TelePresence Defined

I recently spent some time scouring the Internet for the definition of telepresence. I wanted to understand how presence enabled telecommunications (i.e. telepresence) became synonymous with next generation videoconferencing. Many have adopted the perspective that telepresence is a system in which users "telepresent" themselves, but presence is not the same thing as presenting. People tend to think of telepresence as essentially ultra-cool conference room systems with great sound, life size images, direct eye contact and other enhancements. But to define telepresence in this way does not make it the billion dollar opportunity that John Chambers speaks of.

The first definition I came across was from the founders of Digital Video Enterprises, Dr. Steve McNelley and Jeff Machtig. Their definition which can be found Here on page-5 under "Defining True Telepresence", essentially lists five components. The problem with their definition is that it's really just a list of product features that make their room conferencing systems better than the stuff it replaced. Their list of features includes true eye contact, life-size images, proper rendering of participants, broadcast quality images, and "superb" audio quality.

The next description of telepresence I came across was from none other than John Chambers as noted in this NetworkWorld article by Stephen Lawson, published on March 16, 2006. Stephen writes, "The telepresence system [referring to Cisco's yet to be released telepresence conferencing system] will use "lifesize" high-definition video and directional sound technology that makes voices seem to come from where a user is located at the remote site", Chambers said. "It will even include better lighting than current systems", said Donald Proctor, senior vice president of Cisco's Voice Technology Group." This description of telepresence seems in-line with the gentlemen from Digital Video Enterprises, but will not be a billion dollar business for Cisco as Chambers has said, if that's the core of Cisco's telepresence initiative.

After reading Chamber's comments, I wondered what our friends in Redmond had to say with regards to telepresence, so I headed back to Google for another look-see. A search for the word telepresence on www.microsoft.com only returns references to Microsoft's research, but nothing related to shipping products that they've chosen to package or brand as being part of a telepresence solution. By the way, the same search at www.cisco.com turns up even less, a meager nine references, none of which are worth reading.

Gordon Bell from Microsoft's Media Presence Research Group (previously known as the telepresence group) states in the notes section of slide-3 of a presentation found Here that, "I think of ... telepresence as having various dimensions. The three dimensions are: (1) the mechanism - how is telepresence accomplished; (2) the application - what is achieved using telepresence; and, (3) the group structure - who is using telepresence." If you take the time to read more of their research material, and review product information, what you'll find is that telepresence at Microsoft equals Office Communications Server 2007 plus a video camera called RoundTable, and is part of their unified communications family of products.

Next stop on my journey to find the true definition of telepresence took me all over the googlesphere and back. What I found was lots of messaging around "unified communications" by Cisco, Microsoft, and others, but not much else from the uber-vendors regarding telepresence per se. Donald Proctor, senior vice president of Cisco's Voice Technology Group, is quoted as saying the following in the previously mentioned NetworkWorld article,

"Videoconferencing has had a rocky history over many years, with expectations of a boom frequently dashed. Previous systems have failed because of complexity, high cost and generally poor quality. Cisco will solve the complexity problem by making the telepresence system just one component of its overall Unified Communications architecture, which also includes IP telephony, text messaging, application collaboration and desktop videoconferencing. Enterprises will be able to plug it into that infrastructure, he said. Telepresence initially is designed not for desktop use but for corporate boardrooms or dedicated videoconference rooms."

In another good article by Stephen Law, this one dated May 5, 2006 titled "Cisco's Chambers pushes collaboration, video", it became apparent to me that vendors are using too many overloaded terms with nebulous meanings and connotations. Chambers was quoted in the article as saying, "Collaboration is the key to enterprises both moving quickly and dealing with the demands of globalization, Cisco, like other networking vendors, is pushing new systems that combine multiple forms of communication on a single IP network. That approach, including presence information that shows how a contact wants to be reached at the moment, can help an enterprise's departments work together." Chambers also said, "Collaboration isn't about data or video or voice or mobility, it's about how you combine that experience." The article's author goes on to say, "Cisco's push on collaboration is part of a vision of all applications becoming accessible on all devices at all times, through virtualization of storage, applications and processing."

