When Good Technology Doesn’t Deliver

From AMI systems and GIS mapping software to outage management platforms, AVL tracking, SCADA systems and mobile workforce applications, today’s local power companies have access to more data than ever before.

Yet despite significant investments in technology, many utilities continue to face the same operational challenges: outages that take longer than expected to diagnose, crews spending valuable time tracking down information, customer service representatives struggling to answer questions, and employees manually connecting the dots of information that already exist somewhere within the organization.

The problem often isn’t the technology itself. It’s getting that technology and the information it contains to work together.

“Utilities often have good systems individually, but the real challenge is getting them to work together operationally,” said Paul Michael, who works in engineering and geographic information system (GIS) at Sheffield Utilities. “Most of the frustration isn’t caused by technology limitations. It’s caused by information not flowing where and when it’s needed.”

In many ways, today’s utilities face a modern version of an age-old challenge: communication, or lack thereof.

Information Everywhere, Awareness Nowhere

Imagine a storm rolling through your service territory.

Smart meters are reporting outages. The outage management system is predicting fault locations. GIS contains a detailed model of the system. Dispatch knows where crews are located. Customer service representatives are answering calls from affected customers.

The utility has all of the information it needs.

The question is whether everyone is working from the same picture.

Michael described many utility operations as “information-rich, awareness-poor.” Valuable data exists throughout the organization, but it often remains trapped inside individual systems, departments or workflows.

“The challenge isn’t collecting data anymore,” he said. “The challenge is making sure everyone is working from the same information.”

At Sheffield Utilities, Michael has spent years working at the intersection of GIS, outage management, dispatch, advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) and field operations. One of the most common disconnects he sees occurs when information exists in one system but never reaches the people making operational decisions.

A utility may have already installed transformers, energized services and deployed smart meters. Engineering knows the work is complete. GIS contains the design. AMI may already be collecting meter reads.

Yet when an outage occurs, the outage management system (OMS) may not fully understand how those customers connect to the network because information hasn’t flowed between systems.

“The utility technically possesses all the information it needs,” Michael said. “The challenge is that the information exists in separate places.”

Small Gaps, Big Consequences

At Lawrenceburg Utility Systems, GIS Coordinator Logan Dooley sees a similar challenge from a different perspective. “There is always a lack of communication,” Dooley said.

Sometimes a field crew deviates from a staking sheet and never reports the change. Sometimes a meter is replaced, but the new meter number never makes its way to the right departments. Other times, service orders sit incomplete in a system because someone didn’t realize another department was waiting on that information.

Individually, these may seem like small oversights.

Combined, they can create significant operational challenges.

“Those small things that are not put on the print or put in the correct service order can affect how accurate the mapping system is,” Dooley explained.

The consequences ripple throughout the organization. A meter change that isn’t communicated can create inaccuracies in both GIS and AMI systems. A service order left hanging can delay billing. An incorrect transformer size or improperly mapped fuse can affect outage predictions and customer counts.

“There can be a large amount of information that gets skipped when inputting data into different software,” Dooley said. “If that information is skipped, it has a trickle-down effect for the rest of the departments.”

The result is a challenge familiar to many utilities: employees spending valuable time hunting for information that already exists somewhere else.

More Technology Isn’t Always the Answer

One of the most interesting themes that emerged from conversations with utility professionals is that technology itself is rarely the problem.

In fact, adding more technology can sometimes make things worse.

At Cullman Electric Cooperative, GIS Mapping Technician Brody Knight has seen firsthand how organizations can accumulate technology without improving connectivity.

“The biggest misconception is that spending more on technology will reap more of a connected environment,” Knight said.

Instead, he encourages utilities to ask three questions before implementing new technology:

• Who will own and manage it?

• Will it integrate with existing systems?

• And does it duplicate functionality the utility already has?

“When these questions go unaddressed, you suddenly have technology everywhere and connectivity nowhere,” Knight said.

For Cullman EC, those challenges are compounded by the fact that the cooperative operates both electric and fiber services on shared infrastructure. For years, disconnects between the two sides of the organization complicated outage restoration efforts.

“We have personnel on the fiber side looking at one system and personnel on the electric side looking at another,” Knight said. During major outage events, communication breakdowns sometimes resulted in confusion, longer response times and member frustration.

The experience reinforced an important lesson: Technology alone cannot create coordination.

People and processes must be connected, too.

Building a Single Source of Truth

If the experiences of these three utilities have a lesson to offer, it is the importance of establishing a reliable source of operational truth.

For Sheffield Utilities, that journey began with GIS.

When Michael arrived at Sheffield, GIS data was maintained by multiple people using different processes and standards. Outage management relied heavily on phone calls, paper records and institutional knowledge. Information often existed in notebooks, spreadsheets or simply in the minds of experienced employees.

