Aaron Zebrook wrote questioning the wisdom behind the proprietary nature of certain systems, and the willingness of consultants to cut and paste from manufacturers’ specifications (my words, not his). I liked his comment that this approach is “akin to shooting a fly with a shotgun.” Often the products have limited distribution as well, effectively boxing certain integrators out of the bid opportunity.

I have two thoughts in response to this. First, I am not a big fan of proprietary systems. We’ve had too many clients get boxed into systems where manufacturers were acquired, support suffered, or they just didn’t keep their promises. It’s expensive ripping out and replacing systems, both in terms of pain and cost. Fortunately, this is becoming less and less of a factor with IP video systems as the hardware, edge devices and infrastructure are becoming more interchangeable. Unfortunately, the practice is alive and well in the access control arena of which Mr. Zebrook speaks. I profess to having no expertise in fire systems and cannot speak to his assertion that it’s a problem there as well.

Our firm has found a solution to this problem for our access control systems that works well for our clients; we specify products that work with panels made by the OEM manufacturer Mercury Security Corp. At last account, Mercury made the panels used by more than 15 access control systems manufacturers including Honeywell and Lenel. This means that with a firmware upgrade and software change out, the system becomes a different brand without the forklift upgrade. To my knowledge, this is currently the only way to have an “open” system in access control, and it’s not really open — it just has a lager proprietary pool to draw from. But to Mr. Zeebrook’s point, it is easy to provide an “or equal” in this manner and our clients benefit from a more competitive bid process.

My second thought speaks to feature bloat, and again Mr. Zebrook raises an excellent point. The fact is that most manufacturers repeatedly add features and complexity, whether they are needed or not. I understand that it is easier to add features to a common software platform than to customize systems, but we truly see some arcane features that have limited value to the majority of the customer base. We try to specify only the features that are needed on all products to make it easier to provide equivalent substitutions, and we avoid the temptation to cut and paste the entire A&E specification provided by a manufacturer. If we don’t want an “or equal” we would rather just say that, so prospective integrators don’t waste their time. But I fear there are a limited number of firms that do this, and perhaps more shotguns than fly swatters out there.

Click Here to Read the Original Article

Loren Dupree wrote: “…I have had many bid situations where I have responded thoroughly and timely and lost the bid. When I have asked for feedback, I was not given any information at all. I feel that if a consultant is willing to accept your bid response, he/she should realize they have a responsibility to provide feedback to the losing bidders when requested.”

When we write RFP’s, we tell prospective bidders what our evaluation criteria are up front. We also tell them that we will not be able to provide information to them as to why their bid was rejected, except in those rare cases where we are permitted to discuss this with them. But in most cases, our client prohibits that type of review — and rightfully so.

There are many reasons for this, but I believe the most prevalent is time. Our clients are busy and they don’t have time to defend their decisions to all of the bidders who were unsuccessful. It takes more time than you’d think because many people don’t take criticism and feedback well. When working with the U.S. Postal Service, we conducted a number of debriefings with unsuccessful bidders. Even with ground rules spelled out clearly up front, many bidders felt this was an appeal, an opportunity to plead their case, or a chance to take a shot at the successful bidder (“You’ll be sorry…”). After a lengthy bid process, the end user wants to move on with the project, not continuously defend their decision to people who have a vested interest in disagreeing with it.

So this brings it back to the consultant, as Mr. Dupree suggests. If our client tells us we can’t discuss it, that’s often the end of the story. We’re paid for our time, and we need to maintain the trust of our client. Both of those reasons will ordinarily prohibit us from providing a candid response to a third party. But there’s a way around this, and it may be easier than you think.

Try giving the consultant a call. Tell him/her you were an unsuccessful bidder on the XYZ project and you would like to speak off the record and not specifically about that particular project. Tell the consultant that you value his/her opinion, explaining that you would like to bid on future projects and hopefully win them. You will agree not to contest the bid or object in any way, and you certainly won’t make an effort to go around the consultant by speaking to the client. You just want to know, in general or specific terms, what you can do to improve your bid. In turn, you are willing to provide constructive criticism on his/her RFP — well, maybe leave that last part out.

In this manner you are appealing to the consultant’s ego – everyone likes to be asked his/her opinion. You are agreeing not to be a pest, and your willingness to improve will ultimately benefit the consultant. If they have no criticism, you lost the bid because of price and/or a preferred vendor was on the inside track. If they are willing to talk, it’s OK to ask for clarification, but don’t argue. Remember, you asked for an opinion. You don’t want to talk someone out of his/her own opinion. And if you think the consultant is an idiot, don’t bother. His/her opinion won’t help you anyway.

Click Here to Read the Original Article

To accomplish our objective, we need to put some care into the preparation of a bid list for each job. This can be complicated for a firm like ours as we work nationally, and there are great integrators everywhere, and unfortunately not-so-great ones too.

We first look to our past experiences. Do we have integrators in that area that we have worked with? Even if an integrator hasn’t won one of our projects in the past, if their bid was responsive and professional, we’ll consider them.

Second, we talk to the client. Are there any firms that they have successfully worked with? Who is the incumbent? Sadly, many of our clients come to us precisely because they have no one; if they did, the project might have been a negotiated sale with no need for a consultant. But their local integrators have let them down, and they’re ready for someone new.

Third, we look to the key manufacturers on the project to recommend firms that they have successfully worked with. We like that option as it tends to give us well-trained firms and the backing of the manufacturer.

And fourth, we’ll occasionally consider firms that have approached us to be on our bid lists.

