Avatar photo

Contributor

Author Bio ▼

Adam Bannister is a contributor to IFSEC Global, having been in the role of Editor from 2014 through to November 2019. Adam also had stints as a journalist at cybersecurity publication, The Daily Swig, and as Managing Editor at Dynamis Online Media Group.
May 21, 2015

Download

Whitepaper: Enhancing security, resilience and efficiency across a range of industries

“Alarm Installers Must Evolve Before Home Automation Undermines their Business Model” – IP Engineer Q&A

Insurance requirements and a reticence to upgrade ‘grudge purchases’ has largely insulated the traditional alarm trade from the digital revolution that has transformed other sectors.

But an IT director at a forward-thinking alarm installation firm has warned the sector that this cannot continue indefinitely.

Change is coming, argues Matthew Brough of Stourport on Severn -based 4i Security, and anyone seeking clues about what the future might look like could do worse than study the embryonic home automation market.

Quizzed by IFSEC Global on a wide range of industry issues Brough also voices his alarm at the growing engineering skills gap – which he can only see worsening as demand for technical skills grows.

IFSEC Global: Hi Matthew. Please tell us a bit about the services on offer at 4i Security…

Matthew Brough: 4i has our own integration platform called Corebox, where we have written automation software to do the job of the traditional engineer and knit multiple systems together. We also use MASterMind Monitoring, a globally respected platform.

We are still the only ones in the industry that offer a £200 money-back guarantee against false-alarm dispatch.

We are so confident in Corebox we decided to put our money where our mouth was. We are to my knowledge the only service company that offers a one-hour support SLA, unlike the four hours everyone else does as the bare minimum to meet their approval.

matthew brough 2

Matthew Brough, centre, with former Conservative MP Jeffrey Archer, left

IG: How has the role of security installer/engineer changed during your time in the industry?

MB: In many ways it has become more complicated. When I first entered the industry 16 years ago what we now refer to as unconfirmed alarms dominated the landscape and the role from an installation engineer point of view was a much more simplified world.

A specification was given to you. All you had to do was wire the system up as per the spec, connect the A & B to an analogue line and things such as verification, entry routes, fobs weren’t really much of a consideration.

The install engineer now certainly has many more rules to consider when installing and those rules change and often conflict with each other until yet another standard is written to clarify the conflicts.

We have also seen a massive amount of different kit available with ever-more advanced features that require much more skill than the days of old.

IG: How do you expect the role of security installer/engineer to change over the next 5-10 years?

MB: I think there will be a two-tier system in place. Installers will install the equipment and the programming and complicated tasks will be managed by an engineer, likely based within an ARC/RVRC.

The skill shortage and lack of investment in engineers of tomorrow will inevitably mean there are fewer and fewer engineers.

I believe the complexity in systems will only increase further, the skill base required to commission and support such systems will be done centrally via well paid, talented engineers and the skill base in field engineers will continue to decline as it has since I’ve been in the industry.

IG: What do you see as your principal training priorities?

MB: Over the past five-six years the training in my own installation business and ARC has been more focused on software and automation than installing equipment on site. In many ways the on-site installation has become quite easy as the installer just needs to connect the equipment to our network. The programming is then done via a highly skilled engineer, or in some cases, computer automation.

The main challenge we’ve seen is trying to teach people how to do a job they did for years manually via computer software. Our estate is 100% IP+Radio and networking skills was a hard skill base that our engineers needed to learn and how to support customers IT departments for both installation and support issues.

This was a skill base not even considered when I came into the industry, nor by the majority of people in it today.

IG: How has security tech changed during your time in the industry?

MB: The main change has been the transition from analogue to digital in various forms. We have seen signalling move from PSTN/Paknet /GPRS-based systems to IP & 2/3g systems.

Time-lapse videos are now all D/NVRs with the vast majority having network cards allowing remote support/viewing/setup.

Cameras have moved from very poor quality images that the offender’s family would struggle to recognise to stunning HD quality IP cameras. Alarm systems have migrated from very, very simplistic control systems to some that can be easily integrated with other equipment and have the ability to automate so many things coupled with control from the web and apps.

IG: What are your biggest challenges as a business?

MB: Lack of mandatory licensing and training are a huge issue. As a professional trade that was very skilled with a reasonably high barrier to entry, now anyone wants to have a go and will always undercut to get the deal.

Accepted, this isn’t just the security industry; many other trades have suffered the same, but as a company we have invested considerably in our ARC, software platforms and people – and all that costs money. In times gone by people would brag how much something cost.

Today the consumers have been trained to buy cheap and the bragging rights are now for how cheap we managed to obtain something. We have to educate our end users on value that we provide and that the value costs money.

Thankfully a lot of subscribers in the B2B space understand this, but it’s one of the main reasons we haven’t entered the B2C market. In the past, inspectorate approval was a good barrier to entry but with ever-lower requirements from insurers and the wide acceptance of non-approved systems, the margins are hard to maintain.

IG: Would you be interested in expanding into the home automation market?

MB: I don’t see how we have a choice. Once of the reasons we aren’t in the B2C intruder/CCTV market is to the consumer it doesn’t add much value to warrant the price point most professional companies want to charge.

