The Smart City Podcast

Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Reliability - Terry O'Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.Com at The ARC Americas Forum 2022

July 27, 2022 The Smart Cities Team at ARC Advisory Group Season 7 Episode 2
The Smart City Podcast
Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Reliability - Terry O'Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.Com at The ARC Americas Forum 2022
Show Notes Transcript


Jim Frazer talks with Terry O'Hanlon , Publisher and CEO of Reliabilityweb.com®, Uptime® Magazine, and the Reliability Leadership Institute™  about RELIABILITY!  Terry discusses his aim of: Making the world work for everyone, with no one left behind, and his mission of: Making the people we serve safe, sustainable and successful

In addition to his various pursuits Terry is the executive director of The Association of Asset Management Professionals, a 501 [C3] Not For Profit association dedicated to contributing to creating Reliability Leaders who create a new future.

Would you like to be a guest on The Smart City Podcast?

If you have an intriguing, thought provoking topic you'd like to discuss on our podcast, please contact our host Jim Frazer

View all The Smart City Podcast episodes here: https://thesmartcitypodcast.buzzsprout.com/

ARC Advisory Introduction:

Broadcasting from Boston, Massachusetts the Smart Cities podcast is the only podcast dedicated to all things smart cities. The podcast is the creation of aarC advisory group Smart City practice. aarC advises leading companies, municipalities and governments on technology trends and market dynamics that affect their business and quality of life in their cities. To engage further, please like and share our podcasts or reach out directly on Twitter at Smart City viewpoints or on our website at WWW dot aarC web.com backslash industries backslash smart dash cities

Jim Frazer:

Welcome to another episode of the smart city Podcast. Today. We're broadcasting live from Orlando, Florida at the 26th annual aarC forum. And on today's episode, we'll be talking about reliability with Terry O'Hanlon of reliability Web. Terry, welcome to our podcast.

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

Hey, it's so great to be a guest here. I've been watching you really working this weekend. Happy to have this conversation with you and your listeners.

Jim Frazer:

It's great to have you. Well, let's just start with a foundational question. Can you tell us a little bit about yourself and how you came to the world reliability domain?

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

Yeah, I was I came kind of through condition monitoring, I was the CEO of a sensor company that sets high frequency that would give you an early indication of when there was a machinery reliability issue. So that was That's one small part of reliability. And then and at&t actually came to me in the early 90s, and said, Have you ever heard of the internet? And I said, Well, I've heard of it. It was maybe before Al Gore invented it. And they invited me down to a place called Bell Laboratories, I worked with the 10 people, 10 engineers who became World Net services, and published one of the first 5000 commercial websites on the internet. And so I was kind of an early adopter to HTML one, that we use a product called Vermeer front page, and it became you know, really Microsoft's premier product. So was an early adopter of web and really understood the power of giving information directly to the readers. I mean, prior to that all the reliability information was really locked up with consultants and technology companies. And all of a sudden, we were sort of turning the industry on its head because we were providing information. At that time, there was no revenue on the web. So you know, the whole idea was to get audience and that's what we did, we took off and that audience. So then then, you know, at that point in time, and I guess I'll tell you one more thing is that John Bovary, one of the gentlemen who brought Reliability centered maintenance out of the airline industry to, to regular industry had a had something called detected maintenance where you were using these instruments to determine if there was any problems. I love Sherlock Holmes. So as soon as he said, detected maintenance, I'm like I am and, and it turned out to be reliability. And I started to learn the breadth and the depth of reliability. As a sensor manufacturer. For me, everything was censor, censor, censor, censor, was the answer for everything. But once I started to get exposed to the wider world of reliability, I fell in love. I mean, I'm passionate, I wake up thinking about reliability. I go to bed thinking about reliability, I don't dream about it. I do take the night off. But otherwise, if you see me I'm thinking about reliability.

