The most annoying aspect of MVAS user base is to keep getting
IVR, SMS initiated promotional campaign by MNO’s, VAS provider and Enterprises.
This has triggered more and more MVAS user opting for DNC directory
registration. The continuous attempt and failure to stop unwarranted activities
by ecosystem prompted regulators to come out with regulatory directive
implementation to reduce mobile user pain points.
For UCC, the NDNC mobile users are supposed to call back on
paid customer service of mobile operator to provide the details of UCC. Post
launching complaint, mobile users get ticket number with a promise that they
will not be getting UCC message after 4 business days and mobile operators’
customer support team will validate the same post deadline date.
Alternatively (Ref http://www.nccptrai.gov.in/nccpregistry/Welcome.jsp?EIID=null
) customer must send SMS to 1909 by following the format "the unsolicited commercial communication, XXXXXXXXXX,
dd/mm/yy". Where XXXXXXXXXX - is the telephone number or header of
the SMS, from which the UCC has originated. The telephone number or header and
the date of receipt of the unsolicited commercial SMS may be appended with such
SMS, while forwarding to 1909, with or without space after comma.
In a similar fashion, unwarranted MVAS deactivation process
include mobile user calling IVR supported and guided toll free number 155223.
The system identifies called number, maps it with the any activated MVAS
services and subsequently execute customer request.
For MNP, each mobile operators launch different toll free
number series with 1800. The mobile user needs to visit MNP status section of
foreign network to check the status of their porting request.
For any information regarding new service, MVAS, Billing
status, the mobile user need to call 121 or 111 or other allocated numbers.
The multiple information points, complaint numbers, toll free
numbers are not adding value but confusions for mobile consumer base. It’s a
human nature that single click service always gets higher adoption.
It raises more queries than answer viz.
- When UCC regulatory solution is already
implemented then why mobile users are still receiving UCC. It is very
common to hear from service provider that they are not allowing any UCC
initiating from home network whereas cannot control the same when UCC is
directed from foreign network. It shows that either customer service
professionals are not trained properly or not willing to accept the gap in
the network.
- Isn’t it possible to block
MSISDN initiated UCC messages at network level? The UCC complaint
directives and subsequent release of number of complaints confirms that
there are gaps in the directives or network levels
- What are the mechanisms used to
check the content of an UCC to validate if the regulatory directives are
followed? For example, the limit of 200 SMS per day are being misused
to flood UCC and based on the
current state, it is very clear that there are gaps in correlating
information from NDNC dipping server, Content
filtering, Security and White/black listing of MSISDN.
- Is there any monitoring tools implemented
to scan SMPP based messages and accordingly to block illegal traffic?
- If SMS is used to get the
confirmation from mobile user for the authorization to activate MVAS for
any new services then the mobile operators may also opt the same process
to take the authorization for existing running MVAS. It is hard to
understand why mobile users are accountable to initiate the process to
deactivate existing services
- Is it difficult to create
consolidated portal and single toll free for MNP, with hierarchical
administrator management functionality, offering mobile user to select
from the list of all service providers with service area and opt for
foreign network?
- Is it mandatory under any clause
of regulatory directives that service providers must offer different toll
free number or can consolidate under one toll free number? In my knowledge
that’s not the case
- Isn’t it really difficult for
most of the mobile user to maintain all Toll free number? Many consumer
and prosumer don’t even know on going initiative by service providers or
regulatory body
- Generally, its consumer and
prosumer tendency to ignore bothering SMS and OBD based promotional calls
but it should not be ignored given the growing security threats towards
mobile devices. According to TNN research the 'Malware attacks on mobiles went up 122% in 2012 compared to 2011’. The
research outcome also demonstrates the hidden threat towards user device,
data including financial information.
Consolidation of all authorization, activation, deactivation,
and complaint across UCC, Telemarketing, MVAS, MNP and integrating it with
existing or new portal is going to reduce cost as well as increase awareness
among userbase.
In conclusion, the current scenario is creating complex
environment for consumer
to launch their complaints.
It is impacting negatively on mobile operator O&M cost structure and subsequently
high TCS (total cost of service) per consumer. The streamlined consolidated
single portal, single Toll free number across mobile operators’ network which
can be owned by mutually agreed third party will result in quick resolution of
consumer pain. The move would be a win-win situation for service provider to
comply with regulation by sharing the cost of management of portal. In a scary
upsurge of security threats towards mobile devices, all of us should come
forward to raise concern. Any negligence can be used as entry point by hackers.
2 comments
Write commentsThe mobile user needs customer experience strategy to visit MNP status section of foreign network to check the status of their porting request.
ReplyThis has triggered more and more MVAS user opting for DNC directory registration. The continuous attempt and failure to stop unwarranted bingo online activities by ecosystem prompted regulators to come out with regulatory directive implementation to reduce mobile user pain points.
Reply