For the second consecutive year: Comprehensive business benchmark including a total of 159 KPIs covering revenue, OPEX, CAPEX, productivity, traffic load and network quality – with a peer group solely consisting of network sharing joint ventures.
Due to pre-agreed confidentiality requirements, the identities of participating JVs are fully anonymous.
Once again, the results demonstrate the value of the JV-specfic benchmark approach: Network sharing JVs have throughfocus on core activities, higher freedom in selecting operation methods and attention to detail established cost and productivity levels that are elevated beyond the obvious sharing effect. Also network quality is very high even though traffic load increases when sharing. To improve further, JVs need to compare with their likes – other JVs – and not to regular mobile operators. The benchmark will run again in March 2015.
For the second consecutive year: Comprehensive business benchmark including a total of 577 KPIs covering revenue, OPEX, CAPEX, headcount productivity, subscriptions & channels, performance, load, quality and innovation & growth – for 33 functions within a mobile operator.
Peer group consisting exclusively of primary data from Swedish, Finnish and Norwegian operators. Due to pre-agreed confidentiality requirements, the identities of the participating operators are fully anonymous.
The results again demonstrate the value of a region-specific benchmark approach: Swedish, Finnish and Norwegian operators have global leadership in a wide array of business aspects and a global benchmark would therefore leave them without guidance on how to improve further. In contrast, participating operators now have a great tool to improve their local competitiveness even further. The benchmark will run again in January 2015 and then cover also Danish operators. Operators can participate either as a mobile entity or as an integrated (fixed and mobile) entity.
Preparing analysis and facilitating workshops on 4G LTE and fibre adoptionwith over 40 of Comptel’s operator customers from around the world as part of Comptel’s Focus Group in Helsinki 25-26 March 2014.
Presented to the members of the Ambassadors of Telecom organisation in the Netherlands 13 March 2014. The title was “Benchmarking – and the tale of a wing clipped Dutch opportunity”. In addition to tefficient’s approach to benchmarking, we discussed if there is a mobile data dilemma in the Netherlands (comparing to the rest of the world).
How have mobile operators introduced single- and multi-user shared plans in USA, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Canada and the UK? Which business results have operators achieved and how has competition reacted? Which modifications have been necessary and when? Can the same customer loyalty effects be achieved without the heavy implementation of multi-user shared plans? Which defensive actions have proven to be most successful?
Based on these international facts and best practice, what would tefficient recommend? Taking local conditions, operator strategy and market position into account.
How are mobile operators monetising mobile data in Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark – and in a few other international markets? Which changes have operators made to their monetisation models during the past years? How have these changes affected business results and how has competition responded?
Based on these international facts and best practice, what would tefficient recommend when it comes to e.g. volume caps, overage policy, throughput tiers and shared plans? Taking local conditions, operator strategy and market position into account.
Market-specific comparison of business results, strategy, differentiation and partnerships of operators – with the purpose of identifying the unique profiles of the operators active within certain country markets. Analysis based on public material.
Commissioned by Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu.
Which operators in the world have advanced the furthest in incorporating operator Wi-Fi – based on hotspots and/or homespots – into a solution to offload mobile data and enhance the mobility of Wi-Fi-only devices? Which are their figures? What are the strategies and drivers behind? How has monetisation been solved? Are strategies different for telcos, cellcos and cablecos?
How should we apply what’s happening elsewhere onto our local competitive context? What should we be prepared for?
tefficient was asked to prepare and faciliate a workshop – focusing on these questions – for key stakeholders within an international operator group.
Comprehensive business benchmark including a total of 129 KPIs covering revenue, OPEX, CAPEX, productivity, traffic load and network quality – with a peer group solely consisting of network sharing joint ventures.
Due to pre-agreed confidentiality requirements, the identities of participating JVs are fully anonymous.
The results demonstrate the value of the JV-specfic benchmark approach: Network sharing JVs have established cost and productivity levels that are elevated far beyond the obvious sharing effects. Also network quality levels are very high even though traffic load is higher. To improve further, JVs need to compare with their likes – other JVs – and not to regular mobile operators.
Measure, compare and improve competitiveness within telecoms
Benchmarks, 2014
and published 2 June 2014 
Preparing analysis and facilitating workshops on 4G LTE and fibre adoptionwith over 40 of Comptel’s operator customers from around the world as part of Comptel’s Focus Group in Helsinki 25-26 March 2014.
Presented to the members of the Ambassadors of Telecom organisation in the Netherlands 13 March 2014. The title was “Benchmarking – and the tale of a wing clipped Dutch opportunity”. In addition to tefficient’s approach to benchmarking, we discussed if there is a mobile data dilemma in the Netherlands (comparing to the rest of the world).
Market-specific comparison of business results, strategy, differentiation and partnerships of operators – with the purpose of identifying the unique profiles of the operators active within certain country markets. Analysis based on public material.