Jim Frazer:

Well, well, Terry, we've had some energetic guests so far in the podcast this week, but you know, you already get the award so how does that so so we get we get the genesis of you sensors reliability, your passion for it, that internet story is amazing. I had a copy of from your front page

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

way back when. But how

Jim Frazer:

does that evolution evolve to then include your creation of reliability with well, so

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

So after, you know, the experience with a TNT went on to start publishing reliability web, online magazine, a sort of, but the magazines that were in the industrial space at that time, very few of them around now. You know, Oh, cute. a.com You know, what a cute little thing that was, and they all wanted to associate. So I ended up writing with for a lot of the industry, trade magazines. I eventually started a magazine. It failed. I then acquired a magazine. It failed. And then I did then I then I went ahead and started a third magazine. I guess I was a glutton for punishment called uptime magazine. It's well loved. In fact, a lot of people are not thinking so well of me because during the pandemic, if you remember, there's a little problem with the post office going on. And then not only that, we didn't know who was at work and who wasn't at work, you know, we don't have everybody's home address. So we stopped publishing print. Same time sustainable ality ESG. We started thinking, wow, you know this where, you know, when our traffic started going up and we made our website better made it easier to access. So we have converted to basically 100% online now, great.

Jim Frazer:

Reliability, that's a that's an ambiguous word from too many different definitions. Let's, before we go into any verticals or details arrive at what? Let me just ask that question. What do you consider reliability to be scoped? Well,

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

you know, there's a technique, there's a technical definition when it comes to assets that the asset will will meet its required function over a particular period of time under stated conditions. I hate that I hate that definition. Now, you and

Jim Frazer:

I spoke before before we started here, and I know you've got a very broad definition and many different things, right. So include it because

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

there's a chi, there's, you know, there's the reliability of the pump and the motor, then there's the reliability of a system that the pump and the motors in. And then there's sort of the reliability of the organization. And then there's the reliability of the humans that are in the organization. So and that's just in our small part of the world. And you're right, there's all kinds of other areas that they apply reliability to, we have sort of drifted up to the system or organizational reliability. And we include the human as at least a 50% part of reliability. So what we say is that it works. Our simple definition of reliability is it works. You could say it works as expected. You could say it's failure free operation, but most people don't understand failure. So you do then you have to go define failure.

Jim Frazer:

Okay, so before we started today, you talked about how your magazine has a rolling six weeks, six weeks media calendar, editorial calendar on on different subjects, and you focus on a particular subject for six weeks, and then you move on. What are some of those subjects? Well, they're

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

based on a framework that I created, I got I got you hear the name sometimes because of the because of the COVID medicines that are going around. But I got a thing called gamma ray in 2010. It's it's a neurological and what your your, your antibodies eat the myelin sheath of your nerves, and I was paralyzed for eight months, I was on my back. I haven't not worked since I was about 14 years old. And so I was on my back for 18 months, I guess, meditating and pondering reliability. And as I as I came back, I was in one of my son's parent teacher association meetings, I look up on the wall, there's mental ofs elements chart I've seen, you know, I've been looking for a way to organize reliability. So I organized reliability into uptime elements. And it's got, it's got 36 different elements across five different domains. And then across the asset lifecycle. And, you know, I was doing it to organize our publishing, I was doing it, we also produce conferences. But what happened is, it's been adopted now, by 6000. Companies, there's 4000 certified practitioners. And it is a, it's two things. It's a strategy. And it's a language, and it really stays high level, it stays on what and why. And it's not prescriptive as to how to so all the many engineering methods and specialties and technologies that are out there. That's all it all fits underneath the what and the why, if that makes any sense. So so like reliability engineering, for maintenance, that's where you're trying to figure out which assets in the system are the ones that if it shuts down, we're all going home for the day, or worse? And then you know, and then what are the ways these assets can fail? Can we anticipate that in advance asset condition management's using the sensors, just like a doctor trends, you over time, what says, you know, they take your blood tests, they listen to your pulse, they might think that they're using all kinds of non invasive sensors to find that to trend your health over time, then there's then there's work execution management, you're paying a lot of people to go out and run all around the plant. And so you have to do that in a very efficient way. And that's what a lot of the software companies here specialize in. In the beginning, we thought, you know, that that's been around for about 40 years, and about 70% of those programs fail to generate sustainable business success. So we thought, here's the key, reliability leadership. So we created a, we created a foundational reliability leadership framework that has Integrity, Authenticity, Responsibility, and aim working for an aim that's bigger than oneself. And we thought that's all we need to really get reliability to sustain. Wasn't so it will stop I don't want one more thing. Okay. Background. What really what really skyrocketed it was we put a coordinating layer on because what we started to realize is reliability is not just maintenance, we need operate Since we need HR, we need engineering, we need our safety we need and we need the top management. So we need everybody, just like if you walked into a plant, everybody would be responsible for safety. Everyone's responsible for reliability.

