FUTURE BSS

Say goodbye to so昀ware customiza琀on

Author: Mark Newman, Chief Analyst

Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
January 2020

Sponsors:

inform.tmforum.org
Contents
03 05 09
The big picture Section 1: Why is the Section 2: A radical, new
business model broken? approach to BSS

13 16 18
Section 3: Challenges to Section 4: Make it happen: Additional features &
adopting ODA Join the ODA team resources

inform.tmforum.org 2
The big picture
“BSS is broken. It’s a business model that can’t carry on. Operators simply cannot afford
expensive change requests (customization), and even vendors who charge a fortune for those
requests realize that the situation has to change.”
Senior VP at a global BSS supplier
Communications service providers’
(CSPs’) business support systems (BSS)
have been under strain for a very long
time. The fundamental issue is
customization which accounts for a
huge proportion of the cost, time to
deploy and functionality. And the
customization is ongoing, with systems
requiring continual maintenance by
expert engineers. Indeed, dissatisfaction
with the outcomes of BSS
transformation programs has resulted in
deterioration of the relationship
between CSPs and their suppliers.
How did we get here?
BSS are critical systems that handle
product, order, revenue, and customer
management. CSPs’ businesses cannot
function without them. The telecoms
industry has been through cycles of
“best­of­breed” and “best­of­suite”
approaches to acquiring BSS from
suppliers, but neither has delivered the
capabilities CSPs want, on time or
within budget.
Twenty years ago, CSPs typically
bought best­of­breed solutions and
then relied on systems integrators to
knit the components together. Results
were disappointing, with CSPs often
encountering problems with
customized interfaces between
incompatible systems, some of which
directly impacted their customers (and
relationships with them). For example,
in 2004 UK mobile operator O2 sent
out incorrect or incomplete bills to
1.5 million customers after deploying
a new billing and customer
relationship management system.
About ten years ago telcos
transitioned to best­of­suite solutions
from a smaller number of vendors
capable of offering end­to­end
solutions. This approach had the
advantage of giving CSPs a “single
throat to choke” but also turned out
to be quite expensive because of
“change requests”, meaning the
addition of new features or
capabilities that sit outside the scope
of the main contract. While the best­
of­suite approach reduced custom
interfaces, solutions typically did not
cover the entire operational and
business support system (OSS/BSS)
stack, which meant that custom
interfaces around the core system
were still needed. And further
customization resulted from CSPs
insisting that the software be adapted
to their individual operational and
business requirements and processes.
Read this report for an in­depth look
at how CSPs procure OSS/BSS:
inform.tmforum.org
BSS transformation projects have
morphed into huge, complex programs
that almost never deliver on time. One
of the highest­profile, failures was a $1
billion deal between Russian telecoms
group VEON and supplier Ericsson. In
2019, three years after the 11­country
project was signed, Ericsson was
required to pay $350 million in
compensation to VEON.
A senior architect working for another
large European operator group
reiterates the problem:
“
On average, our large
transformation projects
arrive 150% over budget and
time,” he says. “We have
found that there is a direct
correlation between the size
and success of these projects.”
As a result, his company has firmly
committed not to undertake any
transformation projects that are not
delivered using Agile methodology or
with commercial terms based on
business outcomes delivered
incrementally.
3
The big picture

What’s inside?
This report examines the state of BSS today within CSP organizations and offers an in­depth look at an initiative within TM
Forum to develop a reference implementation for a core commerce management system. Read it to understand:

n Why the BSS business model is broken

n What the difference is between best­of­breed and best­of­suite solutions

n Why issues like lack of standards and skills and vendor lock­in are difficult to address

n Why radical transformation of BSS (and OSS) is required

n What the Open Digital Architecture (ODA) is and how it is being developed

n Why companies like Orange and Vodafone have committed to collaborating on ODA

n The relationship between ODA and the Open Network Automation Platform

n Why more support from CSPs and suppliers is essential

n How 5G increases the need for collaboration

inform.tmforum.org 4
Section 1
Why is the business
model broken?
“We haven’t found a way of moving away from the best­of­suite approach.”
CIO of a large European CSP
Most communications service providers
(CSPs) rely on a combination of “best­
of­breed” and “best­of­suite” business
support systems (BSS). New cloud­
based, best­of­breed solutions are
available from startups and traditional
suppliers, alike. They provide an Agile
approach to deployment and can help
operators become more innovative.
However, most CSPs are stuck with
legacy best­of­suite solutions that are
highly customized and difficult to retire.
Blame for deterioration in the
relationship between CSPs and
suppliers rests on both sides. CSPs have
endeavored to tighten up contracts to
minimize the cost overrun caused by
change requests, but as a result many
vendors believe they are being unfairly
squeezed (and punished) with
contractual terms that force them to
assume all the financial risk.
BSS is no longer an attractive market for
suppliers. Large players are
reconsidering their commitment to
delivering BSS or have scaled back
offers. Ericsson, for example, ended
delivery of its best­of­suite solutions
after writing off $690 million in the
fourth quarter of 2018. Meanwhile,
CSPs have been reluctant to buy BSS
products “out of the box”, partly
because they believe the costly
customization of solutions helps them
differentiate the products and services
they offer to their own customers
(see panel).
Customization is a double-edged sword
While integration and
customization are necessary to
make applications purchased from
different BSS vendors work
together, an extra layer of
customization also can result from
CSPs’ requirements. For example,
an operator may require support
for a service or pricing plan that is
not part of a vendor’s core product.
The need for this kind of
customization is not always
evident when the initial contract is
agreed or signed. It can result if a
requirement is removed during
contract negotiations in order to
achieve a lower price, or in some
cases, the business requirement
arises after the contractual process
is finished. In either case, CSPs
have viewed the customization of
BSS as a competitive differentiator
in their relationships with their
own customers.
Operators increasingly are
realizing, however, that the
potential benefits of customization
are offset by the additional cost
and time it takes to deploy the
capabilities in BSS systems. As
inform.tmforum.org
such, they now accept
simplification as a key element of
any transformation program and
are more willing to consider out­
of­the­box solutions.
Still, many CSPs express frustration
that even when they buy products
out of the box, they require some
degree of customization. Says a
senior engineer for a European CSP:
“
Some costs are costs we
should never have seen –
they are costs just to
make the systems work.
Our business genuinely
believed we were buying
out of the box, but we
still faced big cost
overruns. Even bits from
the same vendor don’t
always work together.”
5
Section 1

Lack of standards introduce standardized architectures, However, the Application Framework

languages and approaches, IT teams is not specific enough to allow
As CSPs begin merging network and are not able to swap BSS components operators to swap out different pieces
IT teams within their organizations, out easily. Perhaps the most relevant within their overall IT jigsaw.
they come face to face with

fundamental differences in the
approaches each team takes with
suppliers (see infographic below). The
network business is heavily
standardized. Vendors tend to do
their own systems integration, and it
is relatively straightforward for an
operator to swap out components
from one vendor for those of another.
Decisions on which vendor to choose
typically are based on price and
confidence in the vendor’s ability
to deliver.
IT is different. Despite initiatives by
organizations such as TM Forum to
“
standardization effort has been TM
Forum’s Application Framework
(TAM), a systems map that captures
how business capabilities are
implemented in deployable,
recognizable applications. TAM wasn’t good enough
“The Application Framework provides
to say, ‘I want to buy one of
a common language for communities these’,” Thomas explains.
who specify, procure, design and sell “Vendors would state
systems, so that they can understand
compliance to TAM, but
each other’s viewpoints,” says Dr.
Lester Thomas, Chief Systems you still needed to state
Architect, Vodafone Group. “It your business requirements
provides logical grouping of to get what you needed.”
applications, then describes each
application’s functionality.”

