What large companies expect from their security systems integrators

Nov 1, 1999 12:00 PM, James G. Spencer

Security systems dealers and integrators - while significant players in the security industry - are really quite small businesses compared to the customers they serve. For example, they do not have the resources to do extensive market research or detailed forward planning.

Dealers/integrators know what manufacturers expect of them, but what do customers, especially large customers, expect from them beyond product delivery? It's valuable knowledge, and yet hard to come by.

We assembled a panel of large end-user customers to help guide integrators as to what they will demand from their systems integrators over the next two to three years.

Participants are Bob Falconi of Hewlett-Packard, George Booth of eBay Corp., and Jeff Meany of Fidelity Investments.

They identified five issues, or opportunities, that integrators need to address in order to provide more value and meet increasing needs and expectations:

* formal certification;

* open versus proprietary solutions;

* additional skills and services;

* long-term business relationship capability; and

* where integrators most often fall down.

Q: How do you view the importance of integrators being formally certified in the products or services they provide?

George Booth of eBay: I am not sure what certification means, but it is important for an integrator's staff to be trained by their manufacturers. Too often, what is missing is a published quantifiable description of what they had to do, or learn, to become certified.

Bob Falconi of Hewlett-Packard: Certification can be a factor in a decision, but it is seldom that simple. Beyond quantification, currency of certification, or training, is a major component that is seldom mentioned. Due to change, a person trained, or certified, three years ago is only marginally better than one who was not trained at all.

Booth: A customer needs not only to know the degree and currency of the integrator, but also of the individuals who will do the work. People move around in this industry. An integrator who had currently certified people last year may have none today.

Falconi: It is not uncommon for an integrator to have one or more certified people in one location but not in the location of your project. We need to know the quantifiable, current certification and experience on the specific products of individuals who will be assigned to a project.

In my mind, certification must go beyond current product certification. Our business is moving to IT and we need our integrators to be Microsoft NT-certified as well.

Booth: Any integrator who does not think it necessary to be NT, Data Base and communications certified is living in a glass bottle.

Jeff Meany of Fidelity Investments: We have extensive systems and technology capability within our security function that others need to look for in their integrators. However certification - particularly at the field installation end - is very important, both in terms of maintaining warranties and on the issue of consistent quality. With theincreasing sophistication of devices we are putting in the field, the worst scenario is to have a really elegant plan - well documented and strategically right - that falls apart because of sloppy installation.

Falconi: That leads to another skill that is both necessary and certifiable - project management. Too often integrators use a lead technician as a project manager.

Booth: We pay for and should expect to receive professional project management. On big jobs, the tasks are far too complex. Currently, I am not sure customers are getting what they are paying for.

Meany: An integrator who cannot tightly manage a schedule becomes a nightmare.

Falconi: If an integrator really wanted to impress me on their capabilities, they would show me that the people to be assigned to my project are currently quantifiably certified on the products, the underlying technologies, and certified by the Project Management Institute (www.pmi.org ) or similar body.

Q. How important is it for integrators to provide open systems architecture versus proprietary systems?

Meany: This is critical. Even with the level of consolidation we are seeing in the industry, the likelihood of large end-users buying single-source closed systems seems low to me.

We're linking our access/IDS platforms to internal company networks, human resource systems and integrating more closely with building management platforms. We need to open hooks to effect these connections. It's interesting to find that in many companies the people data in our security systems is more current and accurate than other internal systems. That's a real opportunity to push security's influence. To take advantage of it, we need to platforms and pass data.

Falconi: There is really no excuse for being proprietary today. Most image and video manufacturers are on board today.

Booth: There are some great digital imaging products out there that I want to mix and match to meet my various needs. Products using proprietary compression or image formats do not fit my need profile and get immediately taken off my list.

Falconi: Beyond imaging, and possibly card readers, the rest of the security industry has a long way to go in meeting our needs for open systems. For example, despite the recent onslaught of rhetoric, only one access control manufacturer is really on board.