The utility’s challenge wasn’t a lack of information.

It was a lack of connected information.

Over the last five years, Sheffield has focused on establishing GIS as the authoritative system of record for its electric network and then building integrations around that foundation.

“We established GIS as the system of record,” Michael said. “The goal was never simply to build better maps. The goal was to build a more accurate digital representation of the utility and use that information to improve operations.”

That foundation helped improve outage management, dispatch coordination, field visibility and access to operational information across departments.

Dooley sees a similar role for GIS at Lawrenceburg.

“I think GIS, AMI and OMS provide the greatest value when integrated,” she said. Together, those systems create a more complete picture of what is happening on the system and help eliminate the delays that occur when information must be manually passed from one department to another.

The Hardest Integration Isn’t Technical

Perhaps the most surprising takeaway from all three LPCs is that the most difficult integration projects often have nothing to do with software.

They’re about people.

“The projects involving process change were by far the most challenging,” Michael said. “Technology is usually easier than changing how people work.”

Dooley agreed.

“Normally it’s human error,” she said. “Sometimes, as utilities we do a terrible job of cross-training and making sure everyone knows that what you do or don’t do can affect other departments.”

Knight pointed to communication breakdowns as a major contributor to disconnected operations.

“When you rely on human communication, especially from the field to the office, there is always opportunity for it to break down,” he said.

Each utility described a variation of the same challenge: Technology can connect systems, but leadership must connect people.

Employees need to understand how information moves through the organization. Departments need to understand how their actions affect others. Field personnel need tools that are simple enough to use consistently. And leadership must create a culture where information is shared rather than isolated.

In many cases, the greatest barriers to connected operations are not software limitations. They are organizational silos, inconsistent processes and a reluctance to change long-standing workflows.

Lessons Learned

While every utility’s journey is different, the lessons learned are remarkably consistent.

• Start with the systems you already own.

• “Before buying another system, ask whether you’re getting the full value out of the systems you already own,”

Michael advised.

• Keep processes simple.

• “If it’s too complicated, it’s just not going to get done,” Dooley said.

• Include the right people in technology decisions.

“If you don’t have a seat at the table, you will later be handed a basket of lemons and get asked to make sweet tea,” Knight said.

And perhaps most importantly, remember that customers increasingly expect the same visibility and communication they receive from other industries.

Knight offered a comparison that resonates far beyond the utility industry.

“If you can order a pizza and track the pizza from the order, to the toppings, to the oven, to the box, and finally to the GPS-tracked driver coming to your house,” he said, “why do utility customers and members not get the same level of information?”

It’s a fair question.

As utilities continue investing in new technologies, the greatest opportunities may not come from adding more systems. They may come from helping existing systems and the people who use them to work together more effectively.

In the end, successful utilities aren’t defined by how much technology they own.

As Michael put it, “The utilities that achieve the most success are not necessarily the ones with the most systems. They are the ones that do the best job connecting the systems, people and information they already have.”

Buying an OMS? Don’t Forget the Integration Question

An Outage Management System (OMS) can dramatically improve outage response, crew coordination, customer communication and reliability reporting — but only if it works seamlessly with the systems around it. Before selecting a platform, utility leaders should look beyond feature lists and evaluate how well an OMS will integrate into their broader operational environment. Here are a few key considerations:

Ask if the OMS integrates directly with GIS.

Your OMS is only as accurate as the network model behind it. An OMS should be able to leverage GIS as the authoritative source for connectivity, devices and customer relationships.

Evaluate AMI integration carefully.

Can the OMS receive and process meter-level outage and restoration signals in near real time? Automated outage detection and restoration verification are among the biggest operational advantages of AMI.

Look for a mobile-first field experience.

During an outage, crews need information quickly and reliably. Ask vendors to demonstrate the actual mobile workflows your lineworkers will use in the field — not just desktop functionality.

Follow the information flow.

How does outage information move from the OMS to outage maps, IVR systems, text notifications and customer service staff? Delays or gaps in communication can create unnecessary customer frustration.

Talk to utilities like yours.

Request references from utilities with similar customer counts, geography and operating structures. A platform that works well for a large investor-owned utility may not be the best fit for a municipal utility or cooperative.

Don’t underestimate implementation.

Building and maintaining an accurate network model often requires as much effort as configuring the software itself. Make sure implementation timelines account for GIS cleanup, integrations and testing.

Remember: An OMS is part of an ecosystem.

The most successful implementations connect OMS, GIS, AMI, MDM and mobile field tools into a single operational picture. The goal isn’t another standalone system — it’s better decisions, faster restoration and more informed employees.