The market is being whipped into a frenzy by buzz about IP, yet studies show that only 10-15 perent of systems sold include IP cameras. What’s the deal?

Our firm was recently retained by a new client to provide a strategic review on the electronic security industry. This client was focused on CCTV, and inevitably the topic of IP-based CCTV systems was high on their list. They had studied all of the market data they could find and were disappointed to discover that — depending on the estimates — only 10-15 percent of the systems being sold today are considered IP systems. “How can this be?” they asked. “Aren’t all systems today essentially IP based systems?”

They were right. Unless you are using a videocassette-based system or an extremely low-end DVR, all systems are IP based. Why? Because the recording is handled by a DVR, and that DVR virtually always includes client software that allows you to remotely access live or recorded video. So, if all systems are IP eventually, why is there so much discussion as to the pros and cons of IP based systems?

Close to the Edge

The real question is how far out to the edge do you go with IP. An IP system converts an analog video signal to a digital stream that can be transmitted over a conventional Ethernet network. But it can do this in a number of places.

If an IP camera is used, the signal is converted at the camera itself — this is what is commonly referred to as an IP-based system. An analog camera can also be used, and the signal can be fed into an IP encoder that converts the signal to a digital stream. The IP encoder can be located in a more convenient location, and multi-channel encoders are available to convert multiple cameras from one box. Or the camera can remain analog all the way to the recording device, which then converts the signal to store it. In that case, the recorder is also serving as an encoder, and the signal is generally available as an IP signal streaming from the recorder.

So, which system should you use? In general, we recommend that analog cameras be fed to IP encoders unless megapixel resolution is required. We base this on a number of factors, including cost, ease of installation and appearance.

1. Cost — In general, the cost of an analog camera plus an encoder is generally the same price or less than the cost of an IP camera, and technically the signal quality is identical. In fact, if multi-channel encoders are used the cost of the analog/encoder pairing drops significantly below the IP camera cost.

   The true savings come in when you look at replacement cost. Edge devices fail or get damaged from time to time. One of our clients had a faulty camera installation and the outdoor IP camera filled up with water during a storm. Replacement cost was $900, but it would only have been $300 if an analog camera had been used and connected to an encoder that was safely installed in a closet or other weatherproof space.

2. Ease of Installation — An IP camera has some installation limitations that can drive costs up significantly. Primarily is cable distance — IP cameras are limited to 100 meters (328 feet) unless special converters, repeaters, or fiber optic cable is used. Analog cameras can run for great distances before being converted to IP — over a mile if the proper UTP (unshielded twisted pair) baluns are used. The same cabling can be used, so cable cost isn’t an issue, and the convenience of locating equipment where conditioned space is available often outweighs other concerns.

   Other installation factors include the sensitivity of IP cameras to power fluctuations, the difficulty in getting environmentally hardened IP equipment, and the limitations in size and form factor for IP base products.

   Finally, analog cameras can be plugged into a portable monitor for setup, focusing, and field of view adjustments. While some IP cameras also include analog outputs to allow this, many do not. This makes installation far more difficult, involving a computer, extra network port (if power-over-Ethernet is used) and added time and complexity when installing.

3. Appearance — We are currently in the golden age of analog cameras in that the variety of sizes, shapes, features and performance levels available at low price points has never been better. This gives the designer or installer tremendous flexibility in matching cameras, housings, lens types, and other specification features to capture exactly the image that is needed. Too often, IP cameras require aesthetic or performance compromises that do not go over well with end users.

   While these and other advantages make us lean in this direction, nothing trumps technical requirements. If your application makes IP cameras advantageous, feel free to mix and match or use whichever makes the most sense. As far as which type of device to use, keep both in your toolbox and remember the old adage; if the only tool you have is a hammer, pretty soon everything looks like a nail.

DVR Versus NVR

To convert a camera to a digital signal it must be encoded. There are three ways of doing this. First, you can buy an “IP” camera which has an encoder built into it. We don’t usually recommend this, as when the camera breaks you have to replace the camera and the encoder at the same time, since they are one unit. Second, you can buy a separate camera and encoder. This allows you to just replace the device that fails which, over time, will save money. Third, you can buy a digital recorder with an encoder built in, and just plug the analog camera into the recorder.

A device that records signals that have already been encoded (options No. 1 and 2 listed above) is called a network video recorder, or NVR. A device that has the encoders built in (option No. 3, above) is called a digital video recorder, or DVR. It gets a little more complicated as there are units that have some encoders built in and also record encoded signals. They are usually called DVR’s as well, although they’re really both.

Functionally, there’s not a lot of difference. In fact, many manufacturers make both types and a system could use both. For example, a shopping mall might put a DVR in their command center to record the cameras that were run directly back to that room, and put encoders in data closets that would stream back to NVR’s, also located in the command center. When viewing cameras, they wouldn’t be able to tell if they were plugged into an NVR or a DVR, and they could view both types side by side on the same monitor. In most cases, the primary concern is cabling, infrastructure, and ease of installation since the recorded and live images are identical with each type of technology.