Comparison of network and IT procurement

Network IT

Very costly and vendors hold a huge amount of power

Lower cost and less influence
and influence over customers

Hardware­centric, transitioning to software Software­centric

Key segments are networks (core and access) and

Key segments are licenses, services and platforms
managed services

Minor role for systems integrators Major role for systems integrators

Strongly standards­based Lack of standards

Minimal customization Highly customized solutions

Gradual transition to cloud­based solutions Fast transition to cloud­based solutions

No significantly dominant suppliers, rather a combination

of some fairly large telecoms­specific vendors, a few
Dominated by a few large, telecoms­specific suppliers
large multi­vertical companies and hundreds of small­ to
medium­sized players

TM Forum, 2019

inform.tmforum.org 6
Section 1
If the industry is to develop a new,
open approach to BSS that allows
CSPs to switch vendors, upgrade
systems and introduce new
capabilities, it will need to throw its
weight behind something like TAM,
but a framework that is software­
defined. TM Forum’s Open Digital
Architecture (ODA), which we’ll
discuss in detail in the next sections,
aims to deliver this kind of
architecture.
Vendor lock-in
Migration to a more open BSS market
where CSPs can mix and match
applications from different vendors
represents a threat to the control that
IT vendors have exercised over their
customers. Stories abound about
operators trying to switch suppliers
only to be told by the incumbent
vendor that the cost for the support
required to disentangle the solution
or for maintaining another product
would negate the benefits of
switching vendors.
Incumbent vendors also use other
forms of “soft” lock­in. C­level
executives within supplier companies
often make a point of developing
close relationships with senior CSP
management teams and then call on
those friendships if they believe
subordinate teams within the
company are planning to choose a
competitor’s solution.
In addition, CSPs build a significant
amount of internal expertise in
working with the systems provided by
a specific vendor. If a CSP switches
vendors, this expertise is lost and
internal teams must be retrained or
replaced.
APIs can help
Adoption of common application
program interfaces (APIs) is a good
way for CSPs to combat vendor lock­
in and build an open market for BSS
applications. So far, 17 of the world’s
largest CSPs and 37 of their
Vendor adopon of TM Forum Open APIs
100%
80%
Many vendors
show significant
60%
Intent
45
ambion but
relavely low
maturity 40%
20%
0%
Each circle represents the scores for an individual respondent (anonymized)
Size of circle indicates the number of Relevant APIs | Label represents the number of Commied APIs
Results of assessment for Q3 2019
technology partners have committed
to using TM Forum’s Open APIs in
relevant product applications, but
progress in implementing the suite
of 50+ REST­based Open APIs has
been mixed.
A recent survey of CSPs and suppliers
released in November 2019 reveals
that vendors’ native Open API
support lags behind demand from
CSPs (see graphic above).
M&A headaches
When the telecoms market was
growing, it was easier for CSPs to
tolerate a less­than­ideal BSS
business model with suppliers. Now,
however, every department within a
CSP is under pressure to drive
operational efficiencies because – if
operators are unable to diversify into
new markets, they must cut costs to
remain competitive.
At the same time, BSS requirements
are becoming more complex as CSPs
accumulate greater legacy in terms of
the products and services they need
to support. During the past 20 years,
mergers and acquisitions among CSPs
inform.tmforum.org
Mature
adopter
Large circle = large
26 44 product porolio (lots
of Relevant APIs)
39 35 51
37 15
45
7 17
19 High label number +
36
14
full roadmap (lots of
Commied APIs)
23 22
10 More mature deployments
tend to be from vendors with
smaller product porolios
(small circles)
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Maturity
TM Forum, 2020
worldwide have resulted in highly
complex back­office environments.
Many operators have been forced to
put quick fixes in place to combine
the billing systems of previously
separate companies, and they are still
living with the results.
And when CSPs do get around to
launching transformation programs to
merge disparate IT systems, the
priority is usually getting existing
customers onto a new system as soon
as possible so that the old one can be
decommissioned. As a result, new
systems end up being geared toward
protecting existing business rather
than generating revenue from
new services.
The challenge is particularly acute in
emerging markets, where CSPs have
been hit harder by a slowdown in
revenues than operators in developed
markets because of their dependency
on the mobile business. The largest
“best­of­suite” BSS vendors focus on
supplying the lucrative European,
North American and North Asian
CSPs because of the revenue
potential.
7
Section 1
Lack of skills
Around the same time that CSPs were
starting to transition from best­of­
breed to best­of­suite approaches to
IT procurement, they also were
seriously exploring opportunities to
outsource BSS and operational
support systems (OSS). For example,
in 2006 Vodafone outsourced
application development and
maintenance to EDS and IBM as part
of a strategic commitment to reducing
costs.
In many respects, the timing could not
have been worse for CSPs. In the
mid­2000s cloud computing began to
take off, but because CSPs lacked
internal software­development
expertise, they were unable to build
their own cloud­based systems and
capabilities. It has only been in the
past four to five years that operators
have started to rebuild internal
software expertise and capabilities.
Rethinking BSS value
The emergence of digital,
subscription­based software as a
service (SaaS) has changed CSPs’
thinking about where the value lies –
or should lie – in their BSS strategies.
Digital service providers (DSPs) like
Netflix and Spotify offer extremely
simple pricing models and use equally
simple systems to support them. The
content providers typically offer only
a handful of pricing schemes, and
there is no indication that they intend
to use pricing innovation to move
their businesses forward. This is
different from the average CSP, which
typically supports hundreds or
thousands of legacy products and
pricing plans.
Conversely, DSPs invest heavily in
customer experience and
personalization. Much of the value in
their services lies in their ability to
understand customers by leveraging
data about them and their usage of
services and by anticipating the kinds
of services customers will want.
CSPs want to deliver similar
capabilities to their customers and are
rapidly realizing that product
differentiation needs to be based on
customer experience rather than the
core capabilities of their back­end
systems. But they find themselves
unable to make this transition
because so much of their energy (and
budget) is taken up with maintaining
and upgrading traditional BSS.
Making the case
The timing could not be better for
CSPs to make the case for buying
reimagined IT solutions that can
improve customer experience while
simultaneously reducing costs.
Delivering enhanced customer
experience is a strategic imperative
for all operators, and many are now
basing remuneration on teams’ and
individuals’ ability to deliver results.
inform.tmforum.org
Research conducted for this
report suggests that the
value of the BSS market is
about $30 billion, which is
equivalent to roughly 2% of
CSP revenue globally.
Spending on BSS is flat, in
line with revenue trends.
Most CIOs feel strongly that if
inefficiencies in the BSS supply chain
could be addressed – for example, if
operators could incrementally
introduce new capabilities without
going through complex
transformation programs – then total
spending on BSS would fall sharply.
But they are unable to make the case
internally because they do not know
how to move towards a modular,
configurable architecture that
eliminates the need for customization
and maintenance.
Even more difficult to estimate than
the cost savings that might result
from a different approach to BSS is
the revenue CSPs could gain from
delivering a better customer
experience. This would come from
increasing loyalty and the ability to
sell services based on analysis of
customer behavior.
In the next sections, we’ll look at
the work TM Forum members are
doing to improve the BSS supply
chain by creating a reference
implementation for a core commerce
management system.
8
Section 2
A radical, new approach to BSS

