jane@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Jane M. Fraser) (08/27/90)
On August 9, CAST (The Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications) held its fifth one-day symposium, in Columbus, Ohio, titled ``Telecommunications for Ohio Economic Development: A Computer Network for Small Businesses?" The symposium centered around a proposal, presented by myself (Jane Fraser) and Alex Cruz, for a state-wide computer network to link small businesses to each other, to state agencies, and to worldwide networks. The argument we presented was that better access to information for such businesses, better communication among such businesses, and better communication with the world would benefit Ohio through economic development. The following posting reports on the symposium. At the end of this posting is information on how to order copies of papers prsented at the symposium ($5 for the package), audio tapes of most of the symposium ($5), and an email version of the main paper (free). After I presented the basic proposaland its justification, Al Albarran presented the results of a survey of small businesses in Ohio done this summer (with the support of LiTel Telecommunications Corporation). That survey found that 73.7% of businesses surveyed have personal computers and 65.0% have a modem, but only 13.1% use them for some form of communication. However, 59.9% said they would try a network like the one proposed. Alex Cruz, on whose Master's thesis the proposal was based, demonstrated features of 5 existing computer systems (Usenet, ONet, Cleveland FreeNet, Prodigy, and the Big Sky Telegraph). While many of these have many of the features we proposed, none has all nor, as far as we know, is any used by small businesses in the way we proposed. To provide the audience with a larger perspective, Edwin B. Parker presented an excellent mini-course in telecommunications and economic development. Ed is an independent consultant and former Chairman, President, and CEO of Equatorial Communications. Prior to joining Equatorial fulltime in 1979, he was a Professor of Communication at Stanford University. He is a noted expert on telecommunications and economic development. I found this talk to be a wonderful education, particularly in rural development, as well as a powerful view, from a person with a great deal of perspective on what might happen in the future. For example, Ed suggested there are 3 stages in the view of economic developers regarding how to accelerate economic development in rural areas. The first is smokestack chasing, the second involves trying to lure ``back offices" (to handle, for example, bank transactions), but the third is to focus on small businesses. While Ed's research and talk focussed on rural development, he applied the ideas to small business development, noting that many of the problems and issues are the same. The afternoon sessions began with a presentation by Dave Spooner, senior economic development office for the Manchester (England) City Council. Dave described the efforts they are making to improve the use of telematics (the convergence of telecommunication and informatics) in Manchester, in particular by small businesses and voluntary organizations. Manchester will soon have a node in the worldwide Geonet system, enabling small businesses and voluntary organizations in Manchester to access data, to communicate with each other, and to communicate with similar groups in other cities around the world. They are also providing, through the local polytechnic, education to small businesses and voluntary organization on how such a communication network can be used. A panel of three speakers discussed the use of computers in economic development in 3 states. Kay Lutz-Ritzheimer described the Montana Entrepreneurship Center, which makes the expertise of three Montana universities available to entrepreneurs. Tony Roso described a system used to link economic developers in Colorado. Both cited the usefulness of such systems in states with wide open spaces. In both cases, the networks are available currently only to people involved in economic development, but both states plan to expand to bring businesses on-line. John Niles (from Washington state) presented a more skeptical view asking whether it was really necessary to provide yet another information source for businesses, but agreeing that dialog among the businesses can be a strong source of emotional support and good advice. In the final session, four speakers from inside Ohio described various computer activities. Dick Decker describe ONet, which links Ohio colleges and universities. Tom Grunder described the Cleveland FreeNet and the National Public Telecomputing Network. Keith Ewald and Tim Steiner described databases and computer projects in the State of Ohio government. I thought Keith had some very strong arguments against direct state involvement in a system such as we proposed. For example, he pointed out that data (and perhaps ``private" electronic mail) stored on a state computer is subject to sunshine laws. The FreeNet concept of free telecomputing available to all on the model of the public library is a powerful concept. Tom's presentation raised a great deal of discussion in the audience and among the other presenters. Many of the latter felt that free networks are inherently self-limiting since they must continually seek new funds to maintain their current status, much less grow. Tom would argue, I think, that computer networks with a large user base can easily generate funds since there are many agencies that want to be able to reach members of the public with information, for example, on AIDS prevention. The discussion continued that evening in small groups and even into the breakfast the next day since many speakers stayed in Columbus. We at CAST have found that we can play a valuable role in putting people in touch with each other and I know that many contacts made at the symposium will lead to further discussions. Overall, I found that the comments I got in response to our proposal were both more positive and more negative than I anticipated. Many negative comments concerned how users would actually use the system; what kind of exchange of information and communication would occur and how would that help a small business? I believe the symposium failed to convey adequately the uses to which we anticipate such a system could be put; I'll make some comments on that here. We believe