When the integrators get our RFP package, they have a decision to make — whether or not to bid on the project. This is often just a business decision with no strategy involved. They can look at their skill set, the competition, current and projected workload, and other factors and decide whether or not it’s worth their while. If not, why go to the trouble?

Two reasons come to mind, besides the actual project. First, referrals. If a manufacturer is referring you, it’s going to want you to bid. If you don’t bid on projects for which you are referred, the leads are sure to dry up. No one wants to refer someone who is non-responsive, and deciding not to bid a job is about as non-responsive as it gets. From our perspective, when we are referred a consulting lead, it has to be pretty bad for us to ignore it. We want the referrals, and keeping people who give our name out thinking of us is a key consideration when looking at prospective projects.

Second, the experience is a factor. If you are interested in getting into an area, go ahead and respond. If you don’t get the project, seek out feedback as to why you didn’t get the job. There are often factors beyond price, and an informal “off the record” phone call with the owner, consultant, or other key players may give you the information you need to win the next one.

As a side note, sometimes you may get leads that really don’t speak to your core competencies. Rather than summarily rejecting them, respond with the reason you’re not bidding. I’d rather hear from an integrator that they’re not interested in bidding a certain type of project but keep them in mind for other types, than to have them just “no bid” our jobs. The former will get them on the right bid lists; the latter will take them off all of our lists – even the Christmas card list!

Click here to read the original article

Most consultants, integrators and other professionals involved with large-scale security projects tend to develop a sixth sense. We learn to pinpoint problems in the early going and then formulate the necessary adjustments to be successful.

This added sensitivity is important to us, as it occasionally helps us identify those projects that are doomed from the start. Since the survival of your business is often dependent on the success of your projects, it is important to recognize and embrace your “gut instinct.”

Far more uncommon is the project that incites a gut feeling from the get-go that success is inevitable. Indeed, it is rare to find a job that has the necessary backing from upper management, openness to new technology, and a well-defined process for project planning,procurement and rapid problem resolution.

The video surveillance installation at Odawa Casino, located near the waters of Lake Michigan in Petoskey, Mich., was such a project. The design included two control rooms and auxiliary monitoring locations,encompassing a new casino, parking structure, special events area and a remote waste water treatment plant. All of it secured with full integration between video, access control and other gaming systems.While I’d like to say I was pleasantly surprised, all of us involved with this project genuinely knew it would succeed from the start.

Success Begins With Adoption of ‘Qualifications Selection’ Process
In large part, the project’s expected triumph was due to the tribe’s embracement of the Qualifications-Based Selection(QBS) process, according to Kevin Kane, an owner’s representative for the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians (LTBB), which operates the gaming resort.

“This is a nationwide program that is based on prequalifying vendors, interviewing where necessary and then negotiating fees,”Kane says. “This allowed us to select vendors with a proven track record and the skills needed for us to succeed, while still meeting our cost and budgetary objectives. In fact, the entire project finished not only on time, which is not uncommon for casino projects, but under budget, which is certainly the exception.”

Prior to designing the solution, and even before the project got off the ground, the surveillance focus group was tasked with crafting system requirements to a rough order of magnitude and setting the budget. This group — consisting of the tribe’s CFO,general manager, regulatory director, surveillance manager, surveillance lead technician and owners’ representatives — had a general idea of what they needed the system to perform. They desired a wall of video monitors that would display numerous cameras simultaneously, plus operator stations free of distractions and enough room to work effectively and comfortably.

“We are thankful to be working for a tribe that has vision and wanted to make sure that our part of the puzzle fit into their picture,” says Vince Cook, regulatory director for LTBB.

Tribe Prepares for Gaming Future Informed by Past Experiences
The members of LTBB were no strangers to analog and digital video. Prior to the Odawa Casino project they owned and operated the nearby Victories Casino with its 16 gaming tables and 1,100 slot machines, plus restaurants, a bar and other amenities. The tribe had already upgraded its analog recording solution to a Nice Vision Pro 200Series DVR system. The old facility also had a Pelco matrix switch and more than 300 cameras from various manufacturers, both fixed and pan/tilt/zoom (p/t/z) models.

“Our system had grown through evolution,” explains LTBB’s surveillance manager Tom Gould. “We knew that the new facility would allow us to make a fresh start, both from a technical and an operational perspective, and we were looking forward to applying what we have learned over the years.”

One of the things they had learned was they did not want to go it alone; a consultant would be essential to the new project. The new facility — with about 50,000–square feet of gaming floor space — would be much bigger, including 1,500 slots, 30tables, a special events area, more amenities and considerable room for growth.The camera coverage would also be greatly enhanced, with roughly 800cameras, more operators and a great deal more technology to manage the operation. As part of the product and vendor selection process, the tribe first needed to find the right consultant to guide them.

“We wanted someone who could look at our needs and expectations and guide us in making choices,” explains Kane.One example: the existing system had a video wall, consisting of a bank of monitors, all individually controlled through the matrix switching system. While this allowed for real-time video refresh on each screen,it would not provide much operational flexibility, was expensive to implement (a much larger matrix switch would have been required), and would have consumed substantial space in the room.

The final design included front projection of video images fed through the digital side of the system, thereby reducing cost and adding the ability to dynamically resize images as needed, depending on what transpired in the facility at the time. “The decision to put video quality on the desk rather than on the wall was the right one for our application, but we probably wouldn’t have come up with that on our own,” Kane says.

