Key players in implementing integrated security systems

The following question was asked in order to find out about key players in implementing ISS:

Research question 6: Who are the key players in the implementation of integrated security systems?

This question also sought to answer the research objective: Propose the key players to be included in the implementation of integrated security systems.

In addressing this research question, the site visits (45%) revealed that the key players were security practitioners, ICT practitioners, security system suppliers and security service providers. The site visits (45%) revealed that the critical ones were the security practitioners, top management, and information communication technology and security system suppliers.

On the other hand, the interviews revealed that the majority of participants at 90% indicated the key players in the integration process as; Security, IT, systems designer, installer and security service provider or a project team. Almost all the respondents were of the conviction that the Security Manager should be the lead person (champion) in the implementation of integrated security systems.

Turning to the survey questionnaires, the following results were achieved in terms of the key players in implementation of integrated security systems as outlined in Table 4.12 below:-

95

Table 4.12: Q 15 Key players in the implementation of ISS

Q No Player Frequency % in Agreement to

some extent and above

Q15a Security practitioner 100 98

Q15b Top management 97 95.1 Q15c System supplier 97 95.1 Q15d System installer 100 98 Q15e IT specialist 96 94.1 Q15f System operator 99 97.1 Q15g Security provider 89 87.3 Q15h Project team 80 78.4

Composite percentage frequency of 60% and above 100

From the above table, the key players can be ranked as Security practitioner (98%), System installer (98), system operator (97.1), top management (95.1%), and system supplier (95.1%) IT specialist (94.1%) security service provider (87.3%) and project team (78/4%). All the key players with more than 80% are highly regarded in the implementation of ISS. The composite frequency to 100% indicates total agreement among the respondents.

There are some similarities from the three different methods although the survey has a bigger contribution. The observations provide a summary of the key players compared to the other two methods which are broader in scope.

The research question was considerably answered because the key players were established. However, members of the project team within an industrial set-up were not identified but are assumed to comprise the other key players who could be determined by scope of the project.

96 4.3.7 Carrying out implementation of ISS

The following question was asked in order to uncover how implementation of ISS is carried out:

Research question 7: How is the implementation of integrated security systems carried out? This question also sought to answer the research objective: Formulate a best practice process to be followed in the implementation of integrated security systems.

In addressing this research question, the site visits did not include the implementation process because it was unobservable but assisted the researcher in developing a background of the perceived process to be investigated during interviews and questions. Such background information included security risk assessment and the integration scope. Therefore, this related knowledge showed that a process for implementing integrated security systems was necessary.

On the other hand, the interviews revealed that most participants (93.33%) had difficulties in outlining the stages of the process. However, the few (6.66%) who managed to give their views were in agreement that a process should be followed. Some of the suggested stages were security survey, proposal, budgeting, procurement, installation, testing, training, operationalization, review and upgrade. Among these, almost all respondents (100%) were convinced that security survey was to be the first step in the process. In terms of the application of return-on-investment (ROI) as part of an appraisal process for implementation the majority of interviewees (93.33%) had little knowledge about the aspect. The fact that the majority of participants had little knowledge on the integration process is a further indicator of lack of security systems integration in the Harare industrial sector. The study assumed that ROI is not used in practice as a decision making tool for security systems implementation in the majority of cases.

Turning to the survey questionnaire, it brought out the following results derived from Question 16 as outlined in Table 4.13 below:-

97

Table 4.13: Q 16 Process stages involved in the implementation of ISS

Q No Aspect Frequency % in Agreement to

some extent and above

Q16a Security policy 100 98

Q16b Security survey 102 100 Q16c System design 100 98 Q16d Procurement 93 91.2 Q16e SLA 98 96.1 Q16f Installation 101 99 Q16g Training 102 100 Q16h Operating 102 100

Q16i Review & upgrade 102 100

Composite percentage frequency of 60% and above 100

The above table shows that security survey, training, operating, review and upgrade have 100 % frequencies. Installation, security policy and system design have frequencies less than the calculated composite frequency of 100%. Heally and Walsh (1971: 11) substantiate the stages of security system integration as to include; risk assessment, identification of security measures, system design, procurement, installation, development of operating procedures, training, operating and maintenance, review and expansion.

A comparison of the three methods shows that questionnaires contained substantive feedback information on the process compared to the site visits and interviews. Some of the implementation stages mentioned in the interviews were substantiated in the questionnaire and supported by literature study in subsection 3.9 of Chapter 3. However, the aspect of return-of- investment appraisal was not prominent in all the methods.

98

It can be safely concluded that sufficient information was obtained to answer the research question in terms of the research process. Several stages on implementation were brought out particularly in the questionnaires. However, the term “how” may include certain aspects not related to the process and therefore not investigated.