My next stop was a visit to Microsoft's Unified Communications website where I found the following:

"Microsoft's vision for unified communications enables a people-centric solution of rich, intuitive, and seamless communications across e-mail, IM, voice, data, video, and conferencing. Microsoft offers companies a complete software platform that unifies all communications with their business applications and processes, streamlining how people reach each other and communicate."

Cisco's corresponding Unified Communications website had this to say:

"The Cisco Unified Communications system is a full-featured business communications system built into an intelligent IP network. The system contains a number of communications products that are designed, developed, tested, documented, sold, and supported as one entity. It enables voice, data, and video communications for businesses of all sizes."

Notice the difference in the messaging? Microsoft's approach is people and application centric while Cisco's is "system" and infrastructure centric. No surprises here you say? It seems to me that the message of unified communications is about people using applications to get stuff done in a seamless and integrated fashion - 2 points for Redmond.

The terms collaboration, convergence, unified communications, and telepresence have significant overlap based on how they are currently used by vendors, and it's only going to get worse unless we adopt clear definitions and usage.

I would like to suggest that the following be adopted as the formal definition of telepresence:

Telepresence: The transmission of voice, data, and video for the purpose of collaboration, formatted and optimized according to the information provided by each user indicating their feasibility, availability, and willingness to participate in all aspects of communications.

The word telepresence is the combination of the meanings of the following two words, telecommunications and presence. The word telecommunications is made up of the Greek word "tele" which means far off, and communications which is the exchange of thoughts, messages, or information in any form (i.e. verbal, non-verbal, visual, etc.). Presence [information] conveys availability and willingness of a user to communicate.

So by way of formula: Telepresence = Telecommunications + Presence

So how does unified communications and collaboration fit into all this? Collaboration is what happens between participants within good telepresence applications, and is made possible by a unified communications infrastructure. Telepresence is the killer-app that the carriers have been longing for. By combining broadband, presence information, standards based protocols like SIP, new advancements in shared workspaces and other collaborative tools, security and digital rights management, virtualized compute fabrics, and other elements all cohesively delivered together is what makes telepresence the billion dollar business John Chambers is talking about.

Telepresence is not tele-presenting or next generation video conferencing. It's the single most important game-changing synthesis of technology and innovation yet to hit the enterprise. Getting telepresence wrong will become the CLM (career limiting move) for CIOs who fail to understand the power of telepresence. Investing in disparate silos of collaboration tools, VoIP implementations, next-generation video conferencing, IM products, and other "unified communications" stuff, without a plan to fully integrate it all in such a way as to enable anytime, anywhere, ubiquitous collaborative communications will not deliver on the promise of telepresence.

Yes indeed the board room telepresence experience will include true eye-to-eye contact, superb audio and lighting, plus life-size images too. But if it's not fully integrated into the telepresence fabric so that anyone, anywhere, via any capable device can participate to the fullest extent possible in the collaborative process, then it's simply point-to-multipoint next generation videoconferencing.

You'll know when you're experiencing the promise of telepresence when the application fabric that ties users, information, tools, and the nodes (wireless handhelds, smart phones, PCs, room systems, etc.) together in such a way that everyone has a fully interactive and optimized experience no matter where they are. If your node can handle video/data/audio (and you want it) you'll get it - and it will be just like being there. Everything will be captured, indexed, searchable, and retrievable for later use, and things like rights management, security, true collaboration, and messaging will all be transparent parts of the package too.

About the author: Brent Houlahan, CISSP is a member of the Human Productivity Lab's Board of Advisors, a writer and independent consultant who most recently served as the CTO and VP of Operations at NetSec, an MSP acquired by MCI in February of 2005 and as Vice President of Managed Security Services at MCI. E-mail Brent at: Brent.Houlahan [at] HumanProductivityLab [dot] com

HSL's Thoughts and Analysis

As usual Brent is dead-on especially with respect to the importance of the tight integration of Presence and Unified Communications into a broader definition of telepresence.

While the focus of the Lab has been on Telepresence Conferencing which I defined in Telepresence, Effective Visual Collaboration, and the Future of Global Business at the Speed of Light as:

the significant impact that unified communications and presence are having on human productivity has led us to expand the Lab's focus to better cover these emerging technologies.

