New Research Reveals Challenges and Confusion over Provision of Technology
February 10, 2016, HICKORY, NC
With that in mind, it is critical that residents, visitors and workers have access to strong and reliable cellular coverage in order to properly make use of their mobile devices. Despite this, only an estimated two percent of commercial buildings have dedicated technology to ensure strong and reliable mobile coverage and capacity indoors.
The second installment of a new global study, commissioned by global network infrastructure leader CommScope and carried out by Coleman Parkes, surveyed the professionals who design and manage such buildings – including building managers, facilities managers, real estate managers and architects - to explore this untapped business opportunity and consumer need.
Survey respondents asserted that indoor wireless coverage could increase a property’s value by 28% on average, meaning that a $2.5 million office building could be worth $700,000 more with a dedicated indoor cellular system.
Respondents also cited benefits for the enterprise tenant, including an increase in workforce productivity (77%), supporting the recruitment of more talented individuals (46%) and even attracting more visitors (39%). Two-thirds of respondents also rated indoor wireless connectivity as ‘essential’ for employees.
Challenges to overcome
Providing mobile coverage to users within larger and more complex buildings can require investment in dedicated technology. However, there are clearly concerns around who is responsible for the provision and management of this infrastructure.
When asked who is responsible for providing cellular coverage in a building:
- Only one in five (22%) thought building managers should ensure mobile coverage
- Over a third (35%) pointed to network operators
- A quarter (26%) placed emphasis on IT managers
When asked what challenges prevented those from providing dedicated wireless networks indoors, they identified these three top roadblocks:
- The cost of the network (35%)
- The complexity of the technology (19%)
- A lack of skilled workers to manage it (11%)