RTLS Market Intelligence Program AutoID & Transaction Automation Practice Analysis

Introduction

Abstract

Population skewed toward manufacturing sector

Due to the significant amount of infrastructure in many enterprises (i.e.: indoor environments such as hospitals, warehouses, offices and manufacturing facilities), demand for Wi-Fi based RTLS solutions remains high because of:

• Decreases CAPEX
• Reduces Complexity
• Simplifies Integration
• Facilitates Scale

A-GPS is a broadly used RTLS technology for outdoor applications (i.e.: field service, lot, yard) as a result of its footprint with tracking I managing critical mobile devices such as laptops, tablets, phones and rugged mobile computers. Despite its limitations for indoor use, A-GPS is expected to remain a key technology for many hybrid (indoor/outdoor) environments leveraging mobile devices. .

Active RFID continues to gain momentum in many verticals (i.e.: Health Care, Transportation, Government) due largely to its high performance capabilities in a diversity of installation environments and its ability to support automatic continuous communication independent of a reader. Price remains a primary barrier to adoption and scale for this solution the overall average cost of an active tag used by respondents was approximately $68.50.

Passive RFID is garnering a tremendous amount of interest due to its lower price point and broader adopon within the enterprise. Vendors are actively pursuing ways to integrate passive RFID into RTLS as the inclusion of this solution will not only add more visibility and value to the system, it will also create a more universal solution. The integration adds to the complexity of the RTLS system as passive REID requires extensive configuraon of the system to ensure all passive items being tracked can be read at any point in time.

Vendors exceeding expectations for less complex deployments; Falling short for more complex ones

Respondents Segmented by ROI
(N = 356)

Enterprises deploying less complex solutions (i.e RTLS system supporting less than three applications and leveraging less than two technologies) are attaining their Rols ahead of expectations. Average Rols for these solutions is approximately seven months.

Average Rols for more complex installations requiring deep integration, convergence, customized application development and significant design and infrastructure deployments is about 16 months, with the exception of health care.

health care deployments have been a strong focus of the RTLS community for several years, with many vendors working diligently to prove, benchmark and market the solution. This added focus and consequential experience and partnerships has enabled the vendor community to provide more aggressive Rols (<12 months) for both more simple and more complex installations.

Respondents that have been expanding and I or scaling their systems for more than two years indicated that their ROIs have decreased by nearly 20% since their first deployment, particularly in the manufacturing, transportation and health care markets where these solutions are scaling and the business intelligence generated from the systems is currently more actionable (due to deeper integration, benchmarking, information distribution, etc).

VDC Research Group (VDC) provides exceptionally detailed direct-contact primary market research and consulting services to many of the worlds largest technology suppliers, innovative start-ups and leading investors. The firm is organized around six practices, each with its own focused area of coverage. Our clients rely on us for highly segmented research and analysis which is derived from our unwavering commitment to the idea that all markets are collections of smaller market segments and that winning companies must develop and execute strategies that are segment-specific.

Table of Contents

Critical Takeaways

• Page 8. Enterprises deploying RTLS are looking to partner with a solution provider that does not have a technology bias

Implications for Vendors

• Page 10. The findings throughout this report have the following real and specific implications for the RTLS technology supplier community
• Page 11. Implications for Vendors

Scope & Methodology

• Page 13. Demand-side analysis of users and evaluators of RTLS solutions
• Page 14. Secondary research provides the foundation that informs our primary research objectives

Market Definition & Segmentation

• Page 16. Solution opportunities and requirements vary along a number of segment definitions
• Page 17. Market Segment Definitions & Forecast Terms

Demographics & Installed Base

• Page 19. Rigid screening process and representative distribution
• Page 20. Population skewed toward manufacturing sector
• Page 21. Primary decision-makers and influencers for RTLS in their respective companies
• Page 22. More ‘newer’ users with deployments at a select number of facilities
• Page 23. Robust mix of solutions in a diversity of environments
• Page 24. Technologies vary widely based on installation environment and performance requirements
• Page 25. Relative positioning meets most mandates and specifications; Absolute requirement greater in outdoor apps
• Page 26. Requirements vary by enterprise; However most needs met with accuracy up to ten feet or about three meters
• Page 27. Not just for asset tracking anymore
• Page 28. Enterprises have broader vision and are tracking BOTH their own and their partners objects
• Page 29. Autonomous nature necessitates fixed position infrastructure; Role of mobility increasing as solutions expand
• Page 30. One-stop shops preferred; Strong desire to internalize solution integration and maintenance
• Page 31. Enterprises look to software and services for differentiation and as determining factor for their suppliers

