This is an extremely interesting topic, and something which I agree with wholeheartedly. I have seen a few telcos where RA has been ingrained into the overall process map (but in selected areas). However, the key issue here is that it has not been implemented end-to-end.

What do I mean by that? The RA function has more of a “cursory check” feel to it, rather than a leak-proof methodology based on network data and facts. Many of the checks are based on extrapolations performed on a few parameters and a few data points. This is not to be confused with other business intelligence systems in place, which I’m sure do a very good job.

To illustrate the same, let us take the example you had mentioned. Operational metrics to track performance and efficiencies. In my opinion, any system where you cannot track growth/improvement/benefit, is not an optimal system. How do you know that you are truly benefiting? What is the “true KPI” based on which the team can gauge its effectiveness? Let us consider a sample scenario:

RA team identifies an issue with rating for a particular product. The total number of xDRs affected are 200,000. The team raises the issue to the billing team with suggested rectification. RA team claims 200,000 xDRs worth of leakage effectively “captured” after billing team validates the proof.
The RA team stops tracking the issue because as per its mandate, it has reported the issue.
After 2 days, another member of the same RA team finds another 100,000 xDRs with the same rating error. Again, the process is restarted and RA team claims another 100,000 xDRs worth of leakage “captured”.

Ideally, the team should have tracked the rating issue to closure, and then monitored the output of the billing system post-rectification. If I was tracking the efficiency of the RA team, I would see it as:

a) 200,000 xDRs of leakage “Captured”
b) 100,000 xDRs of leakage by day 2 of “Alleged rectification” – Due to inefficient tracking process (Total Leakage captured = 200,000 – 100,000 = 100,000)
c) Extrapolated leakage on Day 1 of “Alleged rectification” (based on leakage captured figures post-rectification) = 100,000

Total performance of RA team = 200,000 – 100,000 – 100,000 = 0

Critical perhaps, but honest. Reporting the same issues over and over again is a sign of a lack of a strong closure follow-up process.

I feel that RA will still take a considerable time to be ingrained into the typical telcos DNA. It’s nice to see people like Thameem talk about Product Risk Assurance within their environment, for these are the types of steps that Telcos can implement within their own departments to ensure higher profitability.

Prevention is definitely better than cure!!!