“We need to be more like a hyperscale tech company in terms of how we use software,”
CIO of an Asia­Pacific CSP

Communications service providers’ Marginal improvements

(CSPs’) efforts to address their long­
held frustrations about business
support systems (BSS) are possible
only because they are investing in
their own software capabilities.
Through internal development,
operators can augment third­party
software and integrate solutions
provided by external vendors. At the
same time, even the most ambitious
CSPs point out that they are not
about to become software houses
and that there is nothing to be gained
from building products that compete
with those provided by a large,
diverse vendor market.
The depth of CSPs’ internal expertise
varies hugely. Large European and
North American operator groups are
investing heavily in internal software
development capabilities, while
operators in emerging markets, where
market stagnation is a more recent
development, are still looking to cut
costs and have not reinvested in
software skills.
This divergence of
capabilities is significant in
the context of BSS
transformation. There is a
strong likelihood that a
handful of technically
“fluent” CSPs will embark
on approaches and
strategies that are beyond
the capabilities of many
other operators.
Use of outcome-based pricing
40%
CSPs
Some CSPs are already changing their
commercial engagement models with
BSS vendors without fundamentally
altering what the suppliers deliver. For
example, some operators are starting
to base commercial terms on business
outcomes rather than purely on the
cost of hardware, software,
customization and maintenance. We
explored this as part of our 2019
research report Kill the RFP:
Reinventing IT procurement for the
2020s and found that more than half
of CSPs are experimenting with this
approach or are using it for new
business. Suppliers are lagging behind
a bit but also intend to use outcome­
based pricing.
14% 15%
40%
Suppliers

71%
20%

We are already using outcome-based pricing and are pleased with the results

We are starng to experiment with this approach

We would like to use this approach in the future

TM Forum, 2020

inform.tmforum.org 9
Section 2

Vendors are also partnering with CSPs BSS for 5G and beyond and future business, including their
in DevOps teams to deliver new future digital services and ecosystems
software and systems on a The impetus for a new approach created by CSPs”.
continuous basis. A TM Forum survey towards BSS is as much about
conducted in December as part of enabling new business models to A subsequent TM Forum Catalyst
another research report on future flourish as it is about improving BSS proof of concept (see page 11)
operational support systems (OSS) for legacy telco services. For example, developed an interoperable reference
reveals that a quarter of operators are as CSPs deploy 5G they are exploring implementation of a core commerce
now using DevOps practices across many new opportunities that involve management system including a
operations and 60% plan to. leveraging their existing assets to product catalog and order
However, we believe that DevOps is provide services beyond connectivity, management service, marking the first
still mostly used for internal particularly in the B2B market. Such time TM Forum members had
development projects rather than services will mostly be sold using a collaborated to develop software
ones that involve external vendors. software­as­a­service (SaaS) model, code for testing. Joining Vodafone
which requires a different approach to and Orange in the Catalyst were
For more about future OSS, read this BSS. If every new service were to catalog vendors Globetom and Sigma
report: entail going through the same long, Systems along with systems
costly process of deploying an integrators IBM and SigScale.
FUTURE OSS: TOWARDS AN
OPEN DIGITAL ARCHITECTURE
associated support system, operators
Author: Tim McElligo, Senior Analyst
Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
November 2019
would never be able to achieve the Watch Orange’s Laurent Leboucher
agility, automation or cost savings and Vodafone’s Dr. Lester Thomas
required for success. discuss the need for a common core
commerce management system:
In January 2019, TM Forum’s
Sponsor:
Collaboration Community published
inform.tmforum.org
an exploratory report for members
entitled Business Operating System
Pioneer Project Report. Led by Orange
and Vodafone, the paper made the
case for creating “a common and fully
interoperable framework for CSP core

inform.tmforum.org 10
Section 2

Catalyst helps CSPs reimagine ordering and billing

The BOS Catalyst showed how to technical architecture that delivers a The next stage of the project
implement and orchestrate TM Forum blueprint for the underlying involves working on the software
Open APIs in order to build a infrastructure architecture and data. architecture or “envelope”. This is
complete experience for the customer, BOS sits at the center of the technical being done within TM Forum’s Open
from ordering a product through to bill architecture as the core commerce Digital Lab, which provides a runtime
calculation. The output and future management system. The graphic environment for conformance testing
evolution of the proof of concept is below shows a more detailed view of and validation of ODA components,
now part of TM Forum’s Open Digital what is now called the ODA using ‘glass­box’ (shared code) and
Framework (see page 26), specifically Referenece Implementation. ‘black­box’ (proprietary code)
the Open Digital Architecture (ODA), components.
which is a blueprint for how OSS/BSS A major result of the Catalyst is
need to be redesigned to support development of the BOS software Learn more from the Catalyst team:
digital ecosystems and take full ‘Canvas’, which acts as the backbone
advantage of technology such as 5G of the core commerce system,
and artificial intelligence (AI). describing which components are
necessary and how to assemble
The ODA consists of a business them. By adopting the Canvas, CSPs
architecture, which describes in and software suppliers will be able to
business terms what CSPs and their test compatibility of commercial
partners want to achieve, and a solutions.

TM Forum Open Digital Architecture Reference Implementaon

Choose process
Assign subscriber rights
Billing account, pay Customer Payment
Welcome
API hub

Manage party informaon management

Party Management
Engagement Management

management
Pre-sales Invoicing
Party (360-degree view)
Rights Launch configuraon subprocesses Copy bill
Billing account, invoice (offer for create, contract for change) items
Manage catalog
Manage offer Order
Front ends

Configure offer & product Bill calculaon

Validate order & product capture
catalog Core Commerce
Customer order Management
Catalog orchestraon & Order Rang & usage
BOS follow-up
Order distribuon follow-up
Contract

Service order Usage

Legend elements/CDR
Business enty-
to-business enty Manage Service order
Process technical management Charging
catalog Producon
Business event

Process (GUI Read (data) Service usage

exchanges)