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

Few organizations are as sensitive to mood swings as the police agencies and security departments of colleges, universities and hospitals. Every time there is a well publicized security incident, the need to address areas of vulnerability is first and foremost on everyone’s mind. However, once the crisis blows over, it’s back to full justification for every expenditure.An important part of upgrading or expanding a system is establishing a baseline. The foundation is critical when building anything, and electronic security systems are no exception. For those trying to be proactive and upgrade their systems in a logical, well-planned fashion, the question of upgrading or replacing equipment is usually a key one. Should you maintain the status quo by performing maintenance and repairs, upgrade a system (or portions thereof), or just chuck it all and replace it?

This is not simply a technical question for many; it encompasses all areas of a security operation and requires consideration of a number of factors. This article is not about building or adding on to a system. These are decisions based on very tangible needs. Instead, a campus should grade its systems in three ways:

Functionality: Is everything working as required?

Future: Do the systems have the capacity to grow to accommodate near- to mid-term future needs?

Features: Are there specific features needed for your operation?

If your system gets one or more “F” grades in this report card, it may be time for a parent-teacher conference.

Functionality Depends on Application, Hardware, Installation
Systems that are not functioning properly may be unreliable or of insufficient quality for the application. This includes CCTV systems with poor image quality, access control systems that fail to permit access as needed (or grant it too freely), or alarm point monitoring that false alarms too often or doesn’t alarm when needed. In all of these cases, the next question that should be asked is, “Can it be repaired cost effectively?”

Surprisingly, that question isn’t always as simple as it sounds. A system can be unreliable because of the application, hardware or installation. If it is one of the first two, you’re often better off replacing it. If the equipment isn’t right for your application, it will never be reliable. If the equipment isn’t up to the task, same answer.

If the installation is faulty, you need to do some more investigating before making a decision. If the wrong type of wire was pulled, the equipment was not terminated properly, there are power or thermal problems, or one of a host of installation related gremlins are present, you’re better off remedying those problems before you rip out a system and replace it with one that performs equally poorly. Very few careers can withstand that kind of mistake.

Another question that should be asked is whether or not the equipment is approaching the end of its serviceable life. We usually think of this as being age related. Monitors, for example, have a very finite operating life, which is often exceeded. But there are two other reasons that come to mind.

The first is whether the product still exists or is supported by the manufacturer. A campus might have an analog matrix switch that is about six years old. Ordinarily, this would not be an issue as matrix switching systems tend to be extremely reliable with 20-year operating lives not uncommon. In some cases, however, the switch manufacturer is no longer in existence, having long ago been acquired and shut down by the new parent company. Since parts are no longer available and the failure of this system would be catastrophic, a campus with this type of equipment has no choice but to replace it.

The other end-of-life issue occurs when a technology is rendered obsolete and will shortly lack even basic market support. The best example of this is the multiplexer/VCR combination, which provides poor quality, low frame rate images and is subject to a host of problems that go unnoticed until there is a problem.

The worst time to find out there is a problem — the heads are worn on the VCRs, the tapes have not been changed, or a power glitch has stopped the VCR — is when there’s an incident at your facility. The alternatives are so far superior to tape that this has pulled out of the realm of “nice to have” and into a necessity item.

Other examples include DVRs and access control equipment using operating systems that are no longer supported by the manufacturer or technologies that consume more space, power and cooling than their more modern counterparts (CRT monitors, for example). If your facility is still hanging on to a type of technology like this, there had better be a plan in place to ensure replacement, with a strongly written letter in a file to cover yourself when the inevitable problems arise.

Determine If the Current System Meets Future Expansion Needs
The second reason for performing the upgrade-or-replace analysis is to determine whether your systems can be expanded to the capacity that you will need, and whether or not it will be cost effective to do so. Both sides of this question are equally important.

Often systems can be expanded, but if this pushes you up against the system maximums, the next round might not be possible. If that is the case, you may want to skip this expansion and replace the head-end with one that has more head room.

In other cases, the expansion of older systems is not cost effective. The older architecture may be expensive to incrementally scale, while a new system can offer greater capacity for less than expanding the old one. This is particularly true with older analog video matrix switches and some access control systems.

Look to preserve as much of the existing infrastructure as possible when making this decision. While the cost of the head-end may not be prohibitive, if all new cabling or other accessory devices are required as well, that may negate any savings. Manufacturers are moving more and more toward platform interoperability, and you should be able to reuse a portion of your existing system or replace it in a later budget cycle.

For example, one CCTV system may require a complete replacement. While campus officials would like this to incorporate everything, including eliminating oversized fixed camera housings and mounts in favor of sleek, miniaturized fixed domes, the image quality is remarkably good, particularly the black-and-white cameras. Because of this, campus officials decide to defer that portion of the system replacement for another year, focusing on upgrading system control and adding digital recording.

New Equipment Features Can Make Your Life Easier
While your system may be working well and have sufficient capability for expansion, it may be lacking features that are needed to effectively run your department. This can range from remote access to video files and system control, to fault tolerance for recorded images and data.

For example, one facility that was migrating from analog to digital recording reported that incident searches were shortened dramatically. This allowed the department to be far more proactive.