Jim Frazer:

So on behalf of all our listeners, let me just start with to give them a name to illustrate your framework. You know, we don't want to go into the 60 objects or that you had there, but But how about, you said a lot there. But what are those six domains or at least give us a flavor of what 123 of them?

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

That's what I just did. That's a reliability engineer for maintenance as a condition management.

Jim Frazer:

Okay, then then, let's go next into you mentioned certification. Yeah, I'm sitting here with you. I understand you're an online magazine about reliability and has a six week rolling editorial schedule? Where does what is this certification? What body? Is it? Who does it does it all work?

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

There's a, there's a not for profit association called the association of asset management professionals, or amp, as I call it, I love acronyms. And they do what's called a certified reliability leader is that CRL. And it's based on the body of knowledge. It's around this uptime elements framework that I created.

Jim Frazer:

Okay, so they you originated this framework? Yes. Brought it to them. Yes. And they built a sort of certification program. Yeah.

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

Because ISO, ISO 1702, for sorry, getting a little geeky here. But they have a certification sort of schema that says, if you're training, you shouldn't be providing certification. Because if you're a big enough client and say, Hey, Terrance, I'm sending 100 of my guys, I want them all to pass, you know, and I'd say, Wow, I want 100 students. So you know, they kind of separate the benefit, the monetary benefit of certification from the training, so the not for profit, accepted in and they've got a whole management system for certification, which I don't have.

Jim Frazer:

So we I think, our audience, and certainly the population here, DRC forum understands the, the measurement measurement of, of reliability, quality issues, and stand and standard deviations, and all that mathematical number crunching. But I was intrigued that your, your umbrella of reliability includes much, much softer human skill type things, you mentioned a few of them and you went so fast, I don't have all of them. But let's start with one that is near and dear to my heart, which is authenticity. So you have the floor about authenticity.

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

So what we what we call authenticity is being who you allow the world to think you are. So you represent yourself in the world. And you say, Okay, if you know me for a while, you know, say respect is very important to me. And friendship and loyalty is very, those are my three top values. But if you saw me acting inconsistent with those values, in other words, if I was dis, if I told you, hey, the most important thing in my life is respect. But I treat other people disrespectfully. That's not authentic. That's not who at least not. So my authentic self would then be disrespectful, not respectful. So I'm putting myself out there, as if I'm a respectful person, but now I'm acting disrespected. I'm using that as an example. Oftentimes, the values that we sort of let others believe we hold dear, we might violate them. We're humans, we were born into this condition called human being. And humans will violate authenticity, as they will sometimes violate integrity. And so we decided that makes the workplace less effective when that happens. So listen, we have to first acknowledge one thing about authenticity is that we're all in authentic as well. And so we need a way to deal with that. So when when I'm inconsistent with the values that I say I have, I need to clean up that mess. I need to say, you know, listen, respect is really important to me. And I apologize that I was disrespectful to you in the way that I spoke to you or in the way that I dealt with you. I understand that that was disrespectful. That's not who I am. And I'd like to clean up the mess. Is there anything I can do to make it up to you that I was disrespectful in my behavior. So in other words you're trying to get you're trying to fill up the bucket of your values, again, restore your values, we're always going to kind of be it's like a bank account, it's gonna go up, it's gonna go down, and you want to make more deposits than you want to make withdrawals.