I first realized the importance of the coming wave of unified communications and presence after watching the one hour, fifty two minute and four second video of the Microsoft Unified Communications announcement where Microsoft President Jeff Raikes and Anoop Gupta, who runs the Unified Communications Group at Microsoft announced the Microsoft strategy, told the traditional telephony/PBX and VoIP industries how it was going to be and christened the survivors that would be left standing as members of their "partner ecosystem".

My second "A-Ha Moment" was actually three "A-Ha Moments" experienced in rapid fire succession at the 2006 Wainhouse Research Summit in Boston where presentations on Unified Communications by Wainhouse Research's Brent Kelly, Cisco Systems' Mike Fratesi, and Microsoft's Ed Wadbrook, [available for streaming download Here], drove home the incredible potential of unified communications and presence to dramatically improve human productivity.

The capabilities that most excite me about Unified Communications and Presence are:

* The ability to manage all communications from a single in-box - At the Wainhouse Summit, Microsoft's Ed Wadbrook highlighted the absurdity of today's disjointed communications platforms by listing his nine (9) different phone numbers, fax numbers, IM handles, e-mail accounts, and skype address. Cisco's Mike Fratesi shared research conducted by Sage Research for Cisco on the time savings of managing all e-mails, voicemails, and faxes from a single inbox: Estimated at 43 minutes per day per employee.

* The ability to reliably reach coworkers on the first try - By combining presence with a unified communications platform the Sage Research study estimated saving of 30 minutes per employee per day by the ability to intelligently route calls directly to a colleague's desk, mobile phone, hotel room, or home office on the first attempt.

* The ability to automatically escalate IM chat sessions into a call, webconference, or videoconference - This is the capability that I most excited about. A good portion of human beings are "visual learners" (including myself) and the ability to instantly and effectively share information with colleagues, vendors, customers, or prospects without having to launch a new webconferencing/videoconferencing application, exchange invitation information, and authenticate in would dramatically streamline and improve visual collaboration. The Sage Research study estimates savings of 51 minutes per day by automatically escalating IM chats into collaborative web conferences and 30 minutes per meetings by simplifing the set up and attendance of webconferences through Outlook/Notes calendar integration.

The study also found that 93% of users would conduct more web and videoconferences if it was easier. Since research has shown that seeing and hearing information improves both retention and comprehension vs. simply hearing it, the potential to improve organizational learning is substantial.

Summarized Benefits from Unified Communications Application: Uses and Benefits - Sage Research January 2006

I was so blown away by the potential of unified communications and presence that I immediately huddled several members of the HPL's Board of Advisors including Brent and Chris Van Waters, CIO at enterprise medical software company QuadraMed, and we made the decison that this was definitely an area that will have a substantial impact on human productivity and the lab should expand its focus to include the coming unified communications revolution.

Since then I have been getting smart on the unifed communications and presence industry, the Lab has expanded our CXO level conference series, TelePresence World 2007, to include presence and unified communications and expect a major announcement from the Lab later this week on an important partnership that will give us additional depth and expertise on the subject. We will also soon be announcing the Lab's next major publication, due out in April 2007 prior to the first TelePresence World conference in San Diego on June 4th, 5th, and 6th which will cover telepresence conferencing, presence, and unified communications. We will also be redesigning the Lab's website to give unified communications and presence the emphasis that they so richly deserve.

Once I was doing an investigation of a network compromise discovered when an IDS signature tripped, indicating a worm propagation during a new sensor install. As the investigation unfolded, I tried to locate the source IP in the asset database and came up empty. Further investigation and lots of subsequent phone calls identified the box as a PC in a conference room. The PC was tied to a video conferencing system running a default OS installation as well as software collaboration tools such as Microsoft NetMeeting. During the postmortem, I found out that a VTC reseller had provided the PC as part of a bundle and the internal IT guys had never reconfigured or rebuilt it with an approved Windows image. Since the IT guys didn't know it existed, no agents were installed on the box, it wasn't properly patched and it wasn't running any of the standard build's applications or security programs. Apparently the box wasn't put into production as a part of any maintenance window, and no history of the PC was found in the change management system either.

