Integrators, Do You Want Manufacturers To Do Camera Layouts / Designs For You?

JH
John Honovich
Sep 08, 2016
IPVM

We are noticing an increasing trend of manufacturers doing camera layouts / designs for projects, often directly for end users; Axis most notably.

What do you think? Is it a valued add service for you or a competitive intrusion? Have you experienced this?

Vote poll:

MM
Michael Miller
Sep 09, 2016

It's one thing to have the manufacture review your design compared to giving the manufacturer the plans and saying " design me a system". I think as an integrator if you can't design your own systems you should be looking for another job.

(16)
UI
Undisclosed Integrator #1
Sep 09, 2016

I cannot agree with this enough. I love bidding against people who have the manufacturer do the design. A little bit of value added engineering and they cannot adapt.

(8)
Avatar
Kevin Nadai
Sep 09, 2016

I also agree.

With great respect to my camera manufacturing colleagues, I question the wisdom of using a camera layout created by someone who sells cameras for a living.

What would inspire a camera manufacturer to layout a more efficient design with fewer cameras?

(3)
(2)
(1)
JH
John Honovich
Sep 09, 2016
IPVM

What would inspire a camera manufacturer to layout a more efficient design with fewer cameras?

To play devil's advocate: What would inspire an integrator to layout a more efficient design with fewer cameras? Integrators sell cameras too.

The benefit from integrators is integrators typically have greater expertise in camera placement including recognizing the logistical restrictions of installing in certain areas / surfaces / spots.

(2)
Avatar
Kevin Nadai
Sep 10, 2016

Integrators sell cameras too.

They shouldn't. News flash: there is no money in reselling cameras anymore. An integrator trying to make money selling cameras is like my landscaper trying to make money by marking up the gasoline he burns in my yard. I have no desire to buy gasoline; I desire to keep the township off my back. (I've been busy this summer, okay?) And if he marks it up too much, I will go buy it myself and mow my own lawn, DIY, sound familiar? The fact that he can do it better, faster, and burn less gasoline is why his job is secure. How much gasoline he burns is incidental to getting the job done. Likewise the number of cameras in a design is incidental to providing coverage.

My point, and I do have one, is to answer your question:

What would inspire an integrator to layout a more efficient design with fewer cameras?

A camera is a tool, and few people buy tools just to have them; they buy tools for what tools can do. You don't want a drill, what you want are holes. Would you buy fewer drills if they could provide the same or better holes? You would. And your customer doesn't want cameras, they want coverage. If they could have more and better coverage, they would buy fewer cameras in a second.

(Conversely, automakers do the opposite, not selling cars for what they do -- take you from place to place -- and instead sell them based upon how they make you feel. Otherwise, Chevrolet would have put Mercedes and BMW out of business long ago)

Same parking lot, same price. Which would you choose? This:

Or this:

(Images courtesy of Wach1Design.com. Maybe. If I had asked.)

Which "works" better for the customer? Which makes better cognitive sense? And for the same or better pixel density (better coverage, not just more coverage), they need to be premium, higher resolution and/or longer lens cameras. But there are only four of them, as well as the associated reduction in supplies and labor. Fewer devices to fail. Lower network bandwidth. Less storage and/or longer retention. And if any analytics are being deployed, four licenses instead of six. And perhaps a less expensive server for that as well if your VMS requires one.

At the same price, which would you buy? Which design would make an integrator more money?

What would inspire an integrator to sell a more efficient design with fewer cameras? To differentiate themselves from their competitors that simply sell more cameras.

"The world is changing. The Internet is killing agents, and severe competition is diluting income for everyone. It's hard to compete. So don't. DOMINATE."

-Mitch J. Miller, Agent Domination: How to completely own your market by doing the opposite of everyone else

Disclaimer: As always, these are my personal opinions and not necessarily those of my employer.

(5)
(1)
JH
John Honovich
Sep 10, 2016
IPVM

News flash: there is no money in reselling cameras anymore.

1. There is still money in reselling cameras. Certainly, it is far less than a decade ago but it is still material to most integrators. For example, see: Integrators Oppose Labor Only Sales

Also, there is money in installing cameras, so even if they did not sell cameras, there would still be an incentive to have more cameras to make money installing / commissioning / servicing them.

As for your image comparison, I obviously don't know enough about the site / background to meaningfully assess.

(3)
Avatar
Armando Perez
Sep 13, 2016
Hoosier Security and Security Owners Group • IPVMU Certified

You are the first person I have heard use this drill/hole analogy other than myself. I like you already.

