Why is interoperability so important? Why is there resistance to it? What can be done to ease this resistance?
Knight: Interoperability allows the construction of more comprehensive solutions and systems from parts. This, in and of itself, is not threatening and makes it important. 

Resistance to interoperable systems arises when the interfaces are open, standard and highly capable. Proprietary distinctions and protections are lost. This ultimately can threaten revenues for those who hope to hold fast to the status quo. Although proprietary distinctions are lost, openness opens the door to new opportunities. Showing resisters how to take advantage of the opportunity is a great approach to eliminating resistance. 

Eggerding: Interoperability is necessary to provide structure with today’s technology. Manufacturers must have a common goal when designing products. Companies that still hold onto the proprietary nature of their products may be hesitant, but with today’s Internet and IT applications and the advent of technology, this thinking must go by the wayside. 

The security industry needs to take a page out of the book from personal computers. Even though there are several computer hardware manufacturers, the software as designed by companies can be interconnected to provide customers with the solutions they are looking for. 

Integrators May Need Additional Training and to Adjust Their Roles
What effect is this trend having on the physical security industry? How is it impacting the IT industry? How will this change be manifested one, three, five years from now?
Knight: The proprietary protections of product market spaces are eroding rapidly and the ensuing restructuring and repositioning of players in the security market to better position themselves to grow as new approaches to products, capabilities, and services delivery are renovating this industry. The IT industry has assimilated many niche markets in the past and will do so in
the future. I do not think this is having much effect on the IT industry in general. Some IT segments may perceive an opportunity to expand their activities and business to a great extent.

With the possible exception of system field device development that still requires nonsoftware technology to perform its function, during the next one, three, five years and more, product function will continue to become more software based and the operating environments of the products will become more standard. The increasing power of DSP chips and associated software is beginning to make inroads even on field devices. Costs will decrease and capabilities will increase.

Eggerding: Never before have I seen a technical explosion like what has occurred the past two to three years, one that continues to point to an open protocol mentality. Johnson Controls embraces that philosophy and has brought it to the forefront in many applications.

As an example, the Sears Tower in Chicago has several generations of automation fire/security systems interconnected, allowing the control of one of the world’s largest and most complex buildings [see July 2003 SSI for case study of this installation]. This interoperability has enabled the owners of the building to stay at the leading edge of technology while still allowing full use of their existing systems and extending the life of those systems to maximize the cost effectiveness of their initial investment.

What can security integrators do to maintain leadership roles amid this changing landscape?

Klinefelter: Some of the integrators will really need to push IT certification. If they don’t have that knowledge, they will have a hard time. It goes both ways though; if people on the IT side, for example, put up an access reader incorrectly, that is going to be a problem. So, both types of integrators will need to understand the other.

One of the things we have discussed at OSE is the convergent engineer as a new occupational title, but it is hard to find today. I believe that type of individual will be in high demand and university curriculum should be developed to cover it.

Eggerding: The goal of the integrator nowadays is not only to keep pace with the technology, but also to stay one step ahead of the tremendous changes. Johnson Controls has the philosophy of providing its customers with state-of-theart technology and designing it to work within the complex structure of the commercial building application, providing a solution to various technologies as manufactured by other companies. It is a solutions-based philosophy.

IT Influence to Stimulate Influx of Technology Innovation for Security

What part will IT-based manufacturers such as Cisco and IBM and IT-centric VARs play in physical security?

Klinefelter: They are very good at making the necessary connections and it is natural for them to look at what they are connecting to. But physical security manufacturers are looking at how they need to adapt to be connected via networks as well. It is a marketplace where innovators will win.

Look at network security today. It remains a constant battle to keep free of viruses, worms, hackers, etc., whereas physical security does not really face all that. That is why standalone networks may be the way to go and why it is critical to determine how to divide up the networks and use best practices. There is much work to be done on the physical security side in terms of standards, and to determine what physical security means from an IT perspective.

Eggerding: I believe you are going to see the greatest expansion in technology because of the influence of the IT world. Companies such as Cisco and IBM are acknowledging the fact of this increase. In commercial site applications, the IT network organization is at the top of the food chain. Businesses are building on their data-processing abilities. Dataprocessing rooms are created for the massive transfer of information.

Because of this dependence on the IT world, security systems have now moved to the forefront of the technology explosion. In other words, downtime is the enemy of the IT network. It requires the security system and personnel to protect this revenue-generating portion of a company.

What do you believe the IT industry finds attractive about physical security, and vice versa?

Klinefelter: I am not sure either side finds the other attractive. It is more of combination through necessity. From their respective viewpoints, they all think they have the most knowledge. This needs to be unified into a common architecture approach, but there is a lot of work to be done.

Eggerding: Obviously, the IT world is acknowledging its vulnerability to both external and internal forces. The development of IT-based security systems has opened the door for the IT world to accept this part of a commercial application. No longer is security just a room somewhere in the building. It is an integral part of a business’s needs and frontline protection to the revenuegenerating applications of the IT world.

How would you contrast the physical security and IT industries?

Knight: The two market segments are not equal. Security is fairly staid as a result of low levels of serious outside competition. It has not been threatened by outside competition in the recent past. IT is always changing and assimilating application spaces. Security is just another application space that can be renovated by the aggressive and focused application of IT practices.

Eggerding: The contrast between the physical security and IT industry is not as defined as it was before. Business depends on its technology, and because of this dependence there is a need for the business models to reflect the importance of the security field. This was brought to our attention on a day back in September 2001.

What can physical security learn from IT, and vice versa?

Klinefelter: Physical security is more people-oriented, whereas IT is more focused on the machines. Physical security could learn that open connectivity is an opportunity, not a threat; IT could realize it is not all about the network, but also people, locks on doors and those times when you need mission-critical security.

Knight: Security market players must learn how IT works and redefine themselves in the context of and according to the practices of IT that make IT successful. On the other hand, IT must learn the business application requirements that security provides. This is the easier of the two tasks.

Eggerding: Physical security needs to learn the importance of the technology as well as the practical application of that technology. No longer can a security guard sit in front of a monitor as though he or she is looking at a TV screen. Technology has brought to the forefront items such as analytics, high definition and rapid response. This is an area where physical security needs to stay at the forefront.

IT to Control Network,With Security Developing Strategies and Tactics

Who do you ultimately envision controlling the enterprise network, security or IT management? Will they even share the same network? How will this clash be resolved?

Klinefelter: IT tends to be pretty well funded and if physical security does not work with them to get funding for what they need to do, they will not be as successful. From a manufacturer standpoint, it is not so clear what role each company plays depending on what tier of the market they are serving, so suppliers will emerge from both sides.

I believe IT will certainly have a growing impact on buying decisions as more of them become connect
ed. However, I still find different companies organize C-level executives in different ways. We may see the sales channels begin to change as well.

Eggerding: When it comes to control of the enterprise network, I see a combined network between the IT department and the security department. The IT world will provide the avenue and transmission of information. The security world will apply its strategy and tactics.

For Johnson Controls, the typical onsite meeting now doesn’t occur between just a security department and us. It also includes the IT network manager and upper management for a more global approach to the security applications. We have installed many security systems now that are sharing networks that only a few years ago would have been off-limits to the security application.

Knight: IT will provide the infrastructure and the services to support it for their many specialized customers, including security. There will be one network. Technologists, like IT specialists, will buy technology. The clash will disappear as IT outperforms security minded approaches to these questions.

Application Possibilities to Grow as Interoperability Becomes Standard

What does the future hold as technology continues to merge and progress?

Eggerding: Through the development of technology, there are new security applications available today that were not available as little as two years ago. The greatest explosion will be with the IT application since companies are linked together through their networks. This will provide customers with a broad base of future security measures that not only can manage a corporate facility but also be connected and manage worldwide sites.

Interoperability will become a standard phrase.

 

If you enjoyed this article and want to receive more valuable industry content like this, click here to sign up for our FREE digital newsletters!

Related Content