Updated: Jan 15
This week we discussed
"Why do security companies so often spend resources innovating against customer needs that are already well satisfied?"
A massive thank you firstly to all the contributors to the debate this week, and in fact for every week you take the time to debate the finer points of these statements.
I personally feel that as a service provider we often get lost in the forest of innovation and try to reinvent the wheel. Instead of a steady progressive step in technology over the prolonged period of the contract, we throw everything at it in one go. This initially has the wow factor and demonstrates our commitment to being green and then our commitment to being at the forefront of a technology based service.
Technology itself is a great enabler in a ever growing technological world and we are right to try and embrace it at a company but at what cost? The cost in the initial outset would be overwhelming a security team that have been used to rock and paper for 20 years, this would cause shut down and struggle within it. The hardest part of a security team to accept to change and new ways of working. You have to progressively introduce any changes gradually it a contract to get the best out of it. This method of thinking, you have to realise is not one for the company that has literally promised all the great technology from day one. It is left to the operations team to try and get things up to speed and tech-taught to succeed without any glitches or hitches.
The thoughts from the day:
There were many people who shared the same thoughts as each other, and some more reflective in depth of why security companies will spend resources satisfying all ready won areas of the service through innovation.
As we are the subject matter experts we should be advising the clients of what we recommend could upgrade the service they are already getting. Many clients do not know what they want to achieve but they want champagne service for vodka money, and we want them to know our unique selling point. As one contributor put quite rightly "what do we know about their business to innovate?" We cant throw a blanket of innovation at something and see what sticks.
Re-tendering for the incumbent is always hard if for the life of the contract they fail to improve any services and then suddenly have many ideas 3 weeks before the tender is on. Why didn't they show the client all this before? It is purely down to complacency and then the hard slog of trying to sell your services again. Which agrees with my statement before of slowly introducing changes across the life of the contract. You may have all this technology but slowly does it and you'll be innovating through the life of the contract.
Whilst the above was agreed some of the contributors also saw that while innovation is great concentration on the fundamental basics is where the real wins are. If you cannot get the basics right then you will have no hope in using the lax team you have delivering on advanced tech. And if the security provider actually took time to address emerging and crime threats this would set them apart from their competitors. That might add more value to the service than say an electronic version of a daily occurrence book.
Thanks to everybody who has contributed this week