Security Technology Installation Projects: Financial Peril or Value-Investment
The larger-than-life roadside advertising board promises Secure lifestyle living 24/7. It does seem to offer a relaxed solution to so many South African’s fears, crime experiences and concerns. But are developers and homeowner associations able to deliver on their promise?
Similarly, corporate organisations, commercial, industrial and mining facilities often require security technology and more particularly, the integration of technology systems into a seamless, friendly user interface that actually does what is expected of it.
There are more examples of security technology installations that have gone precariously wrong for the following reasons:
1.Wrong Technology Solution Installed – Does not function properly in the environment installed.
This may be due to a host of reasons such as neglecting to perform a security risk assessment, the lack of a comprehensive security master plan (strategic direction), the lack of peculiar or adverse weather conditions and the product not having been tested rigorously prior to installation.
2. Lack of a Technical Specification
This vital component of an installation project comprehensively documents component, workmanship, warranty and functional system requirements in full.
3. Quoted Project Fee Exceeded by Far
Installers request variation orders due to poor project planning, incomplete bill of quantities, because of site conditions or distances may be different to what was requested of them initially.
Clients are at liberty to deny such order requests at the peril of the installation. Other causes include the installer not being properly intimated with all the actual circumstances of the project, inaccurate developer as-built drawings, the lack of an Electrical Certificate of Compliance signed off prior to project commencement, the lack of a project agreement stipulating the handling of variances and the lack of a technical specification report that forms the basis of the installation project.
4.Poor Workmanship
Installers may have convinced you of their abilities but if not properly vetted and subjected to comprehensive specification requirements, it is likely to end in a disappointing experience with little to no actual return on investment.
By way of illustrative example related to electronic access control systems, let us consider the question of whether fingerprint biometric systems should be used over proximity card reader systems or vice versa.
When considering the aim of access control: we could with certainty establish that it is the action associated with the ability to identify who has accessed the site, how long have they been on site, who have they visited, where have they visited and when did they leave. Most access systems van provide this information and much more in respect of the control of movements
In the past, most access control systems were activated by access cards in one form or another. This process was simply presenting the card as a form of identification to a reader at the access control point, you as an individual were identified and access was gained.
This process has been refined using cards readers with updated software where the holder of a specific card can present this card at an access point and not gain access due to restrictions being inserted into the software profile and thus prohibiting and controlling specific personal movement and or access.
- Components of Access Control Systems
- Proximity Cards
- Fingerprint Biometrics
- Access cards
- Captured user fingerprints replaces cards
- Card readers
- Biometric readers – reads user fingerprints
- Software packages to read card information
- Software packages to associate prints presented with access privileges assigned
- Turnstile or other type access control mechanism
- Turnstiles to control movement
- Card drop-units to safe-keep visitor cards are disposed of the be reused
- None required
So what is better a card reader system or a biometric system?
There is no clear cut answer to this. It is the same as what is better a revolver or a pistol, and the answer is they are both handguns, they both can afflict death by firing a projectile, yet one may be better suited to certain applications and conditions than the other.
The biometric system has really advanced in the last five years, the readers have become very robust and the software applications have become easily integrated. There is a stigma that Biometrics are more expensive than card reader systems, again this is an application issue and cannot be a straight one-line answer. Biometrics have been successfully applied at construction sites where there have been over 1000 movements on the system each day.
The two systems are particularly close in their ranges of components one has a card issued to a specific individual who presents the card to a reader. The other uses a finger with a unique print that identifies the individual who presents his/her finger to the reader and the information from the print is read by the software and the person is identified.
The software systems are similar and can have a dual application.
The readers differ
The turnstile remains the same and so the installation components
A decision whether to use biometrics or card readers was usually a financial one, however, with the cost of biometrics being so reduced and the software companies being flexible in their applications, it is now a matter of choice based upon the strategic risk control plan of the organisation with respect to the application of security technology.
Taking the above example into consideration, the same comments can be tabled on what is the best Closed Circuit Television application, or the best Electrical fencing system. Again it is apparent that there is no easy answer without doing the homework first.
How can we make an informed decision on the technology that is suitable for our needs?
As an independent consultancy, we recommend a process of identification coupled with the design and development of a five-year security plan, with measurable outputs. This process would involve inter alia the following:
1. A security risk assessment (SRA) will identify the clients’ threats, their vulnerability and exposure to such threats, the occurrence probability. Based on existing security safeguards, the SRA process should provide a healthy guideline into what level of intervention may be required to effectively mitigate the client’s risk profile to within acceptable levels.
2. Once the SRA is conducted, a strategic (3-5 year) security plan should be developed. The strategic plan should essentially support the organisational/business master plan in terms of its purpose and intentions. It should define clear organisational security objectives to establish a purpose-prepared integrated physical protection system supported by a pragmatic security budget.
3. Based upon the strategic plan, a technology specification should be designed, which will consider a holistic integrated security plan focusing on the dynamics of the organisation, the budgetary requirements and the available technology on the market with its various applications.
4. A vendor pre-qualification process is embarked on to identify the most appropriate group of contractors suited to satisfy and exceed the client’s organisational needs.
5. Once this specification is completed and the pre-qualification process is finalised, the organisation may embark on a managed request for proposal (RFP) process, which will identify the best pre-qualified contractor to meet the organisational requirements.
6. Once this RFP process is finalised then the organisation can embark on an informed security installation where all factors are taken into consideration.
The Advantages of the Utilisation of a
1. Absolute independence prevails with no prevalence or business links to any security product or service.
2. A detailed and independent assessment of the client’s physical protection system is performed without prejudice or emotion.
3. Experience in the security field allows for detailed and accurate process flows covering details that may be overlooked by a non-security orientated employee or a product-specific service provider.
4. Project management of the installation utilising the agreed design specification to ensure quality solutions that function in line with user expectations.
5. Project progress reports to track progress and keep clients suitably informed.
6. All legal service level agreements and maintenance agreements are designed client approved upfront prior to the commencement of the process.
History has shown that organisations that embark on a detailed project management process, have fewer & comebacks and less annual nuisance expenditure on fixing up the initial mess.