Issue link: https://securitytechnologyexecutive.epubxp.com/i/229956
As I interviewed C•Cure dealers, Software House introduced me to Scott Welborn from Tech Systems, Inc., one of Software House's enterprise-level dealers. Scott listened intently to my concerns, needs and vision. Usually, once this kind of project would go to bid to the few Software House C•Cure dealers in the area, bids would be proposed and typically, decisions would be made in favor of the lowest-cost, unqualified provider. Scott, however, shared the details of Tech Systems' "For Our Customers' U ltimate Satisfaction" (FOCUS) program with us. We found that Memorial Hermann was able to fill in the gaps of our security operations by allowing Tech Systems to manage ongoing security procedures. The Tech Systems proposal was priced right and the value of the FOCUS program created even more value than the items that were included in the bid. We were impressed by their attention to customer service, an excellent preventative maintenance package, a strong internal technological knowledge among the staff and proven project management methodologies. Because this conversion was a long-term plan it required a long-term partnership. It is never good to create an adversarial relationship with vendors. They need to perform, they need to be motivated and they need to value Memorial Hermann as a customer. It's not all about price, it's about value. Tech Systems offered me the most cost-effective and results-oriented proposal. Leveraging their expertise, experience and ongoing professional services we could save money over time and have a security program that is fluid and effective today, tomorrow and a year from now. The Plan As a non-profit organization, Memorial Hermann had a budget and a limitation on what we could spend. The key was to get the most value for the dollar and to formulate a return-on-investment that our C-level executives could recognize. So I got in front of 13 C-level officers and presented our plan. The plan was to migrate to the Software House C•Cure 9000 platform, with all sites centrally managed at our headquarters location. Integrating the Hugs infant-protection product; six different video surveillance technologies that includes American Dynamics, Pelco and Intellex; along with five audio products would be no easy task. This strategy was developed after several months of in-depth discussion and collaboration with Tech Systems, Software House, Memorial Hermann IT and security staff. The plan resolved the various issues of disparity, operational inconsistency and offered a long-term savings on licensing fees. The plan also presented new challenges, both technically and logistically. We formalized three main objectives. They were to: • Obtain buy-in from various organizational business units. • Utilize existing network infrastructure for fault tolerance and resiliency. • Maintain 24/7 operational effectiveness throughout the conversion process. After identifying the objectives, the team conceptualized the solutions road map, which included: • Upgrading the access control software to support centralized management across multiple locations, which meant replacing the antiquated access control product previously installed at the Texas Medical Center with C•Cure 9000. • Install Hugs and integrate it with the C•Cure 9000 system. • Rebuild command center at Memorial City Hospital. • Include new top-of-the-line computers and associated hardware and software components for a scalable, long-term video management system. • Include a new video wall and new desktop monitors. • Upgrade command centers at other locations. • Rebadge all staff members, which included updating databases, deleting unnecessary entries and editing the partitioning for every badge-holder. Unfortunately it's common for security directors to feel we can't afford the solutions we need or that we will not be able to get approval for our plans. But we were able to get the plan approved by following several strategic courses. Among the most important was working to eliminate the turf battle by reminding people our intentions were aligned with the needs of the organization and that the proposed methods supported our initiative. We also spent time educating the decision-makers on the pros and cons of the current system implementation and on how our proposed design would enhance the current level of security and situational awareness. We highlighted the cost savings, factored in new efficiencies and developed a long-term budget, which created a strong financial argument. And finally we demonstrated efficiency and effective utilization of manpower. www.SecurityInfoWatch.com SECURITY TECHNOLOGY EXECUTIVE • November/December 2013 Since it is a non-profit organization, there were severe budget restraints as they contimplated their systems upgrades. 25