(1)
U
Undisclosed #5
Sep 13, 2016
IPVMU Certified

You don't want a drill, what you want are holes. Would you buy fewer drills if they could provide the same or better holes? You would. And your customer doesn't want cameras, they want coverage. If they could have more and better coverage, they would buy fewer cameras in a second.

Yes but what happens when you show your customer where the holes go and how many and how big (courtesy Hole1Design), and then he buys somebody elses drill and gives them the template to do it?

How to completely own your market by doing the opposite of everyone else.

I waiting for everyone to follow this advice so I would be left owning the market.

(1)
Avatar
Kevin Nadai
Sep 13, 2016

Yes but what happens when you show your customer where the holes go and how many and how big (courtesy Hole1Design), and then he buys somebody elses drill and gives them the template to do it?

This can happen to you for a number of reasons:

(Figurative "you," not Undisclosed 5 who asks a great question)

1. You failed to earn the trust of your customer
Even after the lengthy and intimate process of getting to know your customer's security concerns in order to generate the design, you failed to earn their trust and confidence. You might need to work on that.
2. You failed to sell the value of the work to be performed
Or, at least, you failed to sell it better than the other guy. You might need to work on that.
3. Your customer is a jerk
Face it, sometimes a potential customer is simply a jerk. It might not even be your point of contact that is the problem. Higher-ups might have a family member in the business, or other political concerns intervened. It happens to the best of us. In my case, I once lost a big project when the powers that be decided to give it (and my design) to a minority-owned business. As a sales team, we remained professional about it and maintained contact with the customer. A year later the other company proved incompetent and the project defaulted back to us.

Some ideas on to avoid (but still work on #1 and #2):

Charge a fair price for the design
This way, if they choose someone else for the project -- you still make money.

Wait, you don't think you can charge for design work, as your competitor's don't?
Again, this is a failure to sell. Read Undisclosed 2's reasons below for subcontracting camera design work. But, if you insist:

Charge for the design, but apply the fee as a credit toward the project
If your customer chooses to pay for the design AND someone else to install it -- instead of your work less the cost of the design -- you really do have problems. Go back to #1 and #2 above.

Provide your customer an "eyes-only" presentation
Show them your design work, but don't let them keep a copy. The idea would be to win them over with a glimpse of your work product, but prevent them from showing it to someone else. You are now using your design work as part of your #1 and #2 efforts.

Give them and inaccurate design
I only mention this to tell a story about a friend in the window covering business. He applied CAD technology to the business of blinds, draperies, and curtains. Part of his free in-home consultation was a virtual image of the final product, as well as very accurate dimensions. When one too many customers took his design to the JC Penney Home Store or Budget Blinds, he started taking 1/4" off all his presented dimensions. (You can cut down blinds but not cut up) He even buried in small print a disclaimer that "all dimensions are guaranteed inaccurate." I do not recommend that approach -- I just wanted to tell that story.

U
Undisclosed #5
Sep 13, 2016
IPVMU Certified

When one too many customers took his design to the JC Penney Home Store or Budget Blinds, he started taking 1/4" off all his presented dimensions.

Some folk call it short sheeting...

Avatar
Armando Perez
Sep 13, 2016
Hoosier Security and Security Owners Group • IPVMU Certified

generally speaking, the motivation comes from the lifetime value of the customer across a range of solutions, not just cameras....

(1)
UI
Undisclosed Integrator #7
Oct 11, 2016

Exactly, that can only be achieved by earning your customer's trust. Overselling does not earn trust.

Avatar
Armando Perez
Sep 13, 2016
Hoosier Security and Security Owners Group • IPVMU Certified

right on!

Avatar
Brian Rhodes
Sep 10, 2016
IPVMU Certified

If you go to a dairy farm for dinner, you get served a meal with lots of the farm's milk, cheese, and maybe beef. No seafood or pasta. Just lots of what's on the farm.

But if you go to a restaurant with a chef, you get a meal. He might even buy milk, cheese, or beef from that farmer. But he buys lots of other stuff too, from lots of places. If he's a good chef, he'll know the right ingredient to buy at the right time, and cook them in the right way. He'll vary the menu based on what's available and who is asking for the meal.

I like to think of integrators like chefs and manufacturers like farmers.

Like farmers, manufacturers tend to resolve designs with what they have; but that is not as good as what a chef who is willing/ able to sell different and potentially better ingredients. That's an integrator; (or at least a good one.)

(13)
U
Undisclosed #2
Sep 10, 2016

I'm subcontracting my camera layout to Wach1Design and found their approach well thought out. Once they come out with their layout and "view sheds" that achieve my objectives, I become a CAD guy and just stick the locations on my design drawings. I also include their view sheds on my drawings and make the integrator accountable for achieving the results indicated. Better yet, the integrator likes knowing exactly what is expected. I now have a much higher degree of faith in the predicted outcome and its easy to show the Client what he can expect. More often than not, they can reduce the camera count, sometimes by significant number. They have a "really new and unique" approach..... its called math, field testing and verification (very mysterious stuff).