Meany: On the device and field panel side, we have tried to standardize on products, all linked together in a truly global system architecture. Nonetheless, we face challenges in certain countries and markets, and even with internal clients with unique, higher-security needs. I want to take advantage of the whole pallet of field devices out there, not just a select list that can work with a particular panel. And in some cases, either in support of a retrofit project or some unique local need, I want to be able to have Company A's field controller talk to the central station server from Company B.

Falconi: Open systems is the key area for industry payoff and will benefit the strong players. By insisting on only open architecture solutions, we might have to do without some feature only currently available in a proprietary solution, but that risk is worth it in the long run for a global system.

Booth: Sometimes manufacturers do not care and integrators all too often make manufacturer's decisions for reasons beyond end-user needs.

Falconi: All the objections to open systems have already been addressed and dismissed by users in the PC and other technology-based industries. They must be similarly resolved throughout the security industry. A push for open systems by integrators could strain some existing relationships with manufacturers, but integrators should know that it is increasingly an important criteria in a customer's selection of an integrator.

Booth: I want an integrator who understands my needs, finds solutions, makes recommendations and puts technologies together seamlessly.

Q. What additional skills and services will you expect integrators to provide?

Meany: This one is kind of a double-edged sword. On the one hand we all really need to push manufacturers to give us solutions that use the latest technologies, but from an install point are practically plug and play. Easier said than done, but that's what we are looking for. On the other hand, even with a bullet-proof kit, installers today need more and different skills than a decade ago. We are essentially installing microcomputers on the wall of intelligent, soon-to-be-programmable, complex field panels. Increasingly these are connecting through communications links that are much more complex than the old paradigm of 1MB PSTN dial-up lines. These folks need to understand network basics

Falconi: Project management and IT skills must improve. Some integrators are focusing on this today but others are not. Most integrators must also enhance their abilities to function as part of a team with end-users and be able to communicate with the various members of the user's team. Knowing and communicating are not necessarily the same skill.

Booth: The job of an integrator goes well beyond the box-install skills and services of yesterday. The previously contentious relationship with IT must change. They are a tremendous resource and to ignore them would be idiotic. Integrators need to be able to deal with and support corporate standards as to operating systems, databases, communications and procedures. They also need to understand how their products will be used as well as how to install them in the customer's environment. Most importantly they must be able to understand and even anticipate my needs.

Falconi: We need a qualified partner, not just a vendor. We need a firm and people who share the same sense of urgency in meeting our needs that we have.

Q. What must an integrator do to win a long-term contractual relationship?

Falconi: They need to show a sense of committed urgency and a feeling of business ownership beyond the immediate project.

Booth: They need to team with the customer and the manufacturer to form a pro-active partnership in the form of a written agreement like IT has with its VARS and suppliers. It needs to go well beyond reactive maintenance.

Meany: We look for a single point of accountability, a dedicated account rep or team that knows us, our standards, and knows the way we work. You don't want to reintroduce yourself every time you call up for service or subsequent work. This also applies to problem resolution. You need to have a pre-established method of escalating problems that doesn't feel like an international peace negotiation.

Q. Where do integrators typically fall down?

Falconi: Technology slide. There are a few integrators who truly understand technology. That is why we need more and better certification to use as criteria for decision-making. Project management, consistency and business ownership beyond a project are other areas of failing.

Booth: They tend to be good on broad issues but the all-important narrow issues too often escape them. We hate to discover, after the fact, that their depth of knowledge or understanding on important minor points is either non-existent or superficial.

Meany: Consistency is another pitfall. We are looking for national, sometimes international relationships, but the quality of work from market to market can vary wildly. The fact that everyone has the same company logo on their shirt doesn't always mean much.

Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2008 Penton Media Inc.

This month in Access Control

• Opening Up About Door Closers
• An Enterprise Approach
• The Framework For Open Systems
• On A Higher Plane
• More from April's issue