Executive Thought Leadership

VoIP and the Cleveland Municipal Court

The Cleveland Municipal Court is the center of legal activities in the Greater Cleveland, Ohio metropolitan area. Every day, hundreds of Cleveland residents work with the court's more than 500 employees to address civil, traffic, small claims, contract, and criminal matters. This diversity of activities involving hundreds of human interactions made a reliable telephony solution a paramount requirement to sustain productivity for the court.

More than a quarter of a century earlier, the City of Cleveland had purchased a Centrex private branch exchange (PBX) system to support the court's telephony needs. By 2000, the court found those needs expanding-not just in numbers of telephone lines, but also in the types of voice servicesbut had no way to meet them quickly or costeffectively. The existing Centrex PBX could not support the new and increasing requirements, and the court's IT and administrative teams looked to voice over IP (VoIP), and a trusted partner, Cisco Systems, for the right solution.

Recently, Doug Dennerline, senior vice president for Cisco Systems U.S. Enterprise Sales, had an opportunity to talk with members of the Cleveland Municipal Court business and IT teams about their migration from the PBX to a Cisco VoIP solution. In the following Q&A, members of the team, including Kim Wilson, telecommunications manager and network analyst for the Cleveland Municipal Court; Alden Coleman, director of information technology; Michael Flanagan, court administrator; and Ed Ferenc, public information officer discuss their reasons for the VoIP migration, the benefits of VoIP technology, and their customer experience with Cisco.

Q: Doug: What were the strategic challenges you faced with your communications infrastructure?

A: Kim: The major strategic challenge was our inability to manage our own system. The phone company would take several weeks to a month for moves, adds, and changes. We also wanted more advanced features that would enable our users to be more efficient. Our Centrex system predated 1977.

Q: Doug: Did your users ask for a change, or did the IT and telecommunications groups decide it was time?

A: Michael: We are a separate branch of the city government. We order through the city and our billings come from them. It wasn't unusual for us to get bills for long distance calls months after the calls were made. Tracing who placed the calls and figuring out which calls were personal and not to be reimbursed was difficult. We had no control over the city billing process. IT came up with this idea. They told us that we could become independent of the city's Centrex system using VoIP technology. We'd also get better accountability in terms of our phone usage. That's what influenced our decision.

Q: Doug: Did you look at competitive solutions?

A: Kim: Sure we did. In 2000, we were looking at a variety of PBX solutions across the board, but we were also very interested in VoIP, even when it was bleeding edge. During the Y2K conversion, we had already converted from Bay to Cisco.

Q: Doug: Kim, in your evaluation, you must have found that a lot of PBXs have the same accounting and charge-back capabilities. What made you choose Cisco?

A: Kim: We were confronted with two issues: having to install new house cable in the Justice Center and acquiring space for a d-mark location. The phone company prohibited us from using their existing house cable and we simply did not have the space to house a d-mark room for a PBX solution. These unplanned issues would have required that we exceed our budget for the new telephone solution. Our Cisco representative explained how VoIP would integrate into our existing data network without having to add more cables and space, and that interested us. In our research, we discovered that Cisco's VoIP was on the leading edge of voice technology.

Q: Doug: What were the risks and rewards you thought about?

A: Kim: We were concerned about the voice quality. There was also the risk of network and power outages that would affect the telephone system as well. However, after our deployment, there was no discernable difference in voice quality. We are now preparing to deal with the network outages and power outages by building a redundant network located in another facility. Our biggest reward, which used to be our biggest challenge, is the ability to manage our own system. Moves, adds, and changes take only seconds, and unified messaging has provided a more advanced and efficient way of managing our jobs.

A: Alden: I'd like to add that kudos go to your Cisco representatives. During the evaluation process, they kept telling us that there was an IP solution out there but it was bleeding edge. When we started this, there were no examples of working installations to see if it was a good solution for us. But as more problems surfaced with implementing a standard PBX solution, and we started looking at VoIPand its advantageswe began putting numbers together. The possibility of quick installation, easy management, and the resultsimproved service for individuals and departments, with potential ROI in a year and a halfgot the court's attention.

Q: Doug: Have you seen the ROI come to fruition with the installation?

A: Alden: We're seeing the ROI now, but it's also led to the court adopting other related technologies, including Cisco Unity, which is driving up the use of e-mail mailboxes throughout the court. We're also experimenting with Wi-Fi. Because we're spending fewer dollars for IP, we have the additional dollars to use for other technologies.

Q: Doug: Have you seen operational efficiencies in the IT organization as well?

A: Alden: We thought it was going to take more than a single person to support it, but so far, we're doing quite well with it.

Q: Doug: Could you describe the value you see in the Cisco relationship and business partnership?

A: Michael: As with any new technology, there is a learning curve and a reluctance by some individuals who prefer the old way of doing things. Looking back, I can say the process for the switch to VoIP was smooth and overall positive for the entire court. I feel much of that has to do with the way Cisco prepared our technology department for the change, and that says a lot about your business and how important the client is.

A: Kim: I think Cisco definitely brings a tremendous value to the court as a business partner. We not only run the VoIP system, but our infrastructure is based on Cisco technology. We have a robust system and Cisco technology allows us to enhance our efficiency and productivity. We're using VoIP and the unified messaging architecture, and we're looking into video as well.

A: Alden: Cisco's product mix is extensive, so we've found that with Cisco, there is little need to go to another vendor when we're talking about the network and infrastructure. Cisco also provides expertise for experimentation. To have Cisco available to say, "Well, what if we tried this? What would happen? And also what will it cost the court to do that?" That's the real extra value. It's good to have a partner that knows our infrastructure. Our current Cisco representative is as familiar with our communication infrastructure as we are, and is good to have.