I don't use manufacturers, I pay for this service and the outcome and client satisfaction are my driving motives. Selling cameras is the manufacturer's goal. That being said, I do bounce design issues off manufactures just like integrator do. Interested in your thoughts on this approach.

U
Undisclosed #3
Sep 11, 2016

The answer is....both. At least for me.

First, and most importantly, Brian's point about farmers vs chefs is spot on. I like to put it in simpler terms -- when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. In other words, to a manufacturer, only THEIR solution will be recommended when you ask them for a design layout. In some cases, this may be great. In other cases, I've found it necessary to have more than one manufacturer to achieve the desired result for the client. After all, my job is to find the best overall solution for the customer, not to push a single manufacturer. While we try to limit our overall product mix for service purposes, etc, I'm not going to focus on a single manufacturer if they won't do everything I want done in the way that I think will work best for the customer.

Second, part of my value as an integrator is to provide value to my client beyond just hanging a camera on the wall. I have multiple customers that look to me to do everything from design and lay out their camera systems to writing security standards and practices to working directly with architects to specify entrance standards, door hardware, etc. The bottom line, it's one more bit of value that I can add to a client to justify my existence beyond slapping a camera on the wall and pointing it in the right direction. My clients work with me, hopefully, because they know they can trust me and that we're going to do what is right for them at the end of the day. That means that I don't have as many clients as some people, but we have very loyal clients that give us basically all of their work.

On the other side of it, good manufacturers will often have a different take on their own products than I will, and they should know their products better than I do. That means they may have an alternative design that I haven't considered that could help everyone involved. My most trusted manufacturers will also literally steer me away from their products in certain scenarios where they are uncomfortable that it will work. They know that if they screw me over on one project to get 30 extra cameras, they may lose hundreds of cameras over time because of that.

The key for everyone involved -- integrator, manufacturer, and client -- is to develop a partnership where everybody is vested in the success of the client. Easier said than done, but once you're there, life is easier for everyone.

(2)
(3)
MT
Matt Transue
Oct 05, 2016

Totally agree!

Avatar
Christopher Freeman
Sep 12, 2016

Like Axis , its for thier own gain, if anything goes wrong we the integrator are the responsible parties, and you have a hard sell on changing products . This sales tactic is nothing new. It gets the manufacturer to the front line and bypass's the professionals in the field , Makes the manufacturers rep's the sales team in charge of the project.

(1)
UI
Undisclosed Integrator #4
Sep 12, 2016

NO! The Manufactures Rep. usually gets carried away with the design, not considering the End-User budget restraints, and/or treats the Integrator as if you have no or very little knowledge of their products. We just want them to educate us in their new product releases and their functions. We'll take it from there!

(1)
MT
Matt Transue
Oct 05, 2016

In a past life when I worked for a camera manufacturer I had many requests from Integrators to do design layouts for them.

In these cases, I would try to politely push them to mock up their recommended layout first, then I would review their layout and design and optimize where possible. Usually asking some questions of the integrator that they may have forgotten to ask the end user.

If I would just 'do it for them', they never learned anything. Once I was able to work closely with the people/person in charge of the design, I was able to direct them to possibly a better/more efficient way of designing the solution. My experience is that they appreciated this tactic and learned during the process by asking my questions or even answering mine. I usually learned a thing or two also.

There have been cases where I was able to reduce camera count and/or complexity of the installation. There have been other cases where I recommended more cameras or different cameras to provide better/full coverage as requested by the end user.

So at the end of the day, I don't think manufacturers should DO the drawings, but I do believe they should vet/review the design proposed by the Integrator. Both the Integrator and Manufacturer win in this scenario, in my opinion.

(4)
(1)
JH
John Honovich
Oct 05, 2016
IPVM

Matt, good feedback. I agree with you.

From the manufacturer side, it is more driven by sales, i.e., salespeople see doing designs as a way to increase the probability that they win deals. From that perspective, rather than 'teach a man a fish', better to tell them which of your fish to buy ;)

MT
Matt Transue
Oct 05, 2016

Yes, sir. Spot on.

In fact, I recall many instances where an RSM would ask an integrator to send the design spec to me (prior to actually doing the design themselves) so that we had eyes on the project all the way through. It was a 'sold' as a value-add for the integrator.

So it was a tough situation for me sometimes since our own people were basically telling the integrator, 'we'll do it for you'.