By now, you're probably wondering how this could happen. After all, it's not like you can just plug a PC into the wall jack, configure DHCP and a default route, and get on the network. Or can you? In this particular case, the network architects ran a test network, essentially a non-production playground for building and testing new applications and tools. Apparently, someone configured a couple of cross-connects in the right places to bring this network into the conference room. It probably started as a pilot project or vendor bake-off that slipped right into fulltime use without ever getting redeployed into production. I know what you're thinking. This would never happen on my network. Not on my watch. Not at my company. But I have to tell you that after more than 15 years in IT, I've yet to meet a CTO, CIO or other IT executive who could tell me they knew every device and all the applications running on their networks.

The whole scenario was a case study in what happens when IT and security are cut out of the deployment process for new telepresence applications.

Deploying applications within the IT systems management paradigm is critical to ensuring application performance and security. Yet time and again I've seen visual collaboration systems deployed outside of the best practices and visibility of IT and security, a blunder that can turn into a real executive management nightmare if gone unchecked.

A fundamental lack of cooperation and integrated delivery between the IT, security and telecomm groups dramatically increases security risks when it comes to deploying new technologies like VoIP, telepresence and collaboration. Security is seen as the great roadblock to getting anything into production and is routinely left out of project planning and milestone reviews. Though it's supposed to be all about risk management, not risk avoidance, security all too often becomes a business inhibitor instead of a business enabler and gets cut out of the picture. I predict this will only change when security teams provide true risk mitigation support and view the groups they serve as internal customers.

Convergence is here to stay, and our technology organizations need to reflect the integrated nature of enterprise applications and networks. Silos responsible for telephony, audio/video and IT no longer make practical sense. Telepresence systems should be deployed like any other enterprise application and be subject to company governance and process controls.

About the author: Brent Houlahan, CISSP is a member of the Human Productivity Lab's Board of Advisors, writer and independent consultant who most recently served as the CTO and VP of Operations at NetSec, an MSP acquired by MCI in February of 2005 and as Vice President of Managed Security Services at MCI. E-mail Brent at: Brent.Houlahan [at] HumanProductivityLab [dot] com

Telepresence is not just about SIP, Video-over-IP (VoIP), gee-wiz cameras, life-size video or even a holodeck-like experience. It's about empowerment and enablement. It's about enabling the development team to out-innovate the competition, empowering the marketing team to drive brand, messaging, packaging, and productization faster than the competition, and even equipping the executive team to craft strategy and tactics on-the-fly as market dynamics and product demand change.

Sure there's technology behind the curtain, and the likes of Cisco, HP, and Polycom would be more than happy to sell you some "kit" (as my friends in the UK would say). But no matter how enticing, you've got to keep an eye out for critical elements like project management, user requirements, performance metrics and status reporting.

CFOs think of telepresence as simply a way to slash travel costs. They're wrong. So are the AV guys, the conferencing people and the guy in IT who loves to play with webcams. If you don't already have a business analyst (BA) involved in your telepresence project, get one, and fast. Send the BA out to meet with the people who will be using the solution and collect their thoughts. What the BA comes back with may amaze you.

I've found that users have great ideas, and provide solid requirements regarding who needs to communicate with whom and in what ways. They know the kinds of tools and data/information they need to share. The BA will capture the business, functional, technical and performance components of user requirements and build them into a matrix of prioritized use cases.

Talking to vendors and solutions providers before a BA can do the leg work will only take the project in the wrong direction. I've found that vendors have a tendency to "lead the witness." Instead, send for vendor lit-packs. Or better yet, just download the marketing fluff from their websites to create a "me-too" matrix of features for reference. Once you assemble a solid set of requirements with measurable expectations, it's always a great idea to send out an RFI to a half-dozen or so vendors. The responses you get will help solidify what to put into the RFP and usually helps to reduce the list of vendors down to three or four.

A word to the wise: If the AV guys run the telepresence initiative and the CIO's PMO isn't tracking it, then you're in for tragic disappointment. The solution is almost guaranteed not to meet expectations, get the usage you want, and end up functionally no better than the video conferencing stuff you just ripped out. While the centerpiece of any telepresence solution will undoubtedly still be the big showy rooms wherever the execs live, telepresence will need to be like VISA, "... everywhere you want to be."

