Security Integration
Proper security integration improves efficiency, and reduces risk and costs. Clients should demand more of their security advisors.
Security integration is at its simplest the coordination of security measures with the site and operations so that no security measure impedes another or the operation and assets it is there to protect. Intelligently applied, many of the measures can be incorporated into the fabric of the site to present a reduced public profile, as well as reduce cost. it requires cooperation between different departments within the client organization to understand the requirement. It is pointless pursuing a sustainability agenda in isolation if in the process you compromise some security measures and impede operating efficiency and resilience. However, it is perhaps this narrow client requirement of security practice that has partly fuelled the increasingly commoditized security industry that we are experiencing today. The apparent systems savings from commoditization are ephemeral. The savings through integration are real.
Security integration happens at three distinct stages: Concept, Master Plan and Technical. At the strategy or conceptual project requirement stage, consideration of security will influence the functional programming of the site, layout of the public realm, and inform discussions with the local authorities and neighbours. Critically, it informs how the different branches of security (physical protection, physical security, personnel protection, personnel security, cyber security and electronic countermeasures) will be coordinated to facilitate the operation and purpose of the site. At the Master Planning stage, the interplay between different security systems and measures are laid out and the over-arching requirements criteria for the different systems extracted and deconflicted. For perimeter security, for example, many will use the Operational Requirement of security Measures (ORSM) Level 1 (by the UK's Centre for the Protection of the National Infrastructure). Similarly, integration with the site and environs around the assets will inform vehicular approaches and controls, pedestrian flow and movement and surveillance tracing with accompanying communications and target handover and intercept planning. The client may decide to use a common platform, such as PSIM (Physical Security Information Management) and incorporate security communications into the building and administration systems. Once the design phase starts, the final level of security integration is the technical coordination between systems through to commissioning.
Security integration is as good as the quality of the security advisor retained. The more competent professionals can provide an intelligent service to the client and will seek a clear understanding of need, operation and site in order to provide their advice. Clients should expect more of their security advisors and demand more of the industry.
You're quite right, Øyvind. I have seen the same across many organisations, both corporate and government. However, when the value of the operation is significant enough or at least that the consequence of loss is great enough, there is a genuine effort to integrate at the strategy and master planning stages. Prepared to spend a lot of money they find that they don't need to. I often find that it comes down to the perception of value and whether it's important. It's reassuring that share a Scandinavian perspective. I suspect that many more so too. All the very best. aye, Alec
You have good points in your post, Alex. As a structural engineer and security manager combined, I have no trouble of agreeing totally with what you write. I just want to note a couple of things that might give an interesting aspect to your image of an ideal world. It is often (not always) the case that security is an isolated field in a business and even in projects. Skilled security managers and skilled persons in other crafts are often isolated from each other and rarely collaborate or collaborate badly. That's why security managers and other skilled personnel in the security business not always get the position and voice that they need to influence the business and solutions. Who's fault this is or what can be done to improve this, is an interesting discussion that I don't want to enter. Note that I write this from a Scandinavian reality, which probably might differ from the typical British model. Given your culture and history, you have matured differently in the field of security. But you're right, Alex. Well put.
Every day's a school day! Eminently applicable in my field, and one of the more challenging aspects to achieve in practice - cheers Col!
Excellent points Alex.