Colfax experienced the same roadblocks that plague most companies investigating IoT, especially federated ones like itself:

  • Colfax had a sizeable number of people working on IoT, but the company lacked communication and alignment across the various business units and initiatives.
  • Plenty of good ideas were being developed via shadow IT, but the company lacked cohesion and developments were technology-focused — not guided by business problems. This failed to differentiate the company, and Colfax’s messaging got lost in a crowded market.
  • Colfax initially tried to go it alone with a do-all solution, but that led to generic offerings that were not best-in-class, and handling all of the components, including design and management, was difficult for a diverse, distributed organization.

Externally, the company faced the usual challenges of the market. Its customers were interested in IoT, but Colfax found itself in proof-of-concept limbo as customers continually kicked the tires on IoT but never walked away with a key in hand. Cahalane explained that Colfax had trouble navigating customer cultures, such as garnering agreement from line-of-business, OT and IT managers from a technology viewpoint, and ultimately proving ROI for its digital solutions, from a business viewpoint, to C-level executives.

Many companies have shared the same struggles, and are now washing out, including behemoths such as General Electric, indicating no company is safe from the volatile and hypercompetitive IoT market. Colfax has persevered, however, because the company was quick to perceive the changing market dynamics. Here are my takeaways from my conversation with Cahalane around the company’s pivot:

  • I’ll begin with something that Cahalane, being humble, didn’t share with me but that I believe was an important step for Colfax: The company established Cahalane’s position of digital growth VP to coordinate IoT initiatives across the company and foster knowledge sharing, ultimately helping Colfax organize for IoT. Instead of offering a number of distributed, unfocused and perhaps competing IoT initiatives, Colfax, with Cahalane’s help, is focusing and acting on key opportunities.
  • What are those key opportunities? Colfax’s competitors would certainly like to know! Cahalane did share, however, the company’s new thought process for developing them: focus on the business challenges of its customers and narrow them down to what Colfax can best service with its technology and expertise. It’s no longer about developing fancy new technology and telling customers why they need it. It’s about listening to customers and solving their problems.
  • Colfax is going to market with the technology discussion on the back burner. Instead, the company is approaching customers with a business-problem-solving outlook, fishing for the all-important CEO buy-in and leaving the technology details to be sorted out later. As Cahalane stated, “We are staying very focused on the business message, the real value that you get from the solution. The tech is just a vehicle. A business message allows us to really spend time on bringing our knowledge to more customers. The customers finally see how it all fits together. It’s in their language.”
  • Cahalane noted that companies, such as Colfax in its early days, are often afraid of working with vendors or partners. Cooperation and coopetition among partners or working with a new vendor can be intimidating when a company knows it’s on the verge of a vertical breakthrough or solving the next use case, causing companies to keep their cards close to their vest. Laying the cards on the table and sharing technology, techniques, and customer relationships or entry points is a daunting step. Cahalane emphasized how Colfax had to shift its thinking from “How do we compete?” or “How do we keep this in-house to avoid paying for technology?” to “How could [a partner or new vendor] help?” or “How can they accelerate our goals?” Using the technology, expertise and capacity of Microsoft, OSIsoft and PTC now allows Colfax to focus on the solution components it knows best and to layer them on best-in-class platforms and tool kits provided by its vendors. This approach not only provides customer validation — for example, attaching to a well-known brand such as Microsoft for IaaS makes customers more comfortable — but also spreads out development and management. Instead of trying to support the entire load, which would be a challenge for an organization of Colfax’s size and structure, the company relies on its partners and vendors to take responsibility for their own components.
  • Finally, Cahalane emphasized the need for companies such as Colfax to remain agile in the quickly moving and erratic IoT-enhanced products market. The company constantly looks for acquisition candidates that can not only increase its expertise in its core digital initiatives and target verticals but also deliver new business models.

What is next for Colfax? Cahalane noted that there is still a lot of work for Colfax and its partners to do to develop, and educate customers about the power of data. This means not only tying data together inside one organization but also sharing data across organizations. For example, Colfax’s welding solutions could be used by customers to apply predictive and prescriptive analytics to real-time operational data to have alerts sent to supplies manufacturers for automatic resupply. Cahalane also hinted that Colfax sees the importance of shifting toward prepackaged solutions, which reduce customization costs and complexity and are built around proven ROI, to induce more customers to buy Colfax IoT solutions.