Jim Frazer:

That's a great concept. And I get the empathy, the empathy and the human human factors of all of that. But for some of us in the audience, they may be wondering and scratching their heads are about what's that

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

got to do with reliability? Its effectiveness. It's effective. So in the workplace, the first one is called is integrity. And the way we define that we don't put that in the moral and ethical framework of, of honesty. And that because that's a slippery slope, and that's a, that's a real gray area. So we are We simplified the definition of integrity to say, do what you say you're going to do. And when you don't, because there'll be times when you won't, you either can't, or you won't clean up the mess you made. And so the with authenticity with integrity, when you when you restore it more often than you violate it, the workplace is a lot more effective. That's what it turns out to be. It turns out, there's a lot of, you know, when somebody sees you being inconsistent with your value, somebody sees you breaking your word or experiences, you break in your word a lot. It's really hard to get reliability back and back, you one deputy, when you you, you started by saying, you know, hey, reliability, he's got all these, you could say reliability is your word. And so if you violate your word off, and it's going to be very difficult to achieve reliability as an organization or reliability as a system, you have to be consistent.

Jim Frazer:

So that that authenticity, is that does it only apply to the actual human being in the organization? Or is it doesn't apply to, to actual engineering systems, devices? Other things?

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

Well, I would say integrity, certainly could authenticity also, could I was a great question. I would say, yes, it does. But that's not the intention. Yeah, that's not that's not that's not the intention of the way we use it. But now you've given me a whole new what was it was a one of the ways I work is called the inquiry. I love questions. That's why I'm loving doing this with you. I love questions, so much better than I like answers. Because when you start with an answer, only the things that match that answer a possible. When you start with a question, you have what we call unlimited opportunity sets. Because it's anything I mean, and a classic question, it's anything, it's only when you start narrowing it down to limited possibilities, that, you know, you're narrowing down your options. So you gave me a new inquiry, which I'm gonna stand in to say, what Terry was what you're dealing with, with integrity and authenticity, does that apply to the system reliability back

Jim Frazer:

on the next step? And I will do that

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

I will do that I hadn't, I'll be honest with you, I had not really thought about it in that context in mind,

Jim Frazer:

and, you know, what you've had me think about over the last, you know, five or 10 minutes is that, that authenticity? You know, people have an intuition, and they have their authenticity detector. Yeah, many I like that. And many of us, whether it be human, the perceived value of a human, you're your perception of a human, or your perception of a product in the market. You're you look at it and intuit the the authenticity. And you know, you might in these days of inflation, when boxes of cornflakes are shrinking, you might go pick up that box of cornflakes. And you know what, last week it was this big this week. It's not that I love it, and you guess what you hate or something. of whack, you know, the, the the universe is not in alignment here. So so I can I can see that. So how long let's let's go back to reliability. You've got a six week rotating, secure, you know, media calendar.

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

Yeah, my memories. Okay, this is so far. So I'm gonna say we started the year with specify for reliability. In other words, when you're replacing assets, when you're when you're going to get a new asset, you take reliability into consideration and specify the reliability level at that point in time. And then verify that all of the stakeholders, the engineers, the operators, purchasing are aware of that specification and understand that specification, agree with that specification, we'll make sure they include that specification. So we spent six weeks with a with a group of companies developing a 10 step process for specify for reliability. We had a lot of people writing articles about it. We had some webinars about it, we had, we actually even ran a small cohort of companies, just to explore what current practices are, was specified for reliability. We couldn't find any written practices about it. So we developed some written practices around it in a six week period.

Jim Frazer:

That's interesting. I mean, what am I typical questions, you know, frequent listeners will know is what are the obstacles? What are the challenges in this marketplace? So I mean, you answered some of it, but but you might want to look at that in a little different perspective. What are the challenges to reliability? Well,

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

the first challenge I would tell you is language, because it's just like you went We could talk all day long about 27 Different contexts of reliability, you know, the reliability of, of the news, the reliability of the Ford vehicles, which are highly reliable. You know, so lots of lots of different contexts of reliability. What we find inside an organization is that they're using different words for the same thing. So we had to just have experienced it this morning we're doing we're doing what's called reliability, strategy development. And this six weeks. So off these engineers, when talking about here's how you do it, here's how you do it. Here's how you do it. I said, Do you think we could stop because there's people on this on this project that have no idea what even the term reliability strategy means? Could we start with what is it? And why do we need it? Do you have agreement on that? We did. We got it. Everybody was like, ah, we miss that, you know, and they were loving it. They loved my mom. Yeah, exactly.

