SEARCH searchBY TOPIC
right_division Green SCM Distribution
Bookmark us
sitemap
SCDigest Logo
 
 
distribution

Focus: RFID and Automated Identification and Data Collection (AIDC)

Feature Article from Our RFID and AIDC Subject Area - See All

 

From SCDigest's OnTarget e-Magazine

- Aug. 17, 2015 -

 

RFID and AIDC News: Is the Internet of Things More Hype than Reality?

 

New McKinsey Study Identifies where Value can Really be Created with IoT, Says Integration with Back-End Systems will be Key


SCDigest Editorial Staff


There's no lack of hype around the Internet of Things - but is there really a path to true value creation?

The consultants at McKinsey recently took a look at this issue, and the answer is Yes to value creation, but there are still many questions about just how much.

First, let's start with what IoT really encompasses. McKinsey defines IoT "as sensors and actuators connected by networks to computing systems. These systems can monitor or manage the health and actions of connected objects and machines. Connected sensors can also monitor the natural world,
people, and animals."

SCDigest Says:

start

A great deal of additional value remains to be captured, by using more data, as well as deploying more sophisticated IoT applications, such as using performance data for predictive maintenance or to analyze workflows to optimize operating efficiency.

close
What Do You Say?

 

Click Here to Send Us Your Comments
feedback
Click Here to See Reader Feedback

With that as a definitional foundation, McKinsey says it looked in detail at than 300 IoT use cases across the global economy. Using detailed bottom-up economic modeling, McKinsey then estimated the economic impact of these applications by the potential benefits they can generate, including productivity improvements, time savings, and improved asset utilization, as well as an approximate economic value for reduced disease, accidents, and deaths.

One obvious lesson from this analysis, McKinsey says, is the critical contribution made by interoperability among IoT systems to creating value.

"On average, interoperability is necessary to create 40% of the potential value that can be generated by the Internet of Things in various settings," McKinsey says, noting that making IoT applications interoperable, such as linking a patient's home health monitor to the hospital's health informatics system, "is a complex systems design challenge that requires coordination on many levels (technology, capital investment cycles, organizational change, and so forth)."

McKinsey notes its first inclination was to look at application and opportunities was by looking at different industry sectors - industrial, high tech, etc. - but instead determined that viewing IoT by the setting of its use would be more productive. So, for example, by examining a "cities" setting, you can find that not only can sensors in individual vehicles be used to save maintenance costs by predicting when maintenance is needed but also that sensors can be linked to broader systems that help to manage traffic congestion across the city.

Ultimately, McKinsey identified and analyzed nine settings: humans, homes, retail stores, offices, factories, work sites, vehicles, cities, and "outside," the latter of which is related to supply chain movements. (See graphic below.)

 

 

 

 

Source: McKinsey

In addition to the observation on the role of interoperability in IoT value creation, perhaps surprisingly McKinsey found that Most of the IoT data collected today is not used at all, and the data that is used is not fully exploited.


(RFID and AIDC Story Continued Below)

 

 
CATEGORY SPONSOR: SOFTEON

 
 


For instance, McKinsey says less than 1% of the data being generated by the 30,000 sensors on an offshore oil rig is currently used to make decisions. And even with the data that is actually used, such as in manufacturing automation systems on factory floor, McKinsey says "most are used only for real-time control or anomaly detection. A great deal of additional value remains to be captured, by using more data, as well as deploying more sophisticated IoT applications, such as using performance data for predictive maintenance or to analyze workflows to optimize operating efficiency. Indeed, IoT can be a key source of big data that can be analyzed to capture value, and open data, which can be used by more than one entity."

Interestingly, McKinsey also finds that B2B applications of IoT have greater economic potential than consumer applications, though it does not provide much detail to really back up this statement.

The report also says that users of IoT technologies will capture most of the potential value over time, as opposed to providers of IoT-based systems.

"As in other technology markets, the end customer ultimately captures the most value," McKinsey says. "Eventually, we estimate that customers (such as factory owners using machines guided by IoT technology, operators of transportation fleets, and consumers) will capture upwards of 90% of the value opportunities IoT applications generate."