Potential Consultants Solicited by ‘Request for Qualifications’
Once the project had received all of the necessary approvals, a”Request for Qualifications” document was sent out to a number of prospective vendors. To save time and maximize participation,the document was sent to consultants, manufacturers and integrators. It clearly stated the needed qualifications for each group. As a consulting firm, for example, we had to certify we did “not manufacture, furnish or install such systems and our firm does not have any affiliation with any surveillance equipment manufacturers or surveillance integrators.”

Similar restrictions were placed on other trades, while questions were designed to reveal as much as possible without requiring respondents to jump through hoops, as can often be the case (see side bar).

I was impressed with the initial interview, as were many of the other consultants and vendors selected for different areas of the project. The focus was on building a team based on capabilities and experience, not the strength of a PowerPoint^™ presentation.Kane instructed me (and other vendors) to keep it short and to the point,and to “leave the marketing folks at home.”

Installation Begins to Take Shape; Integration Capability an Emphasis
Once I was on board, we reviewed the design process to date. In the head-end area, we left raised computer flooring in the rack room and extended it to the adjacent technician’s shop. This would allow us to move the technician to another location in the future, if needed, and expand the rack room. We eliminated the raised floor in the surveillance room, and instead opted for two-foot-wide trenches running from the rack room to the operator and supervisor consoles. The Winsted console we selected features an integral cable management system that we used for console wiring, which also offered some cost savings.

Expansion was a critical factor as well. It is not uncommon for casinos to grow and expand far beyond their initial footprint and we wanted to be prepared. The initial system design called for roughly 800inputs, so we sized the racking and infrastructure to support more than three times that number, or 2,500 cameras.

Our firm calculates HVAC and power requirements as part of the design process, so we provided this in two phases — initial system size and expanded size. It was decided to size the UPS system for the expanded capacity, but only purchase batteries for the first phase. This eliminated the high cost of purchasing more battery capacity than was initially required, since batteries are a consumable.

We also provided two areas for video review outside of the command center. Access to the monitor room was to be extremely restricted, so functions that would normally be done in the room at a supervisor console were moved to remote monitoring consoles. One was located in a common area of the surveillance suite, while the second was placed in a conference room. This allowed both semi-private and private viewing, as access to the surveillance suite is limited as well.

Most casinos divide video monitoring into two areas: the heavily regulated surveillance department tasked with monitoring the gaming floor and any money handling areas (including the passage of money into and out of the facility). The security department monitors all other areas including roadways and parking lots. A second command center was designed for security, but it was considerably different from the surveillance console in that it could accommodate more rack mounted security equipment as needed for future growth.

The two monitoring consoles and third security console served a dual role. If there was ever a system failure or condition that made the surveillance room uninhabitable, the operators could simply move to one of the other consoles to resume their duties.

To accomplish this, we designed the system as a single large system that was partitioned in such a way to limit access based on passwords and job functionality. In this manner, the security operator would not have access to call-up or control a gaming camera, but a surveillance operator, with access to all cameras, could send a gaming camera to a monitor in security. This allows a person with more restrictive system access to view an important image they wouldn’t normally be able to see.

On the software side, we focused on integration capabilities.We provided for full integration between access control and CCTV (fairly standard in high-end installations), but also provided for communication between a variety of subsystems such as slot data systems, cash registers, casino marketing cards and slot cash voucher systems. Also included was audio recording from a variety of sources and in selected areas as required by tribal and National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) regulations.

“Working with a consultant [throughout the design process]really opened our eyes to the different technologies available to us,” says Cook. “We had previously focused primarily on coverage and video quality, and there were things like automatic camera call up on alarms that we just hadn’t thought of. Adding these features and capabilities has put us light years ahead of where we were before, and our being a part of the design process, from start to finish, has been a huge help.”
Video, Access Control Vendors Ease Expansion, Offer Flexibility
Once the design parameters were fleshed out, it became important to select a manufacturer. Doing so would simplify the bidding process by allowing us to work with a manufacturer to fine-tune the system design, and make it easier to compare bids since all integrators would be bidding the same functionality and essentially the same equipment.LTBB chose to go with a single manufacturer for as much of the CCTV system as possible. This would allow the tribe to focus on integration with other systems without worrying about integration between the various CCTV sub-systems.

After careful consideration of a number of full-line suppliers,Clovis-Calif.-based Pelco was awarded the contract. The tribe’s experiences with Pelco equipment had been extremely positive. The decision offered the advantage to reuse some of the Pelco equipment(such as matrix switch cages, keyboards and p/t/z domes) for expansion of the system at Odawa when the Victories Casino closed. Other equipment, including fixed cameras and the NiceVision recording system,was broken up into a series of smaller systems and utilized in other tribal properties where compatibility with the Odawa Casino system would not be a requirement.

The selection of an access control system was given careful consideration as well. That it had to integrate well with the Pelco system was a given, but there were other opportunities for blended operation. Access to other databases such as time and attendance, and even cafeteria meal purchases, were added to the specification wishlist, as were hybrid cards with both proximity functionality and printed bar codes to support legacy systems. Ultimately, Rochester,N.Y.-based Lenel was chosen as the access control manufacturer because of its flexibility and willingness to support all levels of integration.

Integrators Selected onFamiliarity With Equipment, Customer Service
Two separate integrators were selected for the project, in part because of the timing of the system purchases. First up was the CCTV integrator, American Video and Security (AVS). Based in Black Creek,Wis., AVS focuses on gaming and has done a lot of work with otherNative American casinos. The company is very familiar with Pelcosystems and had recently finished a gaming project for the NorthernLights Casino in Carter, Wis.