That’s the Colfax story. Why is it important? Not only does it validate concepts we have been sharing since we began our IoT coverage, but more importantly, it serves as an example to companies similar to Colfax across all verticals that may still be spinning their wheels with IoT. As Cahalane explained, true IoT success stories can be few and far between, with numerous IoT projects stuck in the mud due to vagueness, overambition, immature IoT, or lack of organization or maturity among vendors and customers to apply IoT.

However, TBR’s survey work and the insight gained from my discussion with Cahalane, among others, suggest that many projects that start with a specific business challenge, are smaller in scale or divided into digestible parts, and are led and received by companies mature in IoT, are working and delivering actual IoT revenue. TBR believes vendors and customers should take lessons from companies such as Colfax: focus on the business message, organize your business’s digital and IoT efforts around key opportunities, and use vendor partners to fill gaps while focusing initiatives around core strengths. While Colfax, as Cahalane noted, isn’t gaining explosive IoT revenue, TBR believes it’s certainly on the right path.

It’s time to stop calling IoT a technology

Yes, we all do it. Every analyst, vendor and customer has referred to Internet of Things (IoT) as a technology. I have done it countless times, and so have my extremely talented and informed peers. However, it’s a misnomer, a shortcut, and a cop out, and if we actually think of IoT as a technology, it’s ultimately harmful to the adoption of IoT. IoT is actually a technique for solving business problems using a combination of technology components and services, rather than a technology in and of itself.

No one vendor does IoT alone ― it’s not a deliverable, self-contained technology solution. Rather, it often involves a “leader” company, generally a consulting company or an ISV, assembling a solution sourced from software, services and hardware components from partner companies. My colleague Ezra Gottheil likes to use a construction analogy. A general contractor will shop at Home Depot (the wide and increasingly saturated IoT marketplace) for all the components he or she needs to build a structure. The general contractor will also hire subcontractors (partners and specialized vertical ISVs) who have certain expertise. Even as we move closer to prepackaged IoT or shrink-wrapped solutions, multiple vendors will continue to be involved in delivery.

Some of these components can be grouped into the “new technology” bucket. As TBR closely monitors use cases and fills our use-case database, which currently has more than 360 entries, IoT projects are increasingly linked with augmented reality/virtual reality, blockchain and analytics. All of these new components, including IoT, are enhanced when used in cohesion.

But many of the components, such as servers, routers, mobile devices, sensors, connectivity, IT services and business consulting, have existed for decades. IoT is a new shiny label slapped on a technique IT companies have been using for decades: pulling together IT components to build solutions and help customers achieve their goals.

TBR believes when a vendor tells a customer “you should adopt this new transformational technology,” it is usually met with eye-rolling. IoT is no different. As soon as the “new technology” discussion comes to the table, customers instinctively rock back on their heels. It sounds like a large and long-lasting commitment, which leads to rip-and-replace cost fears, technology lock-in consternation due to a rapidly evolving market, and a general lack of understanding about the benefits.

TBR believes vendors should change the message. Begin with discovering what a customer’s business problems are, then suggest using the technique of IoT to begin strategically solving them in a stepwise manner. It’s not a rip-and-replace approach; it’s seeing where improvements can be gradually made to increase connectivity throughout an organization and ultimately deliver improved insight. It might mean adding sensors to legacy equipment, using IoT components and new analytic tools to tie together legacy data and create new insight, or implementing tangential technologies such as blockchain to better inform customers on their supply chain. Eventually, it could mean all of these combined.

At a recent vendor event, the CEO of a Boston-based IoT solution vendor asserted that IoT is now passe. True customer evolution, including problem solving comes from the bigger picture ― using the technique of IoT, tangential technologies, and internal and external data sources to supercharge efficiency and gain insight.

IoT as a technology is a lazy oversimplification. Let’s start messaging how the technique of IoT ―a new way of thinking about and applying technology ― can help solve current business challenges in an agile and cost-effective manner.

 

Predix is looking for a new owner

Reports surfaced on July 30 that General Electric (GE) has contracted an investment bank to auction off the company’s GE Digital unit.

