And I'm referring to the July Security Fair or the Miami Fair as we most commonly know it or refer to the AFSE.During these fifteen years the world has changed, and the science of security has perhaps been the managerial discipline that has undergone more changes in its development and importance in the world of the XXI century.
The September 2001 terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers in the U.S. Uu, from 2004 to the Madrid metro and from 2005 in London, gave a sample of the fragility of the perception of security that in the global scope we had, and opened an immense field for new applications of Security and fundamentally of Preventive Electronic Security, with a wide spectrum of development in the systems of capture and processing of images in real time, that would allow efficient reactive actions to be carried out.
This new reality influenced immigration restrictions and since 2002 the Miami Fair has been transformed into a more managerial event, from the point of view that companies were able to obtain fewer visas for their technicians and engineers and especially with a focus on improving business relations between different attendees (mostly decision makers) and equipment suppliers, where in addition to the activities, during the Fair various social activities and parallel business meetings are held, which give the event a greater added value.
Likewise, these new migratory realities have had an effect of manufacturers approaching the different countries of Latin America in fairs, congresses and exhibitions in different countries and regions, something almost unthinkable fifteen years ago.
I believe that the Miami Fair has marked an important legacy during these fifteen years, and as ALAS since 1997 that we were founded in one of the halls of the same, with a group of visionary permanent attendees to it, we hope that in the coming years, after this period of recession and global financial crisis, in light of the new opportunities, needs and demands for security and electronic security in particular that are emerging, the fair continues to grow and consolidate and the icons of the fair such as DSC, Saltex, Pelco, Ademco, Honeweel that marked the step throughout these years, not only return to compete healthily to be the most outstanding Stand, but many others wish to dispute this space and positioning in the minds of all the security professionals who came in July to Miami.
Greetings
Luis González Nogales.
President.
Don't compare to the competition
Most product comparisons don't say much. I propose a better way to benefit the end user.
By: Steve Hunt*
Most technology assessments read in industry magazines, or those provided by manufacturers, suffer from a common and basic flaw. They compare technologies to other similar competing products and very rarely, if ever, tell the reader how good the product actually is.
These evaluations make a list of features in the light of competitors. In my opinion, this perpetuates mediocrity.
I think there's a better way to look at technology products. The method I've been developing for the past four years is the closest I could find to a scientific way to conduct the assessments.
My method also has another important difference: it tells the security executive (or manufacturer) how successful the product will be at solving the end user's problems, rather than telling the customer what he or she will have to settle for.
An appropriate response
I will say this more explicitly. By taking hundreds of criteria on the requirements and preferences of the end user, I can rate how well any product meets the customer's expectations.
Here's an example of that rating. This product (which I won't name) was recently awarded in a (more or less) independent product comparison with another big name of access control products.
It is considered one of the best products that can be purchased in this category. However, you can see from the rating that you still have some areas of improvement if you want to meet the real needs of the customer.
Ease of use for the customer
Each category has multiple subcategories consisting of different criteria. Each subcategory and criterion is measured according to its relative importance to the customer.
Therefore, the amount of time required by the database administrator to configure the system can be weighted, to a greater or lesser extent, than, say, the range of third-party databases supported by the product, depending on what users prefer.
Similarly, the usability and intuitiveness of the graphical user interface or online help tools will be weighted more than the product support of a command line interface.
When my evaluation is complete, the CSO or product manager will see in the detailed report every major way in which the technology meets, exceeds or fails with the most important requirements or with the preferences of the end-user customers.
So instead of crying and moving forward on which "gadget" has more features than the one on the side, let's focus on solving the problem and meeting the needs of the end-user's head of security.
Let me know if you want more information on how to measure the real value of technologies. I would be happy to talk to you.
*Steve is an industry advisor and founder of Hunt Business Intelligence to support security-related best practices, investments and technological innovations and is the author of the popular security blog www.SecurityDreamer.com. He currently collaborates with his columns in the MEDIA of ALAS.
Leave your comment