One aspect that impressed LTBB about AVS was its long-term plan for customer satisfaction. As part of its proposal, AVS agreed to hire and train a local technician who would work on the project through the installation and remain on duty at AVS expense for a full year.”We’re a small company with big customers, and we feel that going the extra mile on service and support makes us stand out in competitive bid situation,” comments Rick Verbsky, president of AVS.

Access control was to be handled by Grand Rapids, Mich.-based SecurAlarm Systems Inc. Gloria Lubber, executive vice president of SecurAlarm, worked closely with us through the design process and provided many enhancements to the system design based on their past experiences. “We are used to customers who require a great deal of flexibility,” Lubben says. “This project allowed us to present a variety of different options and truly customize the system around the specific project requirements.”

Point-to-Point SystemRequires More Cable, But Advantages Rule
One requirement of the system design was the recognition of the fact that expansion was a given. While the head-end was appropriately sized for growth, we felt it important to allow for the addition of more field devices without the need to constantly pull more cable.Casinos typically use analog video for live camera call-up to avoid latency, with an integrated encoder/server-based digital recording system for storage and retrieval of events. Since this required point-to-point wiring of cameras (instead of a networked configuration), we designed a UTP-based system utilizing equipment provided by Nitek of Rolling Meadows, Ill.

This was one of a few exceptions to the “one manufacturer” rule, and was largely due to the DIP switch-based distance compensation design used on the Nitek hubs. With DIP switches,a failed hub or module can be quickly swapped out for another one by simply matching up the switches. Units that use potentiometers tend to require more extensive setup and drift over time, while self-calibrating units never stop calibrating and can degrade the image as they compensate for changes in the image that fool them into thinking the cable distance has changed. We also selected hubs with dual outputs, allowing us to route the video signal to both the matrix switch and the digital video encoder without the use of a separate distribution amplifier.

While a point-to-point system requires more cable than a networked system, it has other advantages that, in some applications, make it more cost-effective and flexible. For one, we did not have to worry about the cable distance limits inherent in Internet protocol(IP)-based video systems, and the use of 4-pair Cat-5e cable to each camera location allows three additional cameras to be added per cable(two if the camera is a p/t/z model, which use a pair of wire for data).

Cameras were routed to one of two rack rooms on the casino level or directly back to the rack room, whichever was closer. An extensive patching system based on “66 block” style interconnection terminals and 25-pair Cat-5 cables allows for reconfiguration of cameras in much the same manner a telephone system uses.

Separate power cables were used instead of conductors on theCat-5ecables to preserve the spare pairs for video expansion and allow the possibility that future cameras might draw more current than the Cat-5ecable could support. While this flies in the face of convention—electronics equipment tends to get more efficient, not less —we had some concerns that future cameras might incorporate features such as higher resolution imagers, internal hard drives and video analytics.Therefore, we wanted to be prepared.

Camera selection is also a challenge in casinos. We were helped some what by the fact that Pelco carries essentially two different lines of p/t/z dome cameras. The Spectra IV Series is well suited to lower light areas of the casino floor, where the wide dynamic range feature compensates for huge differences in lighting, be it flashing slot machine to shadows around the base of each machine. The wide range of optical magnification (35x) allows cameras to track people throughout the casino and image stabilization is a big help in certain areas as well.

At the other end of the spectrum was the Spectra Mini. These cameras are not much bigger than fixed domes and feature 10x zoom lenses. Our firm had used them successfully in the close quarters of a cruise ship casino and we specified them here in areas with lower ceilings where high magnification and low light response were not a factor. This allowed us to minimize the aesthetic impact of the domes in certain areas without compromising performance.

Changing Nature ofIndustry Evidenced During Installation
Throughout the installation process, the challenge of adjusting, moving and modifying cameras to accommodate varying lighting issues and other décor concerns was ongoing. While Dave Lucas of AVS experimented with different positions, angles and lenses, his brother, Jim, handled the software configuration and adjustments to the Pelco Endura digital video system and 9780 matrix switch.

As cameras were brought online, each was titled on the matrix and adjusted for frame rate, resolution and storage time on the digital system. Operators training on the system prior to opening saw the camera count grow and were amazed at how good the video quality was,compared to what had been state-of-the-art just a few years ago.

As the casino construction progressed, no tradesman or construction worker could so much as adjust their clothing without the watchful eye of surveillance upon them. While this was supplemented by formal training sessions, the real-time experience gained during construction was a tremendous help in acclimating people to the system.

One unforeseen problem with the cameras speaks to the changing nature of our industry.

At one time, cameras were all synchronized to the 60Hz power line frequency. By utilizing a camera’s vertical phasing (or”V-Phase”) feature, integrators were able to matchup all cameras in the system, eliminating the picture”roll” when switching from camera to camera. In practice, cameras were rarelyV-Phased, and customers rarely noticed a roll, but there was no harm in continuing this proud tradition. However, projects that fully utilize online UPS power systems sometimes have slight timing problems and do not deliver precisely 60Hz power. This causes the video images on certain cameras to orbit the screen, moving in a barely noticeable clockwise rotation.

The operators at Odawa noticed it immediately, however,proving that the quality of the tools we were providing for them was well deserved.While we were able to have the UPS calibrated to eliminate the problem,we went to internal sync on all the cameras to prevent this problem from recurring if the UPS ever drifts. Based on our experiences, we will be calling for internal sync on future projects as a precaution and have recommended to manufacturers that they reconsider their default setting.