When former CEO Jeff Immelt aimed to diversify GE into the software space to take advantage of the synergies between Internet of Things (IoT) and the company’s industrial machinery footprint, GE Digital was created. The unit got some things right. It was one of the first IoT vendors to message the importance of operational technology (OT) inside the IoT technique, emphasizing that IT vendors couldn’t do it alone. It was also one of the first companies to highlight the digital twin, allowing engineers to run simulations or see the effects of an asset via its digital doppelganger, a technique now utilized by most IoT solution companies. It also promoted the idea that almost everywhere across a customer’s organization, from light fixtures to robots on the manufacturing floor, the addition of IoT could deliver insight. The unit carved the path forward for its OT peers, most of which were fast followers that gained an advantage by first witnessing GE’s successes and challenges.

TBR believes there were a few missteps. GE Digital made one of the more fatal mistakes among early IoT companies caught in the hype wave: It advertised that it was able to provide solutions for everything from manufacturing to healthcare and from utilities to transportation. It is understandable that GE Digital wanted to mirror GE’s wide industrial reach, but it led to a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none messaging. In actuality, GE Digital likely focused on its Oil and Gas, Manufacturing, and Energy and Utilities segments, however, TBR believes the pivot to specialization in specific industries was too late.

This phenomenon of overextending can also be seen in the mechanics of Predix, which was marketed as a broad, do-all, edge-to-cloud platform with analytics. In reality, Predix was a do-all generic platform that needed a lot of expensive customization and developer time to build tailored solutions for customers. Because of this complexity and platform breadth, GE Digital had problems messaging what it was best at and how it could help customers. We believe the company overemphasized the platform’s  wide set of capabilities and underemphasized packaged IoT applications that solved real business problems. Ultimately, messaging of the platform got mired in discussions of technical features and functions, rather than the outcomes and differentiation of the company’s analytics and platform versus those of competitors such as IBM.

However, what tripped GE Digital up the most was that it wasn’t a great partner in a market that thrives on partnerships. Large IoT deployments will often have a multitude of vendors involved, all with expertise in a specific component of the holistic solution. Instead of focusing on enhancing areas where IT companies are weak, such as OT knowledge, GE Digital tried to do IT and OT. Because GE Digital wanted to do it all, it didn’t play as well as it could have with IT companies boasting deeply established roots in customer companies.

GE’s initial go-it-alone stance also had the company building from scratch, with its tools, such as analytics or cloud platforms, and feature sets always playing catch-up with IT companies that have been building these technologies for decades. For example, GE Digital initially tried building out its own cloud services mirroring Amazon Web Services (AWS) and IBM Bluemix. It ultimately ended up partnering, but we think the company’s initial focus on creating a PaaS cloud kept the company bogged down in services that didn’t add a lot of value. Ultimately, GE Digital proved to be an unattractive partner to bring into an IoT solution, and its platform failed to differentiate it enough to remedy partner apprehension. The platform was also much more expensive to build from scratch than just partnering with peers, making running-at-a-loss GE Digital look like a huge drag to GE leadership, which ultimately sealed its fate.

Where are GE’s Predix assets going? It’s hard to say for sure. As my colleague Ezra Gottheil noted, GE Digital announced it was standardizing on Microsoft less than two weeks ago. Microsoft has been looking for ways for Azure to outpace AWS in IoT and other emerging technology, and being a long-standing IT company, improving its OT expertise would make it more attractive in the industrial space. Perhaps Microsoft, or a Microsoft partner, such as Rockwell Automation or ABB, may be a purchaser.

TBR is seeing other large OT companies, such as Siemens, thrive as they focus on their strengths as OT-whisperers and enhance, not compete with, IT brethren. We are also seeing vertically specialized small ISVs pop up, in the OT and IT domains, that are focusing their expertise on a narrow set of business problems and are being brought in as essential partners. GE Digital blazed the trail for these peers, but also became a cautionary tale for those following in its wake: Enhance partners, don’t compete; be interoperable, not closed; message and provide expertise in your strengths, don’t provide a broad generic solution.

Telecom operators drill down on IoT opportunity in logistics

Despite the hype to the contrary, in commercial Internet of Things (IoT), not all verticals are created equal in terms of opportunity. There is near-term opportunity in some verticals, while opportunity in other verticals will take a few years to mature. The verticals with the longest and deepest histories of using IoT are oil and gas, utilities, manufacturing (including automotive), and logistics. Because these verticals have a long history of using primitive IoT, mostly in the form of telematics, customers in these areas are more familiar with what IoT can offer, how it can be applied to their businesses and where measurable ROI can be found. Unsurprisingly, segments that have most experience with IoT continue to generate the greatest amount of IoT-related revenue.