TM Forum, 2020

inform.tmforum.org 11
Section 2
Glass and black box
Since the inception of the BOS
project, CSPs and suppliers have been
debating about the balance between
glass box and black box components,
and whether the ODA Reference
Implementation can be considered an
open source project. We’ll discuss this
more in the next section, but it’s
important to point out that all
interested parties are adamant that
the aim of the project is not to build
applications that replace the
commercial offerings of today’s BSS
vendors.
Rather, the project focuses on how to
ensure that CSPs can integrate
different products from different
vendors, swap one out for another,
and add products without the need
for lengthy, costly customization. But
deciding exactly what the
components are is difficult. In the BSS
market, not all vendors offer similar
components. As Dr. Lester Thomas,
Chief Systems Architect, Vodafone
Group, acknowledges:
“
Breaking BSS down into
separate components is
very difficult, and we don’t
know how to do it yet.”
As Thomas explained in Section 1 (see
page 6), TM Forum’s Application
Framework (TAM), which is a systems
map that captures how business
capabilities are implemented in
deployable, recognizable applications,
is not specific enough to allow
operators to swap components from
different vendors in and out.
Nevertheless, something like this is
needed – although it must be
software­defined.
Given efforts to move towards
microservices architectures in cloud
software generally, there could be a
case for adopting such an approach in
BSS. However, decomposing existing
BSS applications categories would be
extremely complicated and time­
consuming and would likely be seen
as a direct challenge to many of
today’s BSS vendors. As such, the
project team has ruled out a
microservices architecture because it
would be too granular to specify.
Instead, they are seeking to define
components which will resemble
existing BSS applications. Such
components are likely to have five to
10 services within them.
More partners
The ODA Reference Implementation
project is unusual for a TM Forum
collaboration project because the
team is creating software code. Most
TM Forum initiatives involve defining
a common language or establishing
inform.tmforum.org
best practices and information models
to make it easier to do business.
However, for the ODA Reference
Implementation to be successful, it
needs more partners. Says Thomas:
“
We need every multinational
telco and 30 to 40 vendors to
come on board. We are at
5% to 10% of where we need
to be. We need to get early
components out the door
and to do quick [proofs of
concept].”
At TM Forum’s Digital Transformation
event in Dallas in September, two
more companies, Netcracker and
Oracle, expressed an interest in
working on some components. For
the project as a whole to retain
momentum it is important to get
different components standardized
and put into a GIT repository.
In the next section, we’ll look at the
challenges to getting the ODA
Reference Implementation off the
ground, the relationship between
ODA and the Open Network
Automation Platform, and how
suppliers can benefit from ODA.
12
Section 3
Challenges to adopting ODA
“As things stand today we don’t have the resources. They’ve got to come from somewhere,
and I don’t know how that’s going to happen.”
Vance Shipley, CEO and Founder, Sigscale
The proposal for the Open Digital
Architecture Reference
Implementation is extremely
compelling, but that does not mean it
will happen. For the initiative to
succeed, communications service
providers (CSPs) must collaborate,
and they must commit staff and
financial resources to the projects. In
addition, a critical mass of suppliers
must recognize and accept that if they
do not embrace a new approach, they
may not continue to win CSPs’
business.
As a model, the team is looking to the
Open Network Automation Platform
(ONAP) open source project, which is
building a platform for real­time,
policy­driven orchestration and
automation of physical and virtual
network functions. ONAP, which is
managed by the Linux Foundation,
was formed in 2017 through a merger
of two open source projects founded
by AT&T (which contributed a large
proportion of the software code) and
China Mobile. Other key players
including Orange, Vodafone, Reliance
Jio, Deutsche Telekom, Ericsson and
Nokia also support the project.
inform.tmforum.org
Comparing architectures
ODA and ONAP are complementary.
Looking again at the ODA Reference
Implementation architecture (see
page 14), the core commerce system
focuses on customer­facing business
support system (BSS) functionality,
such as order capture, orchestration
and billing, while ONAP works in the
Production layer, focusing on
network­facing operational support
system (OSS) functionality such as
orchestration and management of the
technical catalog and inventory.
13
Section 3

TM Forum Open Digital Architecture Reference Implementaon

Choose process
Assign subscriber rights
Billing account, pay Customer Payment
Welcome
API hub

Manage party informaon management

Party Management
Engagement Management

management
Pre-sales Invoicing
Party (360-degree view)
Rights Launch configuraon subprocesses Copy bill
Billing account, invoice (offer for create, contract for change) items
Manage catalog
Manage offer Order
Front ends

Configure offer & product Bill calculaon

Validate order & product capture
catalog Core Commerce
Customer order Management
Catalog orchestraon & Order Rang & usage
BOS follow-up
Order distribuon follow-up
Contract

Service order Usage

Legend elements/CDR
Business enty-
to-business enty Manage Service order
Process technical management Charging
catalog Producon
Business event

Process (GUI Read (data) Service usage

exchanges)

TM Forum, 2020

ODA and ONAP both envision the project’s overall success and impact In addition, opinions vary widely as to
creation of a common architecture on the industry remain somewhat whether ONAP is production­
that allows suppliers to develop unclear. deployable or whether it needs to be
differentiated features on top. heavily customized for different CSPs.
Similarly, integrators would be freed The process of creating a new In short, the challenge for initiatives
up to focus on helping CSPs develop architecture has taken longer than such as ONAP (and ODA) lies in
innovative products and services, was originally envisaged when ONAP securing the involvement of a critical
rather than spending all their time on was started, but in the meantime, mass of working partners and
complex integration tasks. technology has evolved. Network contributors while at the same time
functions virtualization (NFV), for moving fast enough to capture the
Now in its fifth release, ONAP example, has become yesterday’s benefits of the latest technology.
includes several million lines of code, story, while the focus now is on
and its technical committee cloud­native technologies that use
represents a veritable who’s who of containers and microservices.
CSPs and vendors. Even so, the