Jim Frazer:

What what's interesting, what you bring up there is that? Well, we all know, in the automation world, we have a lot of discussion about semantic models, interoperability API's with the idea that there's a much more reliable, lower latency transfer of information from from one place to another. And yet in the human world, we too, are far limited by our definitions, and we might even both speak English. But you know what, we just don't agree on what the definition of a term might be. Or we might be 10% off.

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

And don't you know, listen, I don't want the world to think hey, you must use Terrence O'Hanlon definitions. You know from this framework, though, what happens is when we put it into a fortune 500 company, and it's in use by about 6000 of them, even the disagreement can be calibrated. So if you don't agree with my definition of A, B, or C, that's fine. But we're gonna freeze these definitions in time. And what we can do is calibrate our disagreement, at least we have a still point to calibrate our disagreement.

Jim Frazer:

I'm a veteran of the standards world. And typically, no one, no one has a perfect view, everyone is subjective. And typically, as you know, what happens there is you get a consensus based if you get consensus around something, a definition case, okay, that's what we go with. That's right, might not be perfect, but at least it's something that most people can then interoperate? Well,

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

it's very interesting, you say that, because a lot of this came from I joined ISO. And I helped write the ISO 55,000 Asset Management Standards. And a lot of that was debate three years, we actually it's a very, very profound conversation, three years to define what is asset management? The standards was easy. Once we got the definition of what Asset Management was, it was easy to do the standard No. And we spent three years on weekly meetings, discussing what is asset and everybody had an idea everybody had an opinion.

Jim Frazer:

I mean, I had the same experience with I've done a lot of work with the interoperable intelligent transportation system standards from us. And what the about by far the hardest part was what our our user needs, which will, how can we build consensus around them, building consensus, and then refining them into the actual definition, the functional requirement that says, volts is zero to 100, with, you know, with a granularity of, you know, 10, millivolts, or something, and the range is zero to all of that, that by far was the hardest part. Once you get that you can build all your applications very

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

well. And then one of the other things, and I actually, I even saw it in the breakfast session this morning. For some reason, maintenance, and reliability, they like went to the company Christmas party, and so many had spiked the punch bowl, and they had way too much to drink. And they went home together. And then they stayed together for the next like 20 years when they should have probably just gone home the next day, each one of them to their to their homes, and they call it maintenance and reliability. Well, if you're waiting until the maintenance phase of an asset to figure out the reliability, you're in big, it's well, you may not be in big trouble, but it's gonna cost you about time standard times 100. At that point in time, you need to figure out the reliability early it needs the reliability. So I'm sorry if I'm breaking anybody's heart out there. But reliability and maintenance needed divorce, okay, maintenance is great. I love maintenance, please do not get me wrong, but we want reliability early way before maintenance is even considered. So we want we want reliability in every aspect of the asset lifecycle.

Jim Frazer:

It's fascinating to me that there are some you know, there are some network software platform providers out there that monitor equipment that that do not contrast do not operate to oh the most hires performance levels, but they index it all. Have all of the manufacturers stated, stated 100% operation levels. So in, say, a building automation case, you might have, you know, ZigBee sensors on on the bearings of a pump motor. And if they if they exceed, or if they start creeping up by even the smallest amount, you know that there's extra current going to the motor, your electrical bills going up. And if you don't touch it soon enough, something bad is going to happen. So you could actually extrapolate, this is predictive. What should I do? And what is that motor costing me even though the temperature on the bearing has only gone up by half a degree. So that is not maintenance?

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

That's right, that's not maintenance, sort of, you're opening up lots of unpack there. But I would just say a couple of things about that. One is, you know, there's a difference if the pump is being operated in Alaska, and it's, you know, minus 13. It's pumping crude oil eight hours a day, whereas the pump could be in Arizona, it's running 24 hours a day, and it's pumping water. It's an operating context. So that that using the manufacturer specification, oftentimes isn't you need to do your own engineering just to validate that the operating envelope or that the warning signs are context operating context appropriate. That's one

Jim Frazer:

well, you're bringing, you're bringing me you know, the I would argue that that's that manufacturer stated, this is how it should perform is the baseline you work off of gas or your what a great accounting, if your downtime at a refinery is different downtown, a water fountain in a school