Team Approach and a KeenEye for Problem-Solving Ensure Success As the casino progressed through construction and a flawless opening, there were the usual number of challenges, but none jumped out as opportunities for “lessons learned.” With a decision process in place that allows for rapid, informed decisions, a manufacturer that is ready to jump in and help as needed, and two experienced integrators on the job, this project was a testament to the success of the team approach.

But the final measure of performance is ultimately customer satisfaction. “In this case,” explains Kane,”we had a client who had suffered from unfulfilled expectations on previous projects. Through our planning, processes, and attention to detail, we were able to exceed their expectations. We created a showcase and raised the bar for future projects.”

I’m sure I speak for the entire team when I say I’m looking forward to the next one.

Redundancy Relied on for Fail-Safe Protection

The critical nature of the video surveillance solution at the Odawa Casino in Petoskey, Mich., made safeguards essential. As much redundancy as possible was built into the system. In addition to the items mentioned in the case study article beginning on page 70, such as dual output UTP hubs that feed digital and analog systems separately,there were many areas where redundancy ruled. These include:

Camera power supplies— No two adjacent cameras are fed from the same multi drop power supply. This ensures that a power supply failure, however unlikely,will not shut down an entire area, and is a design requirement we adopted for all of our projects based on work we do for the USPS.

Digital data redundancy— In addition to the server-based redundancy offered by redundant arrays of independent disks (RAID)-5 hard drive configuration, we provided a spare set of Pelco Endura encoders and servers. If a server or encoder fails, the analog matrix switch will automatically switch the cameras to a spare encoder, server and RAID. This also allows for server maintenance without the loss of data.

Hardware redundancy —All servers have dual redundant power supplies, and each power supply is fed from a different circuit breaker. A spare CPU is included with the Pelco 9780 matrix switch to take over in case of failure.

Master evidence server— All video clips that are pulled out of the overwrite rotation are saved on a master evidence server located in the rack room. A second master evidence server, also featuring RAID-5 redundancy, is located in a separate building and backs up clips stored on the master evidence server every 15 minutes.

Dual response to alarm events— Door alarms are handled by the access control panels through the access control server, which is connected to the matrix switch through a high level data interface. A second alarm path is provided through alarm contact closures that are fed through an alarm interface on the matrix. In this manner, if communications ever fail between the access control panels and the central CPU, alarms will still go through.

Detailed Program Used to Select Vendors for CasinoProject

An integral component to selecting vendors for the Odawa Casino project was the submitting of prequalification data in compliance with the nationwide Qualifications-Based Selection (QBS) program.

Some of the questions were generic in nature, while others drilled down into design philosophies and experience with other gaming andNative American projects. Questions included:

• Type of firm (surveillance equipment manufacturer,surveillance consultant or surveillance integrator)
• Background information about your firm and any other partners that would be involved
• Biographical information on the principals of the firm and those individuals with your firm with whom we would be working with directly
• List the gaming licenses currently or previously held by your firm and the reason, if any, of those licenses are not current
• Verify if your firm is a Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians (LTBB) licensed contractor or if there is any issue in being aLTBB licensed contractor
• State the level of experience your firm has in working with all tribes and the current and past relationships with any Michigan tribe
• References of tribal organizations that you have provided services; include the contact information for the appropriate individuals
• List the digital surveillance systems your firm has in place, including the size, location and contact information
• Address your firm’s approach and schedule by answering how you: develop cutting-edge technologies and virtual matrix systems;integrate existing digital surveillance systems to your digital surveillance systems; offer service and support during installation,startup and over the life of the system
• Other information you feel is pertinent to our selection process

A confidentiality agreement was also required for the Odawa project,and the format to be used in the response was not specified. This allowed LTBB to evaluate the care each prospective vendor took in preparing its answers, proving that no matter how old you get, spelling still counts!

Copyright © 2009 Security Sales & Integration. All rights reserved. All material on this site including but not limited to images and text may not be duplicated, reproduced, redistributed or re-transmitted in any form without the express written permission of Security Sales & Integration.

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

As a consulting company that often works with hospitals, schools and universities, our goal is to get as many qualified integrators so the process of bidding on a safety and security project is competitive and the quality level will be roughly comparable, regardless of the vendor selected.

On some projects this may be out of a campus’ or our hands. Projects that involve government dollars typically advertise, wait for responses, and evaluate them according to fairly rigid criteria. While hospital, school and university officials as well as their consultants can make some phone calls to ensure selected integrators know a project is advertised so they can respond on their own, the quantity and quality of responses is often left to chance.

Other projects task the consultant or campus official with filling a bid list, ensuring there is sufficient participation. When consultants do this, we’re representing to our campus clients that we will be able to provide them with a minimum of three thorough, competitive bids on the specified project and we’ll be able to make a recommendation from those choices.

Further, our recommended bidder will be able to complete the project as a bid, make everyone happy, and earn a reasonable profit. That last item is critical; if the integrator doesn’t make a profit on its jobs, it may not be able to stay in business long enough to support the project through the warranty period.

As a result, this bid list is a fairly serious undertaking, and as consultants we spend a lot of time working with integrators to ensure we’ll get participation on projects. Since we’re asked about this topic so frequently, I thought we’d share some of the steps we take to qualify integrators and ensure competitive bids.

Be Selective With Those You Put on Your Bid List
Keeping in mind that any integrator placed on a bid list has a chance of winning the job, we don’t want to just throw any name in the ring. If an integrator is selected for the job, you are stuck with them, so give as much thought to the bid list as you do to the final selection (see sidebar).
If you are unable to come up with enough prospective bidders to fill your list, asking for recommendations from manufacturers is often an excellent alternative. This works best when you have already selected a manufacturer, but if you haven’t settled on one, be sure to compare notes. An integrator that is on top of two manufacturers’ lists is generally a good candidate, although it would be rare to find the same company on three lists.
It’s important to get manufacturer recommendations in writing, as they can also be referred to as a “get-out-of-jail-free card.” If the integrator fails in the execution of your project, the manufacturer will generally step up to the plate and see the job through if your selection of the integrator was based in part on its referral.

Many Security Contractors Should Participate
Once you’ve filled your bid list, you need to ensure that as many integrators participate as possible. You do this first by providing a brief description of the project, including your best estimate of the time frame involved, and asking them if they’d be willing to bid on the job.

Bidding on a project is very time consuming and costly if done right, and your project may not interest everyone. Don’t take this personally; there are lots of legitimate reasons why an integrator might turn down a bid request, including workload, unfamiliarity with the specified product, or projects that fall outside its comfort zone. Integrators want to bid on jobs they feel they have a good chance of winning. If they don’t feel they have the right experience for a project and have a lot of other proposals on which they are working, they will likely pass.

Above all, integrators want a level playing field. If you have written a specification or had a consultant write it for you, you are generally in the clear. This is not the case if you’ve had help from another integrator. Many claim to have independent consulting divisions, and if that’s the case, have them put their money where their mouth is; tell them if they design the system, they are not eligible to bid on it. Even with that safeguard, other potential bidders may shy away — no one wants their competitor looking at how they bid and price projects. If the project is a design-build, let each integrator come up with its own design; don’t play favorites.

Registering All Bidders Ensures Clarity
When a campus’ bid has been issued, it is important bidders are asked to register. We’ve found we have had to turn this from an optional to a mandatory process. We tell them that if they don’t register, their bid will not be considered. This is critical because you want to be certain all bidders get the same information. If they don’t register, we’re not sure the answers are getting to the right people. If a bidder does not register, ask for your package back; you don’t want details of your security project circulating any more than necessary.

Once registered, bidders may submit questions in writing. Answers to these questions are sent to all registered bidders throughout the bidding process, as are any changes, clarifications or other pertinent documents. As consultants, we answer questions as quickly as we can.

We understand that the integrator is putting a lot of time and effort into preparing the bid package, and we want to make the process as painless as possible. By delaying a response, we’re concerned the integrator will be up against a deadline and will either throw a high dollar number at the item in question, or decide not to bid because of the uncertainties.

As a side note, some folks lose sight of the goal in the competitive bid process. We feel that if there’s one clear winner, we haven’t done our job as a consultant. A campus’ goal should be to obtain a good number of competitive bids, where all bidders understand the project, provide pricing that is in the same ballpark, and fill you with confidence that they can get the job done. This allows you to look at other factors — experience with similar projects, service and support capabilities, reputation, and understanding of the products, rather than just price.

Many projects benefit from a prebid meeting where all prospective bidders gather for a project review. This is an opportunity to go over any areas of the specification that might cause confusion, answer any questions, and walk through the jobsite to get a feeling as to the physical conditions and work environment. Attendance at the prebid meeting is often mandatory, but this depends on the complexity of the project and the proximity of the bidders. Make sure a published record of items discussed is sent to all attendees.

Pay particular attention to the questions you get at the meeting and through the RFI process. You’ll quickly learn who has read the spec, who understands the requirement, and who is just going through the motions. These are good indicators of the competence of the prospective integrators, but keep from making snap judgments. Remember, the person preparing the bid is rarely the one who installs the system.

At the end of the Q&A, send out a composite list of all questions and answers. This ensures any late registrants are brought up to speed and provides a reminder of the issues that may be tricky or vague in the specification. Ask that all recipients acknowledge they have read, understood and responded to these questions as part of their bid package. The simple act of doing this can dramatically reduce the number (and cost) of change orders if you pick a low bidder that is low because someone in the firm doesn’t remember getting your clarifications.

Properly Evaluate All Prospective Integrators
On opening day, we tell our clients to rip open the packages, ignore all of the carefully prepared material, and go right to the bottom line price. Why? Because everyone does it anyway. Once that is out of the way, we can focus on a proper bid evaluation. There are a few ways to do this, and the method you use might depend on your internal policies or purchasing requirements.

Hopefully this process will lead you to a clear choice or at least a rich field from which to choose. If not, take a close look at the specification, including any onerous terms you may have proposed, and consider rebidding the package with some of these restrictions modified. If time is an element, a negotiated price is another good option. Whatever you choose, keep in mind that ethics play a greater part in today’s society than ever before. If you’re the one tasked with selecting the winning bidder, hold off on buying that new sports car until well after the selection process — better safe than sorry!

Click Here to Download this Article in PDF Format

That last part of the title raised the interest of the audience — and the ire of some of the exhibitors.

“I’m looking forward to hearing this,” said one sales consultant who worked for an integrator exhibiting at the show. “I’ll be here to keep you honest.” Another sales engineer told me he resented the implication there might be a hidden side to upgrading your system. A third person (his business card said “technical advisor”) just glowered, his body language challenging me with contempt and disbelief.

The fact is that with larger system purchases, the end user is at odds with the salesperson. While you may have specific requirements, the salesperson is not necessarily there to solve your problems or meet those specific needs. They are there to sell you the product, earn a commission and feed their family.

If the offered product happens to perfectly suit your application, that’s wonderful. However, if the product doesn’t have the functionality you are looking for, some salespeople will try to convince you that you don’t need that feature, that you need other features as well, or even misrepresent the product to convince you to buy it. They choose to worry about the consequences later, if at all.

This is clearly not the case with all salespeople but the higher the stakes, the more likely at least one of the companies trying to earn your business will exhibit this behavior.

It can be difficult to recognize unless you’re more technically astute than the salesperson or know the warning signs. Reading this magazine regularly will help you with the former, and this column will help with the latter.

Spot the Right Salesperson

It is important to note that most manufacturers do not encourage dishonesty, intentional or otherwise. In fact, the opposite is often true.

Product specification sheets are usually very conservative to ensure that a product is guaranteed to meet its specification. While they’re not above beating up on sales management to “bring in the numbers,” manufacturers do not want customers that will ultimately be unhappy with their product.

If a product is not a good fit, it will require a lot of time and money to make things right, or a hit to the manufacturers’ reputation if the customer complains to others or demands it be replaced with a competitor’s product.
So how can you spot the salesperson that is looking out for your interest?

First, understand their motivation. They are there to sell you a product or solution. Even if their title says “consultant,” “engineer” or “advisor,” they’re likely none of the above.

A consultant or advisor should be independent and not earn a commission on their advice, while an engineer is a degreed position that few salespeople hold.

Once you understand their intentions, look out for the following:

Do they understand your application? To determine what product meets your specific needs, a salesperson first needs to understand your requirements. Do they ask you how the system will be used?

They should be concerned with the skill level of the people who will interact with your system. They should understand that gee-whiz features that add more complexity than your users can handle would not benefit you. Questions about expansion plans, as well as products and features that you have liked in the past, are all good signs.

Do they focus on their competition? If a salesperson keeps emphasizing features that they have that their competition lacks, beware.

Very often, they’re just plain wrong. Their comparison may be based on a superficial demo they saw at a trade show, secondhand information or last year’s model. Besides, you should be looking at the features their product has that meet your needs, not the features their competition lacks.

There is rarely a “perfect” system and you’ll have to make some compromises, but you should be the one deciding what is important to you, not them.

Everything should be in writing. Any feature or specification that you are told about should be in writing in a published manual, data sheet or specification. Everyone has heard or experienced horror stories about features that were promised but never delivered. If you don’t get proof of the promise, you’re unlikely to win this kind of battle.

Buy the current version. You’re not interested in what will be available in a future version of the product. Preliminary data sheets are just that — early versions of what the manufacturer hopes to include at some point in the future.

If a feature is there but doesn’t work right, you have a reasonable chance that it will be fixed. If you’re relying on “it will be in the next release,” you’re sure to be disappointed. Make sure you can live with the product “as is,” since that’s all you can count on.

What do they do when they’re stumped? If you’ve done your homework, you’re likely to ask a question that the salesperson can’t answer. If that doesn’t happen and you perceive that the salesperson is avoiding the answer, beware.
Good salespeople know when to call for help. Hearing that they’ll have to get back to you on a question is an excellent sign (if they do in fact get back to you). That means they’re not making up answers when they’re not sure.

Do they keep their promises? Little things mean a lot. Are they respectful of your time? Do they follow up when they say they will? Do they come through with demo equipment, literature or other requested information?

You want to feel that you’re important to them and that the relationship will continue after the sale. If they’re rushed to make a sale or fail to deliver as promised, they’re not likely to be around when you need them and they’ve already been paid their commission.

Go With Your Gut

If you find a salesperson who listens, focuses on their products and your particular needs, gives you a well-documented solution that is currently shipping, understands their limitations and follows up as promised, should you trust them?

The final test should be your gut instinct.

You wouldn’t be in the position you’re in unless you have had some experience taking the measure of a person. If your internal voice says they’re all right and they meet the criteria above, you’re probably in good hands.

If everything looks good but you feel uneasy, look elsewhere, or ask the manufacturer or integrator to send someone else.

Some people say that life would be a lot easier if it had a soundtrack like the movies, with ominous music when you’re in danger. I’m a firm believer that there is always a soundtrack — you just have to listen for it!

Copyright © 2009 Security Sales & Integration. All rights reserved. All material on this site including but not limited to images and text may not be duplicated, reproduced, redistributed or re-transmitted in any form without the express written permission of Security Sales & Integration.

Click Here to download this Article in PDF Format

What should you look for? Forget about pixels, file sizes and bandwidth for a moment, and concentrate on the things that will matter when you justify your investment. Your application will determine what is important to you and what compromises you’ll make.

Picture Quality is 1st Consideration

While manufacturers would like you to fall in love with a screen resolution, color depth, compression format and file size to compare across product lines, what you need to define is the subjective video quality you need.

If you’ll settle for VHS quality, say so. If you need DVD quality, specify that. Once you know what you’re looking for, make a subjective comparison between the products you’re contemplating and the video quality you’re seeking.

Don’t compare quality across DVR brands – compare it to your reference source. In a recent specification, I wrote, “Video images shall be recorded with sufficient resolution, color depth and quality of image compression as to make the recorded image indistinguishable from a DVD-sourced original. No more than 5 percent of the video image may exhibit compression artifacts.”

My client and I will look at different samples and decide which meets this subjective requirement, but we’d rather trust our eyes than a data sheet. I think you’ll feel the same way once you look at enough DVRs with wonderful specifications that deliver lousy pictures.

Recording Time Dictates File Size

Delivering the best picture with the smallest file size is the holy grail of digital recording, right? You may be surprised to learn that for many applications, file size simply doesn’t matter.