It notes that in many settings, customers will capture value in both direct and indirect ways, such as being able to buy more efficient machinery that is designed using IoT data from older products in use. Of the value opportunities created by the Internet of Things that are available to technology suppliers, in general the largest share will likely go to services and software and less will likely go to higher hardware prices.

As with many others, McKinsey believes the Internet of Things will change the bases of competition and drive new business models for user and supplier companies. For example, with the ability to monitor machines that are in use at customer sites, makers of industrial equipment can shift from selling capital goods to selling their products as services.

Similarly, sensor data will tell the manufacturer how much the machinery is used, enabling the manufacturer to charge by usage.

"Service and maintenance could be bundled into the hourly rate, or all services could be provided under an annual contract. The service might also include periodic upgrades (software downloads, for example). Performance from the machinery can inform the design of new models and help the manufacturer cross-sell additional products and services. This "as-a-service" approach can give the supplier a more intimate tie with customers that competitors would find difficult to disrupt."

Not said in the report, those new business model can only really create value for suppliers if they are able to in the end charge more money for their products under the new pricing model than the traditional approach - which in turn assumes end customers will be willing to spend more of their money for the new offering. Will it really work out that way, or will IoT capabilities simply be a new feature that suppliers in effect give away to remain competitive?

That is a real possibility, SCDigest believes, and not really addressed in the McKinsey study.

On the supply chain side, McKinsey sees the factories setting as one of the largest sources of value from the adoption of the Internet of Things, potentially generating an economic impact of $1.2 trillion to $3.7 trillion per year by 2025. It defines factories in the broadest sense to include all standardized production environments, including hospitals and in agricultural settings in addition to manufacturing facilities.

"In the factories setting, value from the Internet of Things would arise chiefly from productivity improvements, including 10 to 20% energy savings and a 10 to 25% potential improvement in labor efficiency," McKinsey said. "Improvements in equipment maintenance, inventory optimization, and worker health and safety are also sources of value in factories."

In the "outside" setting, McKiney sees potential value creation of $560 billion to$850 billion per year in 2025 through improved transportation routing and inventory tracking, although as with value creation in the other settings not much if any detail is provided to back up these numbers.

McKinsey notes that the price of MEMS (micro-electromechanical systems) sensors, which are used
in smartphones, has dropped by 30 to 70% in the past five years, noting that "A similar trajectory is needed for radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags and other hardware to make IoT tracking practical for low-value, high-volume items in package delivery and retailing."

Whether that price drop will occur is still a big question.

"The digitization of machines, vehicles, and other elements of the physical world is a powerful idea. Even at this early stage, the Internet of Things is starting to have real impact," McKinsey concludes. "The Internet of Things is changing how goods are made and distributed, how products are serviced and refined, and how doctors and patients manage health and wellness. Capturing that potential will require innovation in IoT technologies and business models, and investment in new capabilities and talent. With policy actions to encourage interoperability, ensure security, and protect privacy and property rights, the
Internet of Things can begin to reach its full potential."

The full report is available here: The Internet Of Things: Mapping the Value Beyond the Hype

Any reaction to the McKiney analysis? Let us know your thoughts at the Feedback section below.

 

Recent Feedback

RFID in Supply Chain is clearly one of the first barriers in the cost of the tags & readers. A tag is "acceptable" if it's cost remains a marginal percentage of the cost of the unit of sales that it identifies. A reader must have enough strength to allow a correct reading at a reasonable distance and at a reasonable cost.
 
A lot of sectors already can use RFID (electronic devices, clothes,...), however, others like grocery stores or stationer's do not. Do you accept that your can of beer will increase its price by 5% because it has an RFID on it?
 
A second issue is the standardisation of the data. RFID will have a very high potential if it's application can be used across the Supply Chain, from suppliers to end users, passing through producers and retailers. To allow this we need a standard of communication, using EAN code as identifier but we have to share how and where.
 
Certainly the future will be in this direction, no doubt about it.  A lot of issues need to be solved before it arrives.


Giorgio Canavese
Logistics & Supply Chain Manager
by myself
Aug, 18 2015
 
 
   
.