February 2001

Telephony Goes... Webstream

BY KEVIN MAYER

Perhaps the least exceptionable argument in favor of going Webstream is that it simply extends the standing justification for embracing the PC. The PC, according to this justification, describes the preferred development model because it opens up telephony to the broadest community of software developers. But if we were to agree that winning the hearts and minds of the PC development community would be an unalloyed good, how much better, then, would it be to appeal to an even larger community -- the community of Web developers? Or, to stretch the idea just a little further, we could even imagine opening up telephony application development to anyone sufficiently skilled to put together a Web site. And then wouldn't life be interesting?

Well, at least the marketing literature for telephony becomes more interesting, for those who market telephony and communications solutions now freely emulate the exuberant speculation so common in discourses on the Web, what the digerati might call Webspeak. And never is the emulation of Webspeak more in evidence than when you hear someone claim that that their new platform will support applications surpassing anything anyone can currently imagine. Such airy claims need some grounding.

THE EXAMPLE OF THE WEB
For some, the example of the Web is so compelling that it provides all the grounding necessary. The Web, we are reminded, grew more quickly than anyone predicted, and more elaborately than anyone would have anticipated, and yet, in retrospect, its very structure all but preordained its success. Moreover, the Web, because its underlying protocols emphasize both decentralization and openness, capitalizes on the two laws that have shaped and continue to shape communications: Moore's Law and Metcalfe's Law.

It is fortunate for the Web that Moore's Law holds true, that increases in processing power continue apace, supporting the general shift in network intelligence from the core to the edge. And it is practically a given that Metcalfe's Law benefits the Web, since this law holds that a mere doubling of the number of computers connected to a network means that value of that network will increase exponentially.

Beyond these influences is the influence of bandwidth. With the deployment of fiber from the core of the network to the curbside, and with the proliferation of last-mile options, including cable, xDSL, and broadband wireless, the Web is granted a stimulating challenge: How to capitalize on bandwidth resources in creative, useful, and (ultimately) remunerative ways.

THE IRONY OF THE WEB
Despite these encouraging signs, the Web, as we've learned, has its skeptics. What's interesting is that the skeptics, from Wall Street and elsewhere, have signaled their impatience with Web-inspired euphoria, which, curiously, resembles market-inspired euphoria. The Web, like the market, is often celebrated as a mechanism that executes its own obscure logic, and which mysteriously cultivates emergent phenomena. Many would agree that a market economy is intrinsically more interesting than a planned economy, since it may yield benefits no planner could possibly anticipate, much less accomplish by edict.

The Web, too, would claim such properties for itself. A Web-inspired development platform may promise to support applications beyond what anyone might today imagine. And a Web-inspired business plan may argue that the Web will not only fundamentally alter business-to-business relationships, but will also revolutionize the way customers interact with the corporations that fulfill their needs and desires. Indeed, we are asked to accept that the Web (and better communications generally) would enhance the workings of markets, furthering the mission of the market, supporting, if indirectly, the emergent phenomena of unprecedented profits. And yet the market is doubtful, as indicated by lower valuations and stingier funding. Evidently the market is jealous of its magic.

THE CHALLENGE OF THE WEB
The indiscriminate embrace of all things Web, including dubious dot-com schemes, has provoked a reaction, an unwonted resistance to claims made on behalf of the Web, and even those of communications technology generally. And this reaction, by being indiscriminate itself, effectively devalues the very elements most likely to account for the Web's ultimate (if deferred) success, and most needed for a balanced assessment of any Web-related initiative.

These essential elements are, namely, Web telephony and communications solutions. They are the means by which the Web acquires characteristics such as location and device independence and enhanced interactivity, permitting Web applications to accommodate the most natural and even casual forms of human expression, enabling not only real-time information exchanges, but also the most familiar and convenient forms of messaging.

If this message is under-appreciated (and it is), the most appropriate response is a commitment to education, to clarifying the distinction between dot-com fluff and solid voice-capable infrastructure, to demonstrating the continuity between Web telephony and proven business communications applications. These proven applications -- which include messaging, forwarding, conferencing, call distribution, call accounting, CTI, and many others -- should reassure those contemplating the gossamer creations of the Web. Both the heritage of the past and the promise of the future are reflected in communications solutions and Web telephony.

TALKING WEBSTREAM TELEPHONY
Given the dark mood on Wall Street, the normally incandescent rhetoric of the Web seems out of place. Accordingly, those who would identify with the Web might limit the degree to which they emulate the Web's exuberance. For example, the Web is often portrayed as a means of expanding human potential. But are enterprises comfortable envisioning themselves as human potential laboratories? Is it possible to overemphasize the Web's capacity for enhancing creativity and diversity, when the intended audience is at least as concerned with coordination and order? Perhaps celebrating the biodiversity of the rainforest leaves gardeners cold, particularly those who practice judicious pruning.

A more balanced mood might enhance education efforts in other ways. For example, citing precedent and emphasizing continuity may be more effective than claiming to achieve the unprecedented. Consider the case of "click and mortar" versus pure e-commerce. When pure e-commerce failed to change the world overnight, the response was to demonstrate how e-commerce extended or enhanced traditional commerce, updating, not obviating, "brick and mortar" concerns.

Another way to emphasize continuity is to cite the example of the call center. Here, the capabilities of the Web may be so well integrated that traditional call centers are more comfortable with the label "contact center," since customer interactions may include chat, joint browsing sessions, e-mail exchanges, and IP telephony conversations as well as ordinary phone calls. Also, it's possible to make the case that interactive voice response -- as tried-and-true an application imaginable -- may inspire a mere Web site to move beyond static presentations of text, and to avail itself of the interactive, dynamic qualities of a voice portal.

More generally, it might be a good idea not to exaggerate the ease with which next-generation communications may be implemented. Or, even if next-generation communications may be easily implemented, it might be a good idea not to exaggerate the ease with which real value might be derived from new deployments. First, extravagant claims undermine credibility. Second, it is hard to imagine anything that is too easily achieved possessing any strategic value.

Better to articulate the unique, intrinsic value of integrating advanced communications capabilities with the operations of a particular business or type of business. If such an undertaking were to expose difficulties, then so much the better. At least then it would be easier to assess barriers to entry for potential competitors, as well as rewards for special expertise.

Finally, discussions of Webstream telephony might acknowledge concerns that next-generation deployments might create as many problems as they solve. For example, a more capable communications infrastructure might carry as much useless chatter as productive information exchanges. Or, even worse, businesses might be exposed to unprecedented security threats. Or businesses might be overwhelmed by new traffic management challenges. It is possible that such fears are exaggerated, but anyone promoting Web telephony and communications solutions may be called upon to deal with them, perhaps by way of citing accounting, security, or management capabilities.

TURBID BACKWATER OR RAGING CATARACT?
To identify with the Web is to wield a double-edged sword. While Web telephony may signal one's commitment to the future of communications, it may also draw down the punishments of the anti-Web backlash. To embrace packet telephony, to "go Webstream," and yet minimize the aforementioned punishments, will require no little sensitivity to the concerns of skeptical customers and investors, as well as a commitment to education, to tirelessly drawing distinctions between vapid dot-com schemes and solid voice-ready infrastructure, which may encompass both hardware and applications, as well as provisions for quality of service, security, and interoperability. That accomplished, the phrase "going Webstream" won't conjure up images of sad backwaters, but raging cataracts, irresistibly surging past all obstacles.

[ Return To The February 2001 Table Of Contents ]