In this edited transcript of an interview, John Barorot, Safaricom's CTO, addressed issues raised by consumers, developers and a recent directive by the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK) about network quality.

ComputerWorld: Kenyans have complained about Safaricom's network quality; how come it has not changed given the high profits the company makes?

JB: There are several factors contributing but the major reason is that we have had a 100 percent increase in traffic, compared to 2009. Infrastructure upgrades are made every year and a projection of 40 percent increase in users has worked over the years, but when it jumps to 100 percent, there is a strain. But we are fast-tracking the capacity increase within the network to address increase in traffic.

Safaricom has transferred its capacity from microwave to fiber, which can handle the capacity better and achieve better results provided the fiber network is not vandalized as we have experienced in the past.

CW: Last month, CCK published guidelines for network quality and it seemed out of the four mobile service providers only Safaricom had a problem, why?

JB: If you look at provisions for network quality measurement by ITU, tests should be done across the networks, not just within one network. In publishing the guidelines, CCK took measurements using ISDN from Telkom Kenya (Orange); if you make a call from one network to another, there are several causes of delay, the parameters given were within Orange. We offered an ISDN within our network and the regulator did not take it up. We asked for log files but we got them after the gazettement. The regulator refused to give us the log files because we could equally question the parameters; they are using someone else's network and that's the problem.

CW: Safaricom has had a long-standing debate with CCK over spectrum allocation -- should you get more than the other providers?

JB: In early 2000, there were only two operators -- Safaricom and Kencell -- taking up the primary 900 GSM [Global System for Mobile Communications] band; with 25MHz each had 12.5 MHz and had to give back some of the spectrum with the entry of two new players. Our challenge is that we have 78 percent market share but we have same spectrum allocation with competitors without even 10 percent of the market.

The regulator should appreciate that we have a bigger market share and require more spectrum; it's a national resource that has to be used efficiently. There are accusations that we have not optimized on the available spectrum but we have conducted tests and compared our operations with other cities like Mumbai and London on efficiency, and we provided evidence and the regulator didn't counter-provide, they just said we are not efficient.

CW: Safaricom has lowered costs of connectivity for the mass market; how will you compete with more-established ISPs [Internet Service Providers]?

JB: In the last few years, Safaricom has acquired companies that have spectrum and we have a national Wi-Max network. Other ISPs do not have this level of infrastructure coverage.

The difference between Safaricom and other ISPs is that we are going beyond provision of links -- we are now providing cloud services; storage, application, and platforms that will allow companies to function across the network.

We are targeting individual users, SoHo and corporate users who can leverage on our IP MPLS [Multiprotocol Label Switching] network available in major cities and towns such as Kisumu, Eldoret, Nakuru and Mombasa. With our existing Wi-Max and IP MPLS network we will be extending the cloud beyond the major cities into smaller towns; for instance, a customer in Nanyuki can access cloud services in Nyeri through a combination of technologies.

Safaricom business is changing from legacy to soft switches, migration is ongoing and 60 percent of the network is on soft. This has freed space and [we] have already started building virtual data centers.

On disaster recovery, Safaricom has partnered with EMC and Cisco, providing disaster recovery and alternatives. We are hoping to provide value especially to companies with no IT departments and [who] can benefit from our cloud services.

CW: Safaricom has 78 percent market share but developers have complained of inability to leverage on the network to access the market, and others complain that their ideas have been "stolen" once shared with Safaricom. How true are the complaints?

Safaricom has invested in training and incubation for developers in Kenya; currently we are working with Strathmore University and we have 22 students under the Safaricom Academy.

Yes, there have been a lot of accusations but the problem is that people come with ideas before they can invest and find out whether what they are suggesting can be done. The reality is that we have invested a lot in research and development and some of these ideas may be in development somewhere within the organization. There are some people who come with generic ideas that are common and in some cases are not willing to invest more, but when someone else invests and the idea has market value, they claim the idea was stolen and that the product is theirs.

One of the major steps we have made is setting up the innovation board, which is independent of Safaricom. The board will receive, vet applications before they are received at Safaricom. This way, developers will have taken measures to trademark and protect their apps before they are received at Safaricom.

However, ideas on products and services will still go directly to Safaricom and the legal process will be followed after parties sign the nondisclosure agreement. This process will also be used as a feed to get members of the academy through our partnerships with Google and Nokia. The nondisclosure agreement is one of the documents that seems to put developers off, but there are plans to simplify it.

Excerpt from http://bit.ly/gEiwxC