Telecom operators were early to advertise that they were leaders in the verticals mentioned above. However, now that the chips are down, TBR believes operators are focusing on real, mature IoT opportunity, leading to them drilling down on logistics. Logistics aligns well with telecom operators’ capabilities due to the mobile and distributed use cases. Verticals such as manufacturing provide less opportunity to telecom operators due to the more static and condensed nature of factories. Here are some examples of commercial logistical moves from leading operators:

  • In March 2017 Verizon announced the combination and rebranding of its Verizon Telematics, Fleetmatics and Telogis acquisitions into Verizon Connect. Verizon notes that the rebranding completes the integration of its connected vehicle division with its acquisitions of fleet and mobile workforce management companies Fleetmatics and Telogis. TBR believes the rebranding of Verizon’s telematics businesses into Verizon Connect was a smart move because focusing its IoT business around connecting mobile workforces differentiates Verizon, letting customers clearly know what they can use Verizon Connect for, highlighting its expertise and also making it more partner-friendly. Verizon Connect is now a module that can enhance a broad IoT platform such as Azure IoT.
  • In May 2018 AT&T entered into a partnership with operational technology (OT) behemoth Honeywell to develop IoT solutions for aircraft and freight deployments worldwide. AT&T delivers Honeywell worldwide connectivity, and Honeywell gives AT&T a larger door into industrial engagements.
  • In February AT&T launched two comprehensive solutions with Geotab’s fleet tracking platform, AT&T Fleet Management for Enterprise and AT&T Fleet Management for Government, to provide customers with a holistic view of their transportation assets to improve costs, productivity and safety.
  • TBR believes Telefonica, Vodafone and Orange are also competing for logistics engagements using well-populated landing pages touting their ability to provide logistics-based IoT solutions. Orange, for example, signed a three-year multimillion-euro agreement with Finland-based Cargotec in 4Q17 to codevelop an IoT-based cargo solution.

While vendors will compete for logistics business opportunities worldwide, TBR believes Verizon will try to consolidate and win share of the field service and trucking industries in North America; AT&T will focus on air and sea shipping or asset tracking worldwide and leverage its advantage in connected car gained through multiple contracts with leading automakers; and Telefonica, Vodafone and Orange will battle it out for EMEA and LATAM share.

 

Time to get industrial about healthcare

Internet of Things (IoT) hesitation in the healthcare vertical stems from the industry’s complexity, as it is chained by liability and privacy issues, a general unease about change, legacy equipment, and unevolved processes. These complexities are all rooted in real concerns of customers and vendors in the healthcare space. However, the “Industrial IoT Analytics for the Healthcare Industry” presentation by Glassbeam employees Gopal Sundaramoorthy and Puneet Pandit at PTC’s LiveWorx event highlighted that it is time to shift how vendors go to market within the healthcare industry.

Sundaramoorthy indicated there are not a lot of high-level analytics, or grand-scheme IoT implementations, in healthcare. The challenges mentioned above, especially privacy issues, including healthcare organizations’ desire to keep data internal, prevent it. Instead, Sundaramoorthy explained vendors need to talk to healthcare organizations like they talk to manufacturers, focusing on how healthcare organizations can connect equipment to improve asset utilization, save costs and increase efficiencies. This is the operational technology (OT) discussion instead of the IT discussion.

With asset utilization, for example, how is a medical scanning device being used? How many scans are being done and in how much time, what types of scans are being done, and when are the scans happening? Or, a conversation around operator utilization could include aspects such as determining whether operators are fully trained by measuring what functions they are using and how long they take compared to average or trained users. Likewise, predictive maintenance, such as noting when a bulb needs to be replaced in an MRI machine, helps avoid costly or dangerous downtime. These simpler-to-implement OT-based measurements will help hospitals run more efficiently and save money just through connecting machines and adding straightforward analytics. It also helps medical device manufacturers better understand why things are going wrong and how to best improve diagnostic time, shorten repair time and relieve frustration for medical professionals.

Sundaramoorthy indicated that simple connectivity is healthcare’s biggest problem. To break the hesitation barrier, vendors should focus on solving the first step in IoT: connecting the often woefully out-of-date machinery and building in IoT, in the spirit of OT, to prove ROI to medical organizations. After machines are connected and OT-based IoT is proving consistent ROI, the discussion to move to more transformative IT use cases will be a much easier sell.