Many DVRs are used in closed systems, either standalone or on their own dedicated networks. File size is important when you need to move files around on a network but have limited network bandwidth availability. This is not usually the case with a DVR used on a private network; it is critical, however, when you are sharing the corporate LAN. If the DVR is a standalone unit, network bandwidth is not an issue.

File size matters when calculating the data storage requirements to determine the number of hard drives needed. This was very important when an 80GB hard drive was stateof-the-art. Today, hard drives are available as large as 400GB, and drives less than 200GB are surprisingly inexpensive. File size matters when you’re recording high activity cameras for longer periods of time, but even then, enough drive space can make it go away.

Support, Features Really Matter

Your specification now includes an acceptable picture quality level and enough storage capacity to record the images for the time period required, but there are other considerations:

• Platform – Do you want a PC-based platform or an “embedded” box? The embedded product, with its own self-contained operating system, should be the first you examine. They are more user-friendly, less expensive, smaller and more reliable. Consider PC-based systems when expandability, networking, software upgradeability or enterprise-wide systems are a requirement.
• Reliability – For most people, extreme levels of data reliability aren’t needed. If you’re moving from VHS to digital, and you’re accustomed to staking your video reputation on a $1.29 VHS cassette known to occasionally jam or clog the heads, you’re not moving to digital for increased reliability. System hardening is expensive and important in some applications, but shouldn’t be an automatic purchase.
• Support – This is an important factor often left off shopping lists. If you’re having trouble exporting a video image and have the local law enforcement breathing down your back at 2 a.m., is there someone who can talk you through the procedure?
• Features – They usually add complexity. If you’re looking for a unit that records, burns clips to a CD-ROM and will be operated by people challenged by TiVo, consider something with a well-marked front panel, well-designed user interface and a quick-guide to make life simple. If your sophisticated needs include text interfaces, advanced search tools, dome control and cascading units to form a virtual matrix switch, make this the starting point in your search.

The task of replacing the trusty VHS cassette with digital technology can be a monumental challenge. Hopefully, these common-sense guidelines can reduce it to a more manageable size.

Security Sales & Integration 1 July 2004

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

How does the end user know who’s competent? With a sales engineer or systems architect, the answer is simple: Engineers and architects are degreed positions, so look for the diploma. But with consultants, it’s not as black and white.

Let’s create our own definition. We’ll stick with Webster as closely as we can: A consultant is a person who gives unbiased professional or expert advice and is beholden only to the person who has hired him.

Still, the advice given by a consultant varies, so let’s explore an advisor’s duties and responsibilities.

Consultants Help Make Decisions

Many vendors will provide design, engineering, installation and project management services as part of a “turn-key” solution. If you’ve selected such a vendor and are confident it will meet your needs, you do not need a consultant.

If there are several vendors involved, comparing their bids is much like comparing apples to oranges. If you believe that you can evaluate their offerings and select the one that best suits your needs, you’re acting as the consultant yourself and don’t need to hire outside help.
But there’s a difference between need and benefit: Many organizations find that there are tangible benefits, both financial and operational, in employing this outside expertise.

Consultants Often Act as Specifiers

A consultant is hired by end users to look at their specific concerns and apply the appropriate technology and operational procedures to accomplish their goals. The objective can be very specific or ethereal, but the end result is generally a specification that details how the problem will be solved. These specifications fall into two categories: functional and performance specifications.

A functional specification describes what a system will do. It is generic in nature and written to allow multiple vendors to apply their specific products. Often, it relies on the lowest common denominator to ensure wider participation between vendors, and may be accompanied by an approved vendor list.

A performance specification is more stringent and describes how the system will work. To accomplish this, a consultant generally has a spe¥cific system in mind, and while others may equal the performance, the criteria are much tighter. This type of specification selects a single vendor “or equal,” and is often the basis for a sole-source procurement agreement.

With either type, the consultant evaluates the options, discusses them with the client and – based on his opinion and expertise – designs a system around the customer’s needs or budget. Sometimes a manufacturer is favored because the consultant has had good experiences and often the installed equipment dictates the add-on products, but there should be no financial incentive for the consultant to choose a particular brand.

The consultant provides this specification in a format that may be sent to multiple vendors, ensuring a competitive bid process. While he helps evaluate the different proposed products to verify their suitability, he also explains the intangibles. Does the integrator have a history of success¥fully completing projects like the client’s? Will the manufacturer support the product for the life of the system? Does the product have a good track record?

“Theory cannot compensate for actual experience,” says Fred Zagurski, of Fred Zagurski Consultants. “Only a consultant from the ‘field’ will know what corners the bidders will try to shortcut, and (he) address these issues in their specifications.”

The consultant also acts as a representative during the construction and commissioning process. He ensures the installed system is the one specified, and will work through the many changes and add-ons that are inevitable side effects of the construction process. Often, a consultant will save his client more than his fees by ensuring the project stays on schedule and within budget.

Integrity, Experience Are Crucial

It’s clear there is no substitute for integrity and experience. To ensure a consultant’s independence, look for someone who is doing it for a living, and is not just “between jobs.” Look for experience with the type of project you are considering. And make sure he has been around long enough to have the reputation, industry contacts and people skills needed to smooth over the rough spots, should it come to that. Remember, your choice in consultant is a lot like a headache remedy – neither does you any good unless it takes away the pain.

Robert Grossman has spent more than 15 years in the industry and is president of R. Grossman and Associates (www.tech-answers.com),
a consulting group specializing in electronic security products and projects.
He can be reached at (609) 926-9264 or rdgrossman@securitysales.com

Security Sales & Integration 1 March 2004

Download this article in PDF format