the communication among companies and with companies elsewhere is much more important than their access to databases. If this were not the case, there would be little point in our proposal; John Niles is correct in that there are many sources that enable companies to access databases. Although there are many State of Ohio sources of information that are not available on-line currently, they could be made available through current information sources. Another point we may not have made clear is that one way a network of small businesses could be implemented is by subsidizing their use of appropriate existing networks. It may be that the most important need is to educate potential users about what already exists. In the paper by Alex and me, we listed the following examples of possible uses, many of which focus on communication, not on access to information: ``OTTO (the Ohio Technology Transfer Organization, an organization in the Ohio Department of Development) might maintain a file giving answers to common questions. For example, they are often asked questions about how to dispose of toxic waste. OTTO agents could also be available through electronic mail and through bulletin boards to answer specific questions. Existing computer connections used by agents of Agricultural Extension could be integrated into this system, improving access to information for the agricultural community. ``Sales people might keep in touch with their home office by using a laptop and a hotel phone to check their mail each evening and to enter new orders. A company might use electronic mail to communicate with its customers. For example, it might send price updates by the network. ``Consultants willing to consult for a fee on specific topics could advertise their availability through the network; inversely, a company needing such services could advertise its need and allow consultants to respond. A company wishing to dispose of used equipment could advertise its availability; inversely, a company seeking equipment (used or new) might advertise its need. ``Engineering diagrams, such as circuit boards, could be sent by the customer to the manufacturer. Users of computer systems could post questions and answers on bulletin boards on specific systems. Chambers of Commerce in various parts of the state might post notices of events and might maintain bulletin boards to answer questions. ``In general, the network could be used by companies to: improve access to customers and suppliers, improve access to up-to-date information, speed communication and thus decision making, reduce distribution costs by increasing efficiency, reduce need for inventory in many locations, reduce need for messengers, reduce response time when repairs are needed, and improve scheduling of time of personnel and machinery. Also, it is very likely that new, unanticipated uses will arise if the network is established." The more positive responses involve contacts from people who want to work with CAST to make at least parts of the proposal happen. After organizing the symposium, I made contact with June Holley and Roger Wilkens of the Worker Owned Network in Athens, Ohio. With funding from the Ohio Department of Development and other sources, they are seeking to establish flexible manufacturing networks, that is, networks of companies that cooperate; these networks are not necessarily computer based. Such networks have had great success in Italy and in Sweden and the DoD is seeking to establish similar structures in Ohio. June and Roger attended the symposium and were able to stay to talk further with many of the presenters. Plans are still developing, but it seems very probable that the Worker Owned Network, the Manchester program, and CAST will cooperate in linking Athens with Manchester. I am also talking with the Ohio Business Retention and Expansion Program (part of the Ohio Cooperative Extension Services) about possibilities for a demonstration project. Other contacts are emerging and I would be happy to discuss possibilities with people, whether they attended the symposium or not. For those who could not attend, or who did attend but would like a better record of the day, two packages of material are available at a price set to cover our costs; each package costs $5. The first package contains copies of background papers; the second package contains four audio tapes, covering all presentations beginning with Dr. Parker's. The background papers in the first package include: the Symposium program, the Biographies of Symposium Speakers, A proposal for a state-funded computer network for small and medium sized companies in Ohio (Jane M. Fraser and Alex Cruz), The use of computers and telecommunication networks by small and medium size businesses in the state of Ohio: Results of an exploratory study (Alan B. Albarran), Telecommunication and economic development (copies of the overheads used by Edwin Parker), The Manchester Host (Dave Spooner), The Montana Entrepreneurship Center, Telematics: A force for development (John S. Niles), Stimulating regional economic development in Colorado (Anthony Roso, Jr.), Networking Ohio colleges in support of statewide economic and human resource development stategies (Richard C. Decker), Illusions associated with electronic technology for data integration and sharing (Keith Ewald and Dixie Sommers), Community computing and the National Public Telecomputing Network (T.M. Grundner), and Background and supplemental reading (Mary Leugers). For those who attended the symposium, the papers by Spooner, Roso, and Ewald and Sommers were not handed out there. The paper by Spooner corresponds to his talk; the papers by Roso and Ewald and Sommers do not correspond exactly to the presentations made by those speakers, but provide some background. Unfortunately, most of these papers are not available in electronic form. However, the Fraser and Cruz paper (``A proposal ...") is available in electronic form and we will email copies of that upon request. For more information or to order either package, contact me at: Jane M. Fraser Associate Director, CAST The Ohio State University Columbus, OH, 43210 614-292-4129 jane@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu Checks for either or both packages should be made out to CAST/OSU. Our next symposium will be in November and will be on the role of commercialism in the classroom, using the example of TV, such as Whittle Channel One, for broadcasting to schools.