Other facilities are looking to do things with their systems that current products simply don’t allow. A university is looking to allow limited access to certain CCTV cameras so prospective students can take virtual tours of their campus while letting parents know they are serious about security. Another organization in a highly regulated environment is looking to improve fail-over provisions to ensure full compliance with all government regulations, including some that are only on the drawing board. In these cases, expansion or repair is usually not an option; replacement of the system, or at least a portion of the system, is required to achieve the desired results.

One caution comes to mind. Security systems are very much like utility type products. They were purchased to perform a specific task, and in many cases they are still doing so reliably and effectively. If the needs haven’t changed, and reliability is not an issue, don’t rush to upgrade software or firmware simply because the manufacturer now offers a newer version.

The old saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” comes to mind, and the problem the manufacturer is solving may not apply in your application. They may have released a new version to solve one bug, but do you really want to be the one to discover the new bugs that this “fix” may have created?

Changing Systems May Be Worth the Trouble

One reason to expand or upgrade rather than replace is the pain associated with a system replacement. The concerns (often well-justified) about disruptions to service and the length of time required to perform the change-out often causes public safety directors and other security professionals to defer replacement and nurse the old system along. While there are many reasons (as outlined in this article) to stick with existing systems, applying “band-aids” is not a viable mid- to long-term strategy for several reasons.

First, contrary to popular belief, the conversion to a new system does not have to be a painful process. As part of the RFP process, you can ensure that the integrator you select has done this exact type of work before. If the project management aspect is beyond the skills of your in-house staff, there are consultants and project managers who routinely guide their clients in this direction.

Second, a phased and planned system replacement can be far more cost effective if properly planned. A campus hospital that intends to ultimately move to a fully IP-based CCTV system can start pulling CAT-5e or CAT-6 cable for analog camera additions to its existing system, using UTP to coax converters to allow analog cameras to run over that type of cable. Once the change out is underway, cabling will not be an issue in these locations.

Similarly, the added cooling and UPS power requirements can be factored into data closet and rack room upgrades before the actual equipment is purchased.

Finally, you want to choose the timing. If there’s a danger that your old system will fail — either suddenly or gradually — it is far more cost effective to do a planned replacement than an emergency overhaul. The former involves careful choices and a trade-off of features, staged phasing and budgetary approvals. The latter will cost exponentially more and may not be the appropriate technology or products, instead leaning more toward what was available on short notice.

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

At this point, many owners of large systems may be shaking their heads with an emphatic “No,” and owners of smaller systems are wondering how much of this detail and documentation is appropriate for them. Sadly, there is little by way of standards in our industry concerning what documentation should be left behind.

The fact is, documenting a system is handled differently by all parties involved and is driven primarily by what the end user requires, demands and is willing to pay for.

Everything Has a Price

If I were looking for one key differentiator used to justify varying bid amounts, it would be in the sophistication and thoroughness of the system documentation included in the bid. A high-end integrator will invariably bid a drawing package with the system that includes signal flow, cable numbering and designations, floor plans with device locations and junction points, and other documents showing the extent and scope of the system installation, customization and programming.

A cost-effective bidder may forgo the expense of creating such a package, assuming they have such capabilities. The package that they present upon system completion is often limited to a cardboard box containing the system manuals, accessory kits and warning sheets advising you not to operate your equipment in the shower or out in the rain for fear of electrical shock.

Let’s assume that all other things – product and installation quality, competence and support – are equal. If the only differentiator in price were the project documentation, what level of detail is appropriate for you? Remember, the reason the well-documented system costs more is simply a function of the labor involved. It takes time and expertise to produce this material and someone will need to pay for it.

Size Matters in Levels of Detail

If we’re talking about a very small system or one with a fairly simple topology, not much documentation is needed. At a minimum, the owner should receive that previously mentioned cardboard box.

A simple line drawing should also be provided showing what went where, and any programming tweaks or customizations should be marked in the appropriate manual. A bill-of material that is reconciled to the system order will prove invaluable down the road when a record of what was installed is needed for repair, expansion or insurance. Finally, a record of serial numbers for all installed equipment is handy. Put all of this material in a file or three-ring binder and save it for that rainy day.

As systems grow larger and more complex, the documentation should ratchet up accordingly. Since its main purpose will be to aid in service or expansion, a good rule of thumb is that the documentation should be a timesaver down the road. Look at everything – system and documentation – as if you were a third party being brought in to review your installation for the first time.

Remember, integrators go out of business and your own support staff may retire or seek employment elsewhere someday. There’s nothing like an accurate written record to get you through such a transition if it’s in your future.

Make Time for Third Party Review

No matter how basic or complex the system documentation is, make sure every word is reviewed by someone other than the person who put it together.

As a consultant, part of the final sign-off on a project is a final review of all as-built drawings, and it is rare that we don’t find a small list of mistakes. These errors can be typos or simple mistakes and are easily chalked up to “human nature.” They are easy to fix as part of the review process. However, if they’re not fixed, transposed numbers aren’t going to jump out at you several years from now. Correcting mistakes in documentation at that point will need to be done the hard way: with ladders, tool belts and an open checkbook.

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 November 2004

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