Once the BA collects and validates requirements, you'll end up with the "30 fps jitter-free video synchronized with THX quality sound" type of wish-list suggestions. But you'll also get surprisingly good ideas for true collaboration, real transparency, utility, ubiquity and self-service.

Making sure you consider these requirements will ensure your project will be a success:

Collaboration: It involves more than interactive scratch pads and document sharing tools. What users look for here is the ability to work in an integrated fashion with their colleagues whenever and wherever they are, with all of the applications and tools they use to do their jobs. Of course limitations exist when you're on the road working from a hotel room with everyone else back in the conference room. But users need to share, create and synthesize information into actionable results no matter where they are. True collaboration nullifies distance as a factor, and being away from the office won't hinder getting the job done.

Transparency: The solution should be so good, the technology itself fades into the background. Nobody picks up an analog phone and first listens for a dial-tone before making a call. Nobody turns the key in the ignition of a fuel-injected car wondering if the car will start.

Utility: Plain and simple, users want real tools that help them get stuff done. Again, chat, webcams, interactive scratch pads and document sharing do not make the grade here. Users want immersive shared working environments where the tools enhance the creative process, enable true real-time collaboration within the tools and actually provide a way to work cooperatively with others as if they were sitting right next to each other.

Ubiquity: It's ideal when everyone can meet at one of the telepresence rooms to collaborate, but it's not always possible. But what about the people who work from home offices or are on the road/onsite with clients? Knowledge workers need access and the ability to use all their productivity tools no matter where they are. Make sure to consider the requirements of the remote user when building the solution, and look for ways to extend functionality out of the rooms and out to the desktop and beyond. With broadband capabilities in wireless phones, Wi-Fi hotspots, plus options for both fat and thin clients where appropriate, extending near full collaboration room functionality to the user is finally a reality.

Self Service: The solution should be intuitive, user friendly, and should lack complexity to the point where any employee can walk in to the room and use it for the first time without help from a power user. Nobody should have to go into a room and be intimidated by a complicated set of plastic-coated instructions to use the telepresence solution. Most executive conference rooms I visit have the expensive VTC solutions that look impressive, but I always have to chuckle when the big powerful CEO's admin or AV tech has to rush in and make it work ... as the CEO looks on with amazement.

About the author:

Brent Houlahan, CISSP is a freelance writer and independent consultant who most recently served as CTO and VP of Operations at NetSec, an MSP acquired by MCI in February of 2005. To contact Brent, email him at:
Brent.Houlahan (at) HumanProductivityLab (dot) com

So you finally made it happen. With your help the company has invested in a next-generation global telepresence solution. You've got over 150 desktop users and 14 rooms around the world deployed and usage is through the roof. The CIO was commended by the CFO at a recent staff meeting for cutting travel costs, and the CEO has experienced the productivity gains for himself and was very impressed. Everything was going great until someone from Legal called regarding a subpoena that you've now been sworn to secrecy about.

As your raise, promotion, and move from the cube-farm into an office all flash before your eyes, the lawyer on the other end of the phone is spewing legalese at 1000 words a minute. You hear her say about a dozen new acronyms and phrases like CALEA, Lawful Intercept, Title III, and more. She asks you to come to her office at once so she can review the subpoena with you, as the FBI agent working the case will be there in about fifteen minutes.

When you get to the lawyer's office she's flanked by the chief security officer, the director of IT, and the director of risk management among others. For starters everyone wants to know why they were not involved in the telepresence project in the first place. They especially all want to know how the telepresence platform will permit the lawful interception of "calls" for a specific user. The problem is, you really have no idea what they're talking about and no clue how to make them happy. The solution vendor never mentioned anything about such capabilities and you admittedly never even thought to ask.

All you were out to do was replace the aging talking-heads-talking VTC system with something that would actually get used. Your requirements for telepresence were simple; real collaboration capabilities, seamless interoperability between conference rooms and the desktop, standards based technology, solid vendor support, and larger than life sound and video to wow the suits. You never considered socializing your project with the IT and security folks and now you not only have the issue of how to support the subpoena, but they're asking about other aspects of the project too. The CSO would like to speak with you about digital rights management and content security, and the IT director wants to know how you calculated storage costs plus he'd like you to explain your information lifecycle management strategy as well. If you could just go back and do it all over again, you'd ask better questions, involve all the right people, and consider future requirements too.