inform.tmforum.org 14
Section 3
Convincing suppliers
As more CSPs join the ODA initiative,
pressure will increase on vendors to
collaborate. If a supplier’s biggest
clients are on board with a technology
project, it is difficult not to support it.
However, and in the meantime, it is
important to promote the potential
benefits of ODA purely from the
perspective of vendor’s own
technology, product roadmaps and
commercial strategies.
Some suppliers are
suspicious that operators
want to create deployable
open source code, which
would represent a direct
threat to their business. But
CSP members of the ODA
project team have stated
emphatically and repeatedly
that this is not the aim of
the project, neither short
nor long term. The aim is to
produce a reference
implementation only.
Even if suppliers can be persuaded
that the ODA Reference
Implementation is not a direct threat,
it still represents a big change in the
business model for vendors whose
revenue includes fees for
customization and maintenance. Even
though CSPs have moved to protect
themselves from over­spending on
customization through tighter
contractual terms, this remains a big
business for many vendors.
Furthermore, if successful, the ODA
Reference Implementation could pave
the way for new vendors of cloud­
based systems to enter the market.
5G as a Catalyst
Perhaps the best chance for CSPs to
“win the argument” about the need
for a new approach to BSS is to
include it in the discussion about 5G
business models and new lines of
business. Such discussions should
focus on two areas:
The need for CSPs to reduce
the cost and complexity and
increase agility of BSS in
order to increase the chances of
success for new lines of business.
The potential for vendors to
$ build new businesses and
capabilities to support these
services and reduce their dependency
on legacy BSS revenues.
Even though CSPs want to diversify
beyond connectivity, they want to
retain the business model – a monthly
recurring fee – for whatever services
they provide. Increasingly these will
be software­based services. As such,
the CSPs will be using the tried and
tested software­as­a­service (SaaS)
approach used by digital service
providers (DSPs).
As noted in Section 1, there is little
innovation or differentiation in BSS
among DSPs. It is merely a tool for
delivering a subscription­based
service. The players are also different
in the digital world. Consider Zuora,
which provides software for
businesses to launch and manage
their subscription­based services. The
company is now marketing itself to
CSPs with a service which, it says,
“lets telecom providers launch
services fast.”
inform.tmforum.org
CSPs must reduce the cost of IT in
order to make services such as the
internet of things (IoT) profitable. The
value of connectivity in the context of
IoT services is already trending
towards zero. For example, China
Mobile reported that it had 551
million IoT connections at the end of
2018 and that its IoT business
generated revenues of RMB7.53
billion ($1.09 billion). This is
equivalent to just $0.165 per month,
nearly 50 times less than the ARPU
for its core mobile business. While
China Mobile has not reported on the
profitability of its IoT business, unless
it transitions to new, low­cost, cloud­
based IT, it seems highly unlikely that
IoT will remain a profitable business
(assuming it is indeed profitable).
Such an outlook for BSS requirements
represents an extreme challenge for
vendors. On the other hand, and in
stark contrast to the existing telecoms
business, IoT and other subscription­
based services represent pure growth
and new markets. Furthermore,
volumes will ultimately be much larger
than for the core telecoms business.
From a vendor’s perspective, margins
will be lower, but the business could
become more profitable. In addition,
the opportunity exists (or will exist)
for vendors of back­end systems to
extend the services that they provide
to CSPs’ customers, where data will
be core to the product itself and
customer experience will be a
differentiator.
In the next section, we’ll outline some
steps CSPs and suppliers can take
now to reimagine BSS.
15
Section 4
Make it happen: Join the ODA team

Aside from application program interfaces (APIs), TM Forum members traditionally have not
created software code. But in order for the Open Digital Architecture (ODA) project to enable
real change, a critical mass of communications service providers (CSPs) and suppliers must
collaborate on a reference implementation. Below are some recommendations for getting
started. If you would like to learn more about ODA or to join the project, please contact TM
Forum’s VP, Architecture & APIs, George Glass.

Collaborate on software Think long term Build a business case

Dr. Lester Thomas, Chief Systems
Architect, Vodafone Group, who is one
of the original founders of the Business
Operating System Catalyst (see page
11), believes that every multinational
telco and 30 to 40 vendors must
participate in the ODA project.
Bringing CSPs on board will be easier
than recruiting 30 to 40 suppliers. The
potential long­term gains for CSPs are
clear, but for suppliers the
development of a core commerce
system reference implementation
represents a step into the unknown
and commitment to a project that
could cause short­term business model
disruption.
CSPs must do their best to convince
suppliers that everyone will benefit
from ODA long term. Realistically, it will
take several years for the ODA vision –
and related architectural and software
assets – to be developed. The Open
Network Automation Platform (ONAP)
project was officially launched three
years ago (and the two initiatives that
combined to form ONAP, a year before
then). Today ONAP is on its fifth
software release, but its eventual
success and adoption is still by no
means guaranteed.
The CSPs we interviewed for this
report are confident about the business
benefits of ODA. Cost savings resulting
from a dramatic reduction in the level
of customization is the clearest benefit,
but greater agility could also drive
revenue by helping CSPs respond
quickly to market opportunities.
However, until technology teams can
articulate these business benefits, for
example by putting together a proper
business case and demonstration of
return on investment, it may prove
difficult to attract the interest or
support of senior management.

