The Allure of Smart Cities
When I first entered the world of Smart Cities in 2015, I was brimming with excitement. The concept was mesmerizing — technology could transform urban living, making cities more efficient, sustainable, and responsive to the needs of their citizens.
Imagine a city where traffic jams are minimized through intelligent transportation systems, waste collection is optimized, and city services are seamlessly integrated into residents’ lives. It was hard not to get excited about being part of this transformation.
However, what seemed like an adventure full of promise quickly became a reality check. I soon realized that the road from idealism to realism was filled with unforeseen challenges, complex processes, and harsh lessons. The idea of Smart Cities was perfect on paper but far more complicated in practice.
The Birth of an Idea: A Reporting App for Citizens
It all began with a simple yet ambitious idea — a citizen reporting app called Favorsense. This app would allow people to report issues like potholes, broken streetlights, and uncollected trash directly to local councils.
Not only that, but users could also track the progress of their complaints, bringing a new level of transparency and accountability to local governance. We believed we had created the perfect solution for improving city management. Our plan was to roll it out to all local councils across Malaysia through a cloud-based system. It felt like a game-changer.
Initial Optimism: “How Hard Can It Be?”
I remember thinking, “Surely, local councils will embrace this innovation!” After all, who wouldn’t want to improve city services and engage better with citizens? The app could streamline operations and boost efficiency overnight.
But my optimism didn’t last long. The first few meetings with local councils were eye-opening, and the challenges were more significant than I had anticipated.
The Harsh Reality: An Open Can of Worms
The first major hurdle was convincing local councils to adopt and pay for the system. It wasn’t that they didn’t see the value; it was more about what the app would reveal.
The app was like an open can of worms. It exposed inefficiencies and shortcomings in city services that many preferred to keep hidden. Some council representatives resisted, saying, “We can build this ourselves.” Others attempted to create their own versions, only to end up with poorly developed solutions that didn’t work.
The Sobering Realization: “Why Isn’t Anyone Using It?”
Once the app was launched, another issue arose: nobody seemed to use it. Despite its simplicity and functionality, citizens remained unaware of its existence.
The question haunted us: “Why isn’t anyone using it?” We had assumed that just building a great app would be enough to drive adoption. Unfortunately, we learned that even the best ideas need proper promotion and education to succeed.
Copycats and Tough Decisions
As if things weren’t challenging enough, we soon saw copycat apps emerge. Competitors replicated our idea, flooding the market with similar solutions.
It was disheartening. After some time, we made the difficult decision to stop supporting the app. This was a painful lesson in the realities of the Smart Cities market—not every great idea translates into success.
Nine Years of Persistence
Fast forward nearly nine years, and my company, FAVORIOT, is still trying to penetrate the Smart Cities segment. It’s been a long and challenging road. We even joined the Malaysia Smart City Alliance Association (MSCA), hoping it would provide easier market access.
Being part of the alliance did offer new perspectives, but the reality was still complicated. Building Smart Cities in Malaysia is a long and tedious process, fraught with uncertainties and obstacles.
The Complexity of Building Smart Cities in Malaysia
One of the most common questions I hear from local councils is, “Where do we even start?”
Without clear Smart City Indicators to guide them, many cities don’t know how to begin their transformation. There is a lack of a unified vision, confusion about priorities, and an overwhelming sense of inertia.
Talent Gap and Slow Decision-Making
Another significant challenge is the talent gap. Many local councils lack professionals with the expertise to manage Smart City initiatives.
Decision-making is painfully slow, with proposals often stuck in layers of bureaucracy.
And then there’s politics. Decision-making in public projects often involves political interests, making things even more complicated.
The Funding Dilemma
Perhaps the biggest challenge of all is funding. Most local councils don’t have the budget to implement Smart City solutions. When they seek financing, they often turn to private companies with a risky proposition:
“We want you to fund everything upfront. Maybe you’ll see a return on your investment later.”
It’s a tough sell because most local council services don’t generate revenue. Their true value lies in cost savings, operational efficiency, and improved quality of life for citizens — concepts that don’t always resonate with decision-makers seeking immediate financial returns.
Greenfield vs. Brownfield Cities
Not all cities are created equal. Greenfield cities — built from scratch — have different challenges than brownfield cities, which are older and more developed.
Each type of city presents unique obstacles, making it difficult to scale solutions across multiple locations. What works in one city may fail in another, adding to the complexity of Smart City projects.
The Frustration of Endless Trials
I’ve also encountered the frustrating trend of endless trials. “Let’s start with a proof of concept,” they often say.
However, many of these trials never progress beyond the testing phase. They fizzle out, leaving everyone involved feeling disillusioned.
The Reality of Smart Cities in Malaysia
Whenever I hear someone proudly mention the number of Smart Cities launched in Malaysia, I approach it cautiously. Many so-called Smart Cities are proof-of-concept projects that never complete full-scale implementation.
A Strategic Shift: Diversifying Beyond Smart Cities
Given the challenges, we had to make some tough decisions at FAVORIOT. While we remain involved in Smart Cities, we’ve diversified our focus. We started taking on other IoT projects in industries like manufacturing and agriculture.
We couldn’t afford to put all our eggs in the Smart Cities basket. It was a matter of survival.
Balancing Ambition with Practicality
I’m still passionate about the potential of Smart Cities, but I’ve learned to balance ambition with practicality. Not every solution will become a commercial success, and that’s okay.
Smart Cities are an exciting concept, but they’re also highly complex. We must be smart about where we invest our time and resources.
Reflecting on the Journey
Looking back, the journey has been both humbling and enlightening. The Smart Cities market wasn’t the easy win I had imagined. Still, the experience taught me valuable lessons about persistence, adaptability, and the realities of innovation.
Who knows? The next big breakthrough may be just around the corner.
Until then, we keep moving forward — wiser, more resilient, and ready for whatever comes next.
More Favoriot Entrepreneurship Stories
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part 11: The Rocky Road of Smart Cities
- The Story Behind Favoriot — Part 10: Age Does Not Matter in Business
- The Story Behind Favoriot — Part 9: Leaving the Comfort Zone
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part 8: The Frustration of Unanswered Emails and Missed Opportunities
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part 7: The Task of Finding Favoriot’s First 10 Customers
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part 6: Expanding The Business Models
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part 5: Finding the Right Fit
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part 4: How Favoriot Became More Than Just an IoT Platform
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part 3: Why No One Wanted Our IoT Platform—And How We Turned It Around
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part 2: Turning Failures into Milestones
- The Story Behind Favoriot – Part I: The Humble Beginnings of Favoriot
Dr. Mazlan Abbas 