OK - Back to reality. While CALEA does not technically apply to enterprise networks today, it's anticipated that it may very soon. The FCC has stated that by May 14, 2007 VoIP service providers for the first time will have to comply with CALEA. In addition there's really nothing to stop law enforcement today from securing a subpoena to request telepresence session information for one of your users if deemed appropriate as part of an ongoing investigation. So the prudent course of action for solution architects today is to get smart on lawful intercept requirements and be prepared to challenge vendors during the RFI/RFP process.

Here are the essential terms you need to be familiar with and should be prepared to discuss with your telepresence vendor.

CALEA: Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act - A Federal Law aimed at commercial service providers that the FCC proposed in September of 2005 be more broadly applied to entities like universities and perhaps at some point public and private companies. The objective is to preserve law enforcement's ability to conduct lawfully authorized electronic surveillance of private communications.

Handover Interface: A physical and logical interface across which the results of interception are delivered to Law Enforcement.

Intercept Related Information: A collection of information or data associated with services involving the target, specifically call associated information or data, service associated information or data and location information.

Interception Interface: The physical and/or logical locations within your network where access to the content of communication and intercept related information is provided. The interception interface is not necessarily a single, fixed point.

Lawful Interception (LI): The legally sanctioned official access to private communications, such as telephone calls or e-mail messages. LI is a process in which a network operator or service provider gives law enforcement officials access to the communications of private individuals or organizations. The key elements of the LI process are as follows: the intercept must not be detectable by the targeted party; unauthorized personnel must not know about specific interceptions or be able to perform the LI processes themselves; separate agencies targeting a subject must not be able to detect each other; and that service providers must decrypt encrypted information for officials if they have access to the keys.

Mediation Device: a mechanism that passes information between your network and a handover interface.

Pen Register and Trap and Trace: Allows a law enforcement agency to acquire dialing and signaling information for incoming and out going calls (essentially call-identifying information). For data sessions (i.e. email) the identity and routing information. The objective here is to provide information describing the session without the actual content of the session (who, when, by what means) but not what was said or what information was passed between parties.

Title III: Commonly referred to as a "wiretap". In this lawful intercept scenario full collection of all communications content is provided (voice, data, video, stored data - email, voicemail, SMS).

Questions to discuss with your telepresence vendor:

• How they plan to support the ability for enterprise customers to provide law enforcement with lawful intercept capabilities in the future?

• When will their LI solution for enterprise customers be available?

• If all parts of the session (voice, data/collaboration, and video) will be available to law enforcement in their solution?

• Will both hardware and software investments be required by your company, and what about additional training and support costs?

• Does the vendor intend to support all the key elements mentioned in the LI definition above?

Reference Links:

Wikipedia article covering Lawful Interception

Cisco Architecture for Lawful Intercept in IP Networks

CALEA Information Website

HSL's Thoughts

While the Lab unequivocally supports the right of individuals and businesses to the privacy protections guaranteed under the 4th amendment, the Lab is also realistic with respect to the regulatory realities of doing business in America in 2006. As telepresence begins to grow in popularity there is no reason to doubt that telepresence solutions will not face the same regulatory burdens that telephony faces and Brent is the only expert that seems to be addressing the very real security and regulatory requirements that vendors and end-users will ultimately face. I, personally, look forward to a world of strong privacy and cyber anonymity (if desired) which will mean strong encryption. Those interested in strong encryption and privacy might enjoy this talk by economist David Friedman, entitled Will Strong Encryption Protect Privacy and Make Government Obsolete? given at the Independent Institute in 2001. A transcript can be found Here and a Real Player streaming download can be found Here.(Streaming Audio Recommended)

About the author:

Brent Houlahan, CISSP is a freelance writer and independent consultant who most recently was the CTO and VP of Operations at NetSec, an MSP acquired by MCI in February of 2005. To contact Brent email him at:
brent.houlahan (at) humanproductivitylab (dot) com