Home automation adds the value to warrant more expenditure and for the end user. Using one platform to do multiple tasks makes financial sense and the great flexibility to control everything from 1 place.

Home automation is a simple case of supply and demand. The market wants it and will want it more and more as the tech becomes easier and cheaper.

Installers face a simple choice. Move up from alarm installer to another level or the IT companies and current home automation companies will just add alarm installer to their bow.

IG: How many apprentices do you take on and how valuable are apprenticeships to you as a company?

MB: We currently don’t have any – which is a great shame. The main two reasons are the fear of investing so much time and money into someone only for them to leave once they have the skills they need and we are (as is everyone) under so much pressure to get jobs done quickly and on tighter and tighter margins not leaving so much room to take a punt on an apprentice.

I am not the only employer in this boat but equally it isn’t a real surprise that lack of apprentice training and the current skills gap are linked hand in glove. I thoroughly enjoyed my apprenticeship and it is something I know we need to get better at.

To what extent is the term ‘installer’ becoming redundant? Should the industry call installers integrators or engineers instead?

On the contrary, I think installer is more and more the correct label for the majority I see in the industry today. Engineers and integrators are in a different camp altogether.

I think this two-tier system will continue and the chances of a true engineer on the ground will become extinct. Installers will be field-based, reporting to more senior support based centrally. The skill shortage we have makes it inevitable.

As an engineer through and through it can often be very irritating seeing the title easily applied to someone who’s skill base falls very short of the mark required to be classed as an engineer. If you look at the dictionary definition of all three titles, the majority of field-based staff would fall into the installer category, not the more skill-based engineer or system integrator category.

If we had mandatory qualifications it would be easy to differentiate the skill base as in other professions. I would like to see the differentiation in the marketplace but unless this becomes mandatory everyone is an engineer with no way to show their true skill base.

Matthew Brough is one of several industry experts sitting on an interactive panel debate about home automation at IFSEC International 2015. Fielding questions from the audience the panel will explore the challenges and opportunities posed to security installers/engineers by this growing market.

Subscribe to the IFSEC Insider weekly newsletters

Enjoy the latest fire and security news, updates and expert opinions sent straight to your inbox with IFSEC Insider's essential weekly newsletters. Subscribe today to make sure you're never left behind by the fast-evolving industry landscape.

Sign up now!

man reading a tablet, probably the IFSEC Global newsletter

Related Topics

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tony Reed
Tony Reed
May 28, 2015 7:34 pm

Is that the same 4i that has just gone into liquidation?? I think it is MB is down as a director of the liquidated co

Hugh1958
Hugh1958
May 28, 2015 8:06 pm

Tony Reed Tony Reed Yes it is Tony, the same one who has folded owing and also been in court a number of times:-

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=5acd8472d49fb4598040417c469e612c&showtopic=26102&st=20&p=230557&#entry230557

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080131/debtext/80131-0005.htm

Pretty poor show for the security industry I’d say!

Tony Reed
Tony Reed
May 28, 2015 8:15 pm

Hugh1958 Tony Reed Wow! Why are IFSEC having anything to do with this sheester?  Matt Allwright is probably the only person interested in Mr Broughs opinion on the security industry

Hugh1958
Hugh1958
May 28, 2015 8:22 pm

Tony Reed Hugh1958 Forewarned is forearmed as we used to say in the Air Force.

Larry Gritter
Larry Gritter
May 28, 2015 8:55 pm

A former wheel clamper & a disgraced former MP together in the same picture ?
Surely it must be a crimewatch  appeal rather than an Ifsec promo ?

sparky_brian
sparky_brian
May 29, 2015 10:51 am

to right tony, all sounds really bad any comment from the organisers yet, i expected better vetting to be honest

Adam Bannister
Adam Bannister
May 29, 2015 11:30 am

Hello all, we weren’t aware of these allegations and will look into it…

Hugh1958
Hugh1958
May 29, 2015 4:06 pm

Whilst I agree with the principle that many companies close, those that do owing contractors and suppliers vast amounts of money only to resurface again in a slightly different guise are lacking basic moral fibre.
These individuals in my opinion should not be associated with the security industry.
I also believe that anyone who associates themselves with such people could be tarnished in the same way and I for one am surprised that ifsec are almost adding weight to this dubious character.

Hugh1958
Hugh1958
May 29, 2015 6:24 pm

Good to hear Adam.

Tony Reed
Tony Reed
May 29, 2015 8:03 pm

I agree Stig lots of companies open and close for many reasons, but I have it on good faith that 4i went into administration owing several small companies, including their financial backers a fair amount of money, money that many smaller companies cannot afford to lose. And if you look at Mr Brough’s history of opening and closing companies, including the fact that he has current company called 4i acquisitions everything looks more than just fishy. It looks very much like he went into administration but carried on running his business regardless.

sparky_brian
sparky_brian
May 29, 2015 8:16 pm

Tony Reed

Warwick Hunt
Warwick Hunt
June 1, 2015 2:17 pm

Seems some may need to read the actual accounts and some of the finer points of the Companies Act.