inform.tmforum.org 16
Section 4
Consider 5G
CSPs globally are focusing on how,
when and why to deploy 5G networks,
so it’s a good time to put forward
initiatives that help to build a case for
rolling out the new technology.
Monetizing 5G is a concern for every
CSP. If IT teams can demonstrate to
business leaders that reimagining BSS
can help with monetization, they are
more likely to win support.
Hone software skills
CSP that lack in­house software talent
will have a tough time evolving to a
modular, configurable BSS. This could
be a bigger challenge for Tier 2 and 3
operators which may simply lack the
resources to recruit new software
teams, but this should be a goal.
inform.tmforum.org 17
Additional features & resources
19 | The future of BSS lies in the public cloud
23 | Operators Need Digital BSS to Innovate in the
Platform Driven Ecosystem Economy
26 | TM Forum Open Digital Framework
27 | TM Forum research reports
28 | Meet the Research & Media team
The Future of BSS Lies in
the Public Cloud
Predicting the future can be a challenge. But one thing is clear. In 10 years, the BSS of every
telco will be on, or far along the way to, public cloud. To understand the future of BSS, let’s
explore the current challenges (and opportunities) that face most telecoms.
At a high level, BSS allows telcos to
monetize their core products, services,
and partner solutions, while also aiming
to provide tools to craft the best
experience for their customers. Over
time, operators have tailored these
systems to the extreme in an effort to
address a multitude of market demands.
This practice has created layer upon
layer of customizations, also known as
technical debt, making future changes
much more complex and resource­
intensive, as legacy customizations
migrate from version to version.
Therefore, many times operators have
had to remain on the same monolithic
applications they acquired years ago —
missing an opportunity to evolve and
capitalize on the latest market trends.
Operators, however, are now
reconsidering this approach as they
evaluate their needs for upgrades and
digital transformation. The liability of
those legacy systems — aging, holding
heavy technical debt, and preventing
CSPs from utilizing business
opportunities — also makes the
systems inefficient and costly.
Given these realities, Optiva believes
the future of BSS involves three major
changes. And the public cloud is a
stimulus for these changes — namely,
BSS delivered on the public cloud will
afford telecoms access to
technologies available only on the
public cloud. This transformation will
allow telecoms to compete and meet
future market needs without the
complexities of customizations.
1. Migrating to the public
cloud (because private
cloud is a fake cloud)
Only public cloud — with its virtually
unlimited, standard compute power
and holistic software and solution
portfolio — offers you scale,
performance, and security. Public
cloud allows you to stop constantly
buying and refreshing hardware,
managing viruses, and handling its
lifecycle. Private cloud, mistakenly
confused with public cloud, is, in
reality, just on­premise in disguise,
offering only virtualization.
One of the primary public cloud
benefits — the massive cost savings —
demonstrates a major difference. When
comparing the different deployment
options, you will find that while public
cloud can help you save up to 80% on
your BSS costs, private cloud is actually
even more expensive than running
applications on bare metal.
But there is a “right way” to achieve
these results. Simply running an
application on a cloud will not suffice.
Instead, look at the public cloud as
more than an infrastructure or
hardware provider, and make sure you
leverage the public cloud capabilities
inform.tmforum.org
when you build your applications as
well as deliver and manage them.
2. How to build your
application (hint: it must
be cloud native)
There is a tendency to use the term
“cloud native” without truly
understanding what it is or its real, full
potential. For some telco CTOs,
vendor use of terminology, such as
“cloud ready,” can be misleading. The
consequence can be a steep learning
curve when making the transition to
cloud and a loss of potential savings.
Cloud native does not mean just
running on the cloud — and the use
of containers is not enough either.
You need decomposed architecture
and the use of public cloud solutions
versus third­party, proprietary, legacy
solutions on the ground.
Cloud native means that an application
is built from the ground up to work on
the public cloud, and it means that you
can leverage its compute power and, as
an extension, the powerful software
and solutions cloud native make
available to you. Cloud native BSS
integrates more quickly with other
applications and solutions also running
on the public cloud or offered by public
cloud vendors. This is how you
leverage the power of the public cloud,
get its game­changing benefits, and
satisfy your market requirements
more efficiently.
19
3. How to deliver and
manage it (it’s all
about SaaS)
Software as a service is not just a
business model that enables telco
operators to move from CAPEX and a
perpetual license to a term license —
from “owning” a solution and its
operational liability to receiving a
service. SaaS is also a way to deliver
software and manage it — making it “as
a service” is just the beginning. SaaS
allows customers to deploy multi­
tenancy applications with their own
configuration over a generic product.
With that, they can enjoy a constant
stream and introduction of new
functionalities and features as their
specific tenant version is constantly
updated based on the generally
available product on the public cloud.
Our Products
Optiva is the leader in providing
telecom operators with cloud­native
“
The big question for most
operators is how to embrace
cloud-native applications and
public cloud. The “lift and
shift” approach of cloud
enabling an entire application
and putting it into a container
can deliver some quick
benefits … but this approach
does not leverage all of public
cloud’s advantages.”
George Glass, VP, Architecture & APIs,
TM Forum CSPs need an evolutionary
architecture to embrace cloud, Sep 2019
revenue management software on the
public cloud. Operators globally are
leveraging our re­architected products
and discovering the proven benefits.
Optiva offers its customers two
leading products that provide
operators two times faster time to
market and the lowest TCO with up
to 80% savings.
Optiva BSS Platform™, re­architected
and made available on the public cloud,
is Optiva’s new entry into the SaaS
market. It provides unlimited capacity
with a worry­free, pay­as­you­grow
model. The multi­tenant, best­in­suite
platform is a fully managed, end­to­
end, cloud­native product. Therefore, it
allows operators to focus on their
business, not on deploying and
managing enterprise software.
Optiva Charging Engine™ is a flexible,
robust, end­to­end converged charging
solution optimized for the world’s
largest CSPs. Whether your customer
base is 5M or 500M, the unique
pricing model, functionality, and
Optiva’s Cloud Journey
The road from traditional/legacy to
future­ready BSS includes five steps.
This is the journey that Optiva made
over the last three years with its
pledge to invest US$100M in cloud
roadmap. This was not a “one and
done” or “lift and shift” strategy as
employed by other vendors because
such an approach will not give access
to the real and full benefits of the
public cloud.
1. Decomposition and
containerization
Optiva implements the “12­Factor
App” methodology to support its
decomposition process.
inform.tmforum.org
scalability enable 10 times database
performance and make it the best
OSS/BSS solution for telco innovators.
“
“The cost of customizations
is not linear. Every
customization adds
complexity and technical
debt, increasing the time and
cost to complete upgrades
exponentially and making it
very difficult to keep the
underlying technology
current. CSPs believe they
must customize software to
improve the customer
experience, when in reality it
is the opposite.”
Danielle Royston, CEO, Optiva
n Decomposition and containerization
of function and business domains
and subdomains to be self­
contained and scalable based on
the business needs (e.g., charging
types, campaigning, notifications,
renewal) and functional subdomain
(e.g., rating, charging, balance
handler, protocol handler)
n Reusability across multiple
functions, such as cache
management, monitoring, and
notifications
n Application of Kubernetes to
orchestrate and manage different
containers as the CI/CD pipeline
and automated operational
infrastructure for handling
optimized elasticity and scalability
20
2. Use of public cloud products
Optiva leverages new, advanced
technologies and software solutions
available only on the public cloud,
such as orchestration framework,
database management, and security.
This equips Optiva’s customers to
leverage the large investments made
by public cloud vendors and open
source organizations, and it gives
them access to the most mature and
advanced software solutions for
business application development and
operation. Public cloud products are
optimal replacements for traditional,
legacy, third­party software because
they combine the technology and
feature fit for digital use (e.g., scaling,
automation, always­on, ease of use)
along with the reduced risk of a SaaS
model. For example, Optiva replaced
Oracle with Cloud Spanner, which is
available only on Google Cloud
Platform. This database management
solution on the public cloud meets
Optiva’s application needs in a way
that Oracle could not (and at 1/10 of
the cost). Some of these requirements
that Cloud Spanner provides include a
relational structure with horizontal
scaling capabilities, distributed
capabilities with strong consistency,
high availability, SLA, and built­in
disaster recovery capabilities.
3. Open architecture
Optiva implements an open­
architecture approach to its products,
allowing:
n Ease of integration to other
solutions in the overall OSS/BSS
stack and complementary solutions
in the ecosystem, using standard
TM Forum OpenAPI as a reference
model
n Enhanced functionalities with
available cloud­based products,
such as specifically­embed artificial
intelligence (AI) and machine
learning (ML) tool outputs to be
used for the optimization of
different Optiva product processes
Optiva products provide data and
data processing transparency,
supporting access to system data to
facilitate the use of the information
for ML and AI tools (e.g., BigTable,
BigQuery), and provide easy access to
its real­time event stream through its
event service bus for consumption by
other applications in the operator
ecosystem.
inform.tmforum.org
4. Productization
A major stepping stone on the road to
offering a complete SaaS model is to
fully productize the application and
remove technical debt. This is
achieved while also maintaining the
ability to satisfy multiple digital
service providers’ (DSPs’) needs,
which vary between markets and
services. It is achieved only through
application of the following
guidelines:
n Incorporate legacy customizations
to main product functionalities
n Maximize configuration capabilities
for the product and transition from
heavy customization to flexible
configuration
n Include in the core product
development roadmap all new
features and functionalities defined
as relevant
n Use CI/CD as a method for
managing the introduction of new
functionalities to be rolled out to all
production instances — by
productizing the solutions and
introducing constant automated
rollout of capabilities, there is
elimination of software end­of­life,
and operators always have access
to and are using the latest product
version without need for heavy
version upgrades
21
5. SaaS business model
The cloud economy introduces new commercial business models and creates a new SaaS approach that offers new
benefits and value around commercial flexibility for operators. To achieve this, Optiva offers its solution in a flexible “pay­
as­you­go” subscription fee that does not require major CAPEX investment or large upfront investments. Smaller
operations and new lines of business may start small, grow, and pay upon an increase in demand. Doing so helps reduce
risks and better aligns spending with generated revenues. It also allows service providers to enjoy fully managed
operations, including infrastructure management, software management, and business operations on the public cloud,
reducing operators’ ongoing internal operational costs.

Telecom operators have been customizing their BSS applications over the years to tailor them to meet market
demands. Unfortunately, many times that was not the outcome, and those big monoliths with layers of
customization failed to be agile enough to provide the customer experience required by today's empowered
customers. It also proved to be very expensive for operators and not cost effective.