Investment Drivers & Spending

• Page 33. Greater visibility and the inherent cost savings, operational efficiencies and security
• Page 34. Significant hardware spend across all markets; More software and service investment from longer-term users
• Page 35. Vendors exceeding expectations for less complex deployments; Falling short for more complex ones
• Page 36. Preference for one source; However, as solutions expand and complexity increases, shift expected to SIs and ISVs
• Page 37. Aside from price, enterprises look for customization capabilities and continued support from their vendors
• Page 38. Enterprises look to vendor websites over online searches for RTLS news and information

Appendix

• Page 40. Vertical Markets
• Page 41. Use Environments
• Page 42. Distribution Channels

2011 NFC Supply Side Exhibits & Forecasts

• What region are you from?
• Does or Will your company use an RTLS solution?
• Please choose the title that best describes your position.
• What is your interest or involvement with Real-Time Location Systems (RTLS)?
• Which of the following best describes your organizations RTLS solution?
• How precise is the location/position radius obtained with your organizations RTLS solution? (This does not refer to read, transmission or communication ranges.)
• When did you first install RTLS technology?
• Which of the following best describes your organizations primary approach to RTLS (RTLS solution classification)?
• In which environment(s) does/will your organization use its RTLS solution?
• Two years from now, in which environment(s) does/will your organization use its RTLS solution?
• How many sites/locations use or support your organizations RTLS solution?
• In which specific environment(s) does/will your organization primarily use an RTLS solution?
• Does/will your organization own all the assets or tagged objects (including personnel) that need to be tracked?
• Which of the following approaches best describes your organizations RTLS location positioning requirements?
• Does/will your organization require 2 Dimensional (2D) locating or 3 Dimensional (3D) locating?
• Two years from now, does/will your organization require 2 Dimensional (2D) locating or 3 Dimensional (3D) locating?
• Please indicate whether your organization is supporting, evaluating or not supporting the following applications with RTLS technologies?
• Which RTLS hardware products (components) are currently being used, or evaluated/tested at your organization?
• What is your current and expected installed base of RTLS MOBILE communication devices for the following years?
• What percentage of your organizations RTLS MOBILE reading/communication device installed base is comprised of the following types of devices? Please enter your approximate percentage for each line and enter 0% for devices not being supported, evaluated, piloted or installed.
• What is your current and expected installed base of RTLS STATIONARY reading/communication devices for the following years?
• What percentage of your organizations RTLS STATIONARY reading/communication device installed based is comprised of the following types of devices? Please enter your approximate percentage for each line and enter 0% for devices not being supported, evaluated, piloted or installed.
• What was/is your current and expected installed use base of RTLS TAGS/TRANSPONDERS for the following years?
• Which of the following RTLS technology/tag types are currently being used or evaluated/tested at your organization?
• Which RTLS SOFTWARE (SW) license/licensing model is being supported or evaluated by your organization?
• Which of the following tag location reporting types does/will your organizations RTLS solution support?
• Which of the following best describes your organizations RTLS installation method?
• Which of the following best describes your organizations monitoring of RTLS equipment health?
• How important are the following RTLS solution adoption drivers to your company? (Rate each item on a scale of 1 to 5 where: 1 = Not Important; Extremely Important)
• Please state/estimate what your organizations RTLS budget (hardware, software, services) was/will be for the following years:
• What percentage of your organizations RTLS budget is allotted to each of the following: What is your expected percentage allocation in 2013?
• Please enter your approximate percentage for each line and enter 0% for RTLS solution components not being supported, evaluated, piloted or installed.
• What is your organizations EXPECTED and ACTUAL ROI timeframes for the RTLS solution being used, evaluated or planned?
• From which source(s) did you or will you purchase your RTLS system?
• Rank the level of importance of, and your satisfaction with, the following vendor selection criteria for RTLS solutions? (Rate each item on a scale to 5 where: 1 = Not Important/Not Satisfied; 5 = Extremely Important/Extremely Satisfied)
• Within your organization, where are the RTLS purchasing decisions made?
• Which corporate divisions or entities control or influence the decision-making process for RTLS purchases in your organization?
• From which of the following media outlets do you obtain your RTLS news and information?
• What is the principal business of your organization?
• What were your firms total global revenues at the end of your last fiscal year?

RTLS Market Intelligence Program AutoID & Transaction Automation Practice Analysis published by VDC Research Group in January 31, 2012.