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

is definitely good. So I agree with you, I think, I think starting from that starting from that point, but if you live at that point, you're gonna find you're either doing too much maintenance, or you're not doing enough maintenance, because you have to really take it into account or for your own operational context. The other thing is, is predictability. So I like that that works fine with me, I have no real issue with predictability, the word I have any issue with is predictive maintenance. You know, a lot of these companies because they're dealing with that I have, you know, that's the hot IoT application. Predictive Maintenance for me is it's an end of life asset management activity. First off, there's no such thing as predictive maintenance. It was it's condition monitoring, I don't, I don't need sensor to predict maintenance, I can look and see you didn't align the pump, I can look and see you're putting dirty lubrication in I, you know, I can predict the maintenance just from watching your practices. I'm not diminishing condition monitoring. I'm diminishing the word predictive maintenance, although it was originally a marketing term that has now since entered engineering lexicon, and it bothers me. So I just want to get get that. But I also view it as an end of life asset management strategy, here's listen just for a second. In the beginning, you're going to spend money, a little extra money to make sure that that asset or that system, has inherent reliability has inherent availability to it, then you're going to commission it, from that time that you commission it, you want to run as long as possible in a steady state, you do not want to have no you don't want to start up, you don't want to shut down, you don't want emergency work. That's called the money making period. That's the time we're making money. As soon as I've got a temperature sensor or vibration sensor, telling me that I've got to do something with that bearing, guess what, we're back to this band in money phase, you know, so with precision with good engineering, good procurement, good design, good specifications, good commissioning, we can make that trouble fee period of installation to the first point that that temperature starts to go up. That's the game, extend that period, because that's where you're making money. Don't try to extend the last part of the assets like unless you you know, unless you need to, I'm being broad in general, but most people lose the fact that if they put more attention to extending that I to be the installation, potential failure period, they would make a lot more money.

Jim Frazer:

You point out the importance of cost accounting, correct cost accounting.

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

Well, and very few people in the maintenance industry, understand cost accounting.

Jim Frazer:

Indeed, well, Terry, this has been a fascinating prick and rocking the world and reliability. Certainly, we're nearing the end of our time. So are there any last messages you'd like to deliver to our listening audience?

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

Oh, well, you know, it depends on where they are. If they're, if they're not really, you know, if they really haven't started their reliability journey, start and remember, realize everybody's responsibility is reliability. Think about it more in the context of safety than in the context of maintenance and get started with it. If you're more mature very lucky because we are in the era of an era of connected data and visualization. We we've got great engineering around assets, because we've been making as good as decisions as we can without data for the last couple of decades. All of a sudden, well, I'm here at the Ark Ark advisory forum. And this is filled with companies who connect, make it easy to connect data to get access, no matter where they are, no matter what kind of systems they're in, and bring them forward to you and put them in context. So we can make so much more better decisions as a result of it. I am so excited about that. That's why if you're not starting, get started. So when this technology knocks on your door, you're ready to take advantage of the incredible benefits that it offers.

Jim Frazer:

Well, Terry, thanks again for joining us. If any of our of our listeners are interested in contacting you, can you share of your contact information

Terry O"Hanlon of ReliabilityWeb.com:

reliability web? If you're in LinkedIn, you will see me all over. It's Terrence O'Hanlon at LinkedIn like I use my mother and father love Terrance DRENCOHAN Ello en find me at LinkedIn. I'm always there and I'm posting all kinds of stuff if you want to follow what's going on there.

Jim Frazer:

Once again, Terry, thank you very much for joining us today. This has been a jam packed reliability session here on the smart city podcast. To our listeners out there. Please join us again on the next edition of the smart city podcast.

ARC Advisory Introduction:

Broadcasting from Boston, Massachusetts. The Smart Cities podcast is the only podcast dedicated to all things smart cities. The podcast is the creation of aarC advisory group Smart City practice. aarC advises leading companies, municipalities and governments on technology trends and market dynamics that affect their business and quality of life in their cities. To engage further please like and share our podcast or reach out directly on Twitter at Smart City viewpoints or on our website at WWW dot aarC web.com backslash industries backslash smart dash cities