To change that, operators are moving BSS applications to the public cloud with Optiva, and they are doing so with
a productized offering, cloud­native architecture, and the “as­a­service” model. This approach allows our customers
to enjoy the real benefits of the public cloud — up to 80% savings on their BSS total cost, a flexible commercial
model, seamless access to powerful innovation, increased agility, and faster time­to­market.

inform.tmforum.org 22
Operators Need Digital BSS
to Innovate in the Platform
Driven Economy
The telecom business environment and the competitive landscape are changing radically.
Operators are no longer only competing with each other, but against a raft of disruptive and
innovative players that have entered their market. 5G is acting as a catalyst for further
disruption, opening up many opportunities, including other industry verticals competing for
value added services’ revenues. At the same time, operators themselves are increasingly
delivering services through or with partners in ecosystems.

To innovate and compete in this
market, the role of BSS is
fundamental and crucial to support
the fast­changing requirements. BSS
is the monetization engine, but in the
digital era, it’s no longer only about
billing and charging for a core
portfolio three or four services; now
operators are competing in platform­
based economy where innovation is
created through partner ecosystems.
Even before 5G becomes mainstream,
operators are providing a wealth of
services, from banking to smart
healthcare, security, and much more
themselves and with partners. As
their revenues from consumers either
flattens out or falls, most are looking
to their enterprise customers and
business­to­business (B2B) and
B2B2X opportunities for growth
beyond connectivity.This is
highlighted by Vivo, the subsidiary of
the Telefonica Group operating in
Brazil, where Netcracker’s Digital BSS
solution enables Vivo to set and
manage product pricing, promotions
and delivery strategies across its
diverse enterprise lines of business,
resulting in a better experience for its
B2B customers.
Digital BSS must be able to aggregate
services, accommodate changing
relationships with partners and other
players, faster and with greater
flexibility, to support new business
models. BSS is a cornerstone of
innovation, and we can expect future
functional characteristics to embrace
flexibility, cloud scale, intelligence and
multi­channel engagement. Let’s take
a look at some of the critical
functional areas that Digital BSS must
enable.
Going cloud native
BSS of the future must have a cloud­
native architecture, to provide
unprecedented levels of flexibility and
scale due to its modular nature and
adaptability. Cloud native
architectures will allow operators to
leverage the cloud’s multi­tenancy
characteristics to build consistency of
process across OpCos, scale based on
service demands, minimize
customization and significantly reduce
time and cost for development.
Cross-industry loyalty
schemes
At first glance, this might not look like
a must­have for Digital BSS, but
loyalty schemes that cross borders
between sectors will become
increasingly important, reaching way
beyond the bounds of voice, data and
video consumption, and service
adoption. The disrupter here is the
new mobile operator, Rakuten Mobile
in Japan. Its parent company, also
Rakuten, operates in more than 70
sectors and its customer membership
and loyalty scheme spans all of them,
from loans, credit cards, travel and
insurance to a wide range of
consumer goods.
Customers are offered a whole
lifestyle experience that isn’t matched
by any other e­commerce giant.
Rakuten intends to take its mobile
business and deployment model –
building a cloud­native infrastructure
from scratch – global. The parent
company already operates in some
capacity in more than 29 countries
and regions, and has more than 1
billion customers.

inform.tmforum.org 23
Multiple vertical
businesses
As 5G has already demonstrated, the
potential revenue from vertical­
centric services is tied to the actual
ability to build a profitable partner­
ready business model that sets a
value, prices and bills for these new
services. As such, BSS must be able
to support multiple vertical
businesses and their various models
simultaneously. Consider platform
providers such as Amazon Web
Services, Google Ads and YouTube…all
are successful because partners
clearly understand how they can use
them to earn revenue. To compete,
operators must offer this facility, and
ensure it is easy for partners to use
and benefit from. Being easy to do
business with is the first rule for
successful business, and this is even
more so as part of an ecosystem.
B2B2X business models
Enabling multiple business models
necessitates having a multi­rated,
multi­tenanted Digital BSS to support
partners and other players who
themselves need to rate and charge
for services, then bill their own
customers accurately and quickly. This
keeps the order­to­cash cycle as tight
as possible, yet still allows for
flexibility in the way revenues are
divided or shared.
New payment mechanisms
The number of new payment
mechanisms has expanded over time,
giving the end customer newfound
flexibility in how to consume and pay
for services. This trend will continue,
thus extending BSS capabilities
beyond electronic fund transfer and
credit cards, to handle Apple Pay,
digital currencies, and near­field
communications (NFC) for contactless
payments.
Partner management and
multi-party payments
Managing partners and related
services are now a ubiquitous part of
virtual every operator’s service
ecosystem, where different partners
typically offer a variety of value­added
services and complement the
operator’s existing service offerings.
This means partner management and
management of multi­party payments
must be embedded in BSS. Partner
related service revenues will likely will
be paid in different ways
(subscription, ad hoc, pay as you go,
and so on), and also may need to be
split between various parties.
For instance, an operator selling
security services through a partner on
a subscription basis of $10 or $20 a
month may need a three way revenue
share between the security service
provider, the operator and any other
partner involved. Also of note is how
certain services will have multiple
touch points which BSS must manage
effectively.
Opportunities at the edge
BSS will be key in enabling operators to
leverage the newfound power at the
edge The ability to support new, low­
latency services is already bring
accelerated in every sense by 5G, Thus,
BSS layer must be able to provide
distributed rating and charging, and
online charging across the edge.
The edge sites collectively create a
wider range of application and service
options which can be dynamically
switched at different times of day, for
example, or to relieve congestion,
relying on the dynamism of cloud­
native network functions and
infrastructure. Maximizing the value of
the edge requires a BSS that can be
equally dynamic and adaptable to allow
operators to extract the most value out
of their resources for their own internal
efficiencies, but also to give their
customers the best quality of services,
and their customers’ customers too.
inform.tmforum.org
Customer engagement
Revenue management aside, the
other key to innovating and
competing in the digital world is how
effectively operators engage with
their customers. At work and in their
private lives, customers are used to
the level of service provided by digital
natives and have come to expect it
from all their providers. This puts
pressure on the operator to enable
multi­channel communications, data
integration across those channels to
ensure customer activities are visible
and understood regardless of the end
point, and ensure that service
promised are in fact services
delivered.
Intelligent customer
journeys
Applying artificial intelligence (AI) to
customers’ journeys allows an
operator to constantly evolve how it
engages with customer based on
what it ‘learns’ about their behaviour,
needs and preferences. This could
range from which channels they tend
to use at what time of day for what
purposes and how they like to be
communicated with.
Proactive, not reactive, care
Intelligent proactive care that uses
data intelligence to support early
action helps address any issues that
arise before they turn into problems,
helping to prevent churn and increase
customer satisfaction. Plain and
simple…if you’re not providing
satisfactory service to your
customers, you are likely losing
customers and losing revenue.
Pricing and promotions
Being able to offer dynamic pricing
and promotions to customers at the
most appropriate moment, such as
reaching data capacity, location based
offers, or cross­sell/upsell create new
opportunities for greater customer
satisfaction, loyalty and revenues.
24
The case for digital BSS
Netcracker's cloud­native Digital BSS
solution ensures operator's ability to
reduce costs and unlock new revenue
streams by monetizing cross­service
offerings and multipartner business
models. Netcracker's solution enables
analytics­driven dynamic discounts
and promotions, as well as cross­
channel, real­time interactions so you
can deliver a superior customer
experience and drive your evolution
into a digital service provider. All
Netcracker solutions are equipped
with our best­in­class security
features to keep CSPs customer,
service, operations and network data
secure.
Netcracker’s end to end Digital BSS
and OSS is already helping Telefónica
become more efficient today, by
speeding up service delivery,
implementing zero­touch provisioning
and unifying product and services
bundles through a single catalog.
Telefónica Business Solutions will
leverage Netcracker's full Revenue
Management solution, including
converged rating and billing
capabilities. In particular, Netcracker is
helping the company accelerate its
order­to­cash cycles and build a
foundation on which to deliver and
manage new revenue­generating
services.
In summary, Digital BSS is all about
helping to reimagine the scope and
capabilities of operators’ businesses in
the future – always remembering that
the future starts right now.

About Netcracker
Netcracker was founded in 1993, and has been a wholly­owned subsidiary of NEC Corporation since 2008. Driven
by its focus on R&D, Netcracker’s end­to­end product portfolio and related professional services enable
telecommunications and cable service providers, utilities, financial services, logistics and other business services
providers to transform their mission critical back office and front office processes.

Netcracker offers an extensive range of solutions for digital service providers, such as business service innovation,
5G and digital service monetization, IT transformation, hybrid network operations. The company has over 250
customers across more than 60 countries in the Americas, Europe, MEA, and APAC regions. Netcracker remains
steadfast and focused on enabling monetization of any service on any network, bringing together 5G­ready
components that enable proactive customer engagement, dynamic pricing and bundling, partner powered business
models, and targeted AI driven customer engagement.

Netcracker’s Digital BSS solution is the optimal choice for service providers looking for a converged platform to
optimize customer experience, monetize innovative new services and provide a foundation for business agility.

inform.tmforum.org 25
TM Forum Open Digital
Framework

Delivering the tools to go from concept to cash in just 18 days

The TM Forum Open Digital
Framework is an interactive,
continuously evolving collection of
tools, knowledge and standards
that give communications service
providers (CSPs) an end­to­end
migration path from legacy systems
to modular, cloud­native IT
components. Simply put, it is a
blueprint for service providers to
deliver intelligent operations fit for
the 5G era.

A prototype version of the

framework is available now for TM
Forum members to explore. It is
being developed through the TM
Forum Collaboration Program and
Catalyst Program, and builds on the
success of the Forum’s established
Open APIs and the Frameworx
suite of standards. Specifically, it
includes:
n Open Digital Architecture (ODA)
– an enterprise architecture
blueprint, common language and
key design principles for modular,
cloud­based, open digital
platforms that can be
orchestrated using AI
n Open APIs – 50+ standardized
REST­based APIs to facilitate
zero­touch integration and zero­
touch partnering
n Data & AI standards – an
industry­agreed data model,
together with standards
maximizing the potential of AI to
enhance customer experience
and increase operational
efficiency
n Reference implementations – a
framework for assembling and
validating ODA components in
the Forum’s Open Digital Lab,
fostering the creation of a
services marketplace
n Practical guidance – guides and
videos showing how the Open
Digital Framework can be used
to transform the core business
and enable new business growth
n Foundational libraries –
normalized models providing a
common language for business
processes and information that
simplifies and de­risks
transformation projects
The goal of the Open Digital
Framework is to help service
providers increase agility and
drastically reduce the development
cycle for products and services
from 18 months to 18 days. Much
of the collaborative work that is
part of the framework is already
available, but it helps to organize it
and make it more accessible. The
framework is a work in progress
and will improve through
crowdsourcing.
If you would like to learn more
about the project or how to get
involved in the TM Forum
Collaboration Community, please
contact Andy Tiller.

inform.tmforum.org 26
TM Forum research reports

HOW TO LEVERAGE
DATA ANALYTICS
Author: Mark Newman, Chief Analyst
Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
December 2019

Author: Tim McElligo, Senior Analyst

Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
December 2019

Sponsors: Sponsors:

inform.tmforum.org inform.tmforum.org

FUTURE OSS: TOWARDS AN 5G FUTURE: TARGETING

OPEN DIGITAL ARCHITECTURE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION
TRACKER ASIA: SEIZING THE ENTERPRISE
NEW OPPORTUNITIES
Author: Tim McElligo, Senior Analyst
Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor Authors: Tim McElligo, Senior Analyst & Mark Newman, Chief Analyst
November 2019 Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
September 2019
Author: Mark Newman, Chief Analyst
Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
November 2019
DTT
DDTTT

TTT
DT
D
Sponsor:
Sponsor: Sponsor:

inform.tmforum.org
inform.tmforum.org inform.tmforum.org

May 2019 | www.tmforum.org

May 2019 | www.tmforum.org

5G: EVOLUTION
AND REVOLUTION
Author: Mike Hibberd, Contribung Analyst
Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
April 2019

NETWORK
BL CKCHAIN: AS A SERVICE:
ADDRESSING THE FULL
WHERE’S THE VALUE ENTERPRISE
FOR TELEC MS? OPPORTUNITY
Author: Tim McElligott, Senior Analyst
Author: Paul Ridgewell, Contributing Analyst Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
Editor: Dawn Bushaus, Managing Editor
Sponsors:

inform.tmforum.org

inform.tmforum.org 27
Meet the Research & Media team

Report Design:
Report Author: Report Editor:
Intuitive Design UK Ltd
Mark Newman Dawn Bushaus
info@intuitive­design.co.uk
Chief Analyst Managing Editor
mnewman@tmforum.org dbushaus@tmforum.org Published by:
TM Forum
4 Century Drive,
Senior Analyst: Editor, Digital Content: Parsippany,
NJ 07054
Tim McElligott Arti Mehta
USA
tmcelligott@tmforum.org amehta@tmforum.org
www.tmforum.org
Phone: +1 973­944­5100
Fax: +1 973­944­5110
ISBN: 978­1­945220­67­8
Customer Success & Commercial Manager,
Operations Manager: Research & Media:
Ali Groves Tim Edwards
agroves@tmforum.org tedwards@tmforum.org

Global Account Director: Digital Marketing

Carine Vandevelde Manager:
cvandevelde@tmforum.org Anna Kurmanbaeva
akurmanbaeva@tmforum.org

© 2020. The entire contents of this publication are protected by copyright. All rights reserved. The Forum would like to thank the sponsors and advertisers who have enabled
the publication of this fully independently researched report. The views and opinions expressed by individual authors and contributors in this publication are provided in the
writers’ personal capacities and are their sole responsibility. Their publication does not imply that they represent the views or opinions of TM Forum and must neither be
regarded as constituting advice on any matter whatsoever, nor be interpreted as such. The reproduction of advertisements and sponsored features in this publication does not
in any way imply endorsement by TM Forum of products or services referred to therein.

inform.tmforum.org 28
For more about TM Forum’s Open Digital Architecture Project,
please contact George Glass