I also recall times where I had to tell them what fish NOT to buy. Meaning, I told them flat out, 'our product is not the right fit for this solution'. That was always met with a 'bit' of scrutiny from my company, but also with the understanding that we simply don't fit all scenarios. Many integrators I worked with respected the honesty. Really, that's all most people want...to be treated with respect and to be told the truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, 'truth' is more of a shiny unicorn these days, rather than a common practice.

(1)
RS
Robert Shih
Oct 11, 2016
Independent

Distributors have to go through this as well. We have consulted for large projects before.

Avatar
Oleksiy Zayonchkovskyy
Oct 11, 2016
IPVMU Certified

I live in another side of the globe and ethics and business code are not developed here in a manner such as in western civilization. In addition the code is ignored each time when money involved...

As for the drawings or even projects from vendors... my opinion is "NO".

And here are some arguments why:

1) Vendor design kills subcontractor business. Here in CIS we have tonnes of "I just know that guy-integrator" who consist of one or two people like CEO and accountant and the business is fully built on personal relations of the CEO. and not because he is smart, but because he plays football with a decision maker of a targeted customer... I personally hate such business rules adoption but still this is unavoidable evil of modern society. But this one person integrator after some talks with a client should do some work to get the deal and this work should be done by at least semi-professional people and thus the selling integrator MUST subcontract somebody to do the work including design. And if vendor can substitute the subcontractor and moreover substitute for FREE just to sell their solution... brain-based companies like my are out of the business...

2) Vendor kills optimization, they just don't care cause they have sales annual plan. When I was young a decade ago and only started the career in integration business I was convinced that people in integrator know some info to help clients, if they fail there is a mighty distributor with advanced pro to solve some advanced tasks and if they fail there is the HOLY Vendor with godlike abilities and knowledge. Now some things get sorted and filtered a bit ))) but not for the customers. Typical customer thinks that vendor has much deeper qualification than any integrator and the power work of a vendor is beyond controversy. And I've experienced several situations when vendor who did the specification and design of a monovendor solution supporting one person integrator was opposed by me on technical bidding for absolutely inadequate solution for customer needs. My specification contained just several positions of a given vendor. And what do you think a customer with absolutely no expertise in given field decided? Of course, "vendor approved" solution is better... who am I with a bunch of men against vendor brain resources throughout the globe))) And after the purchase of a suboptimal solution there is no client who will step ahead and say: "yes I was stupid, forgive me please... next time I will not trust foreign men in expansive suits". After the purchase almost any client will try to explain the holy rightness of his or her decision cause he or she will not claim own stupidity even for themselves.

3) Vendor saves people from (inquisitors) auditors. I was conducting the network audit in a government bank of one of CIS countries. And I have discovered a budget gap in several hundreds thousand of dollars I've asked WHY so expensive and WHY such solution? It was like buying the ore track just to do the shopping, I was answered that the solution was vendor approved and prices also approved by vendor with special discounts.

4) Vendor support corruption. After a small investigation I've discovered that the deal was made again by one-hero integrator and 99% of work was done by a vendor. And again when I asked the vendor and the client they both said that that was exactly what they wanted a year ago... both on specification and in price. The customer who was in charge for that deal said to me: "I understand now that it was an overkill, but we are learning" and he smiled... We both knew what is hidden behind that smile... but again who am I against the power of "vendor approved"?

5) Vendor designs are killing the market. I had several bidding when there were 3 competing proposals that differ from each other just by company names and corporate styles... Yes, all 3 companies have forwarded technical assignment to the vendor and received the exact same design and specification. I've received the same but have changed it in several way. It was interesting feeling when you've sent a request and a 8 pages document and in 15 minutes I've got answer with all calculations and design... I was amazed how vendor developed speed reading, speed typing and brain-clusters technology among their personnel. ))) Of course I've understood that someone already got a request processed before and if I want to win anyhow what should I do? Of course, either switch to other vendor which is unlikely solution or DROP the price to minimum. And that is what has happened on the bidding all companies dropped prices to the floor... Vendor is happy and what about us?

In addition, as I said I have changed and optimize the solution with reasonable arguments to fit customer needs better than general solution provided by vendor. But you can guess what have happened? I lost... because of one against many... I even had an appointment with the customer to discuss details, and he said that bidding committee decided to choose one out of three "vendor approved" solutions because statistically 3 typical solutions from different integrator companies should be right and your original one - wrong.

To Sum up, I am not against vendor help, I am against vendor doing all technical work instead the integrator.

 

NOTICE: This comment has been moved to its own discussion: Vendor Designs Are Killing The Market

New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions