BEYOND THE FENCE: - FLIR.com - FLIR Systems

KEY EVALUATION OF FINDINGS – CONTRAST SCENARIO 1 & 3The following tables summarize the cost and performance comparison for Scenarios One andThree (a features-based approached versus a performance-based approach). The result was a minorcost differential, but a fairly major difference in the system capabilities.NEXT STEPSIt’s clear to see that the functional requirements anda performance-based approach offer quite a bit bettervalue. Although this may seem like an obvious conclusion,and possibly simplistic given the steps undertakenin this study, in reality the feature-based approach isapplied much more often than the performance-basedapproach. There are likely several factors for this. Oneattributing factor is that technology changes very rapidlyand it is very difficult, even for engineers, to keepup with how new technology performs, how it shouldbe applied and the details around implementation.This factor is magnified for someone who doesn’t havea technical background, but is yet charged with theresponsibility of implementing a very large securitysystem. Many people have fallen prey to salesmen whocome in with the latest and greatest technology, whichmay in fact be a very good technology, but without anunderstanding of its plausibility within their currentsystem.It is very clear that focusing on and articulating theproblem and requirements is a mission critical step. It’sextremely important to understand what exactly therequirements a system must achieve. FLIR and PBAhave taken a phased approach to project assessmentand development in what we’ve termed the Phase 1 siteassessment. It is essentially a needs analysis and preliminarydesign. Because often times project planners willproceed with information, particularly costing information,which is not as comprehensive as it should be.Once a project is in motion, facility security managersare required to reduce the scope or goal of the project tomeet budget requirements. When cost is appropriatelyaddressed up front and a thorough site assessment andpreliminary design performed, site officials are able toproceed in an informed manner, knowing their designrequirements are supportable.Clearly defining requirements, making sure they applycorrectly to the site, then developing a preliminary designand preliminary architecture is absolutely essential.Through this process costs can be derived and a clearsummary report developed. This provides supportingdocumentation that, in turn, provides the justificationof costing. Simply put, it’s much easier to gain buy inwhen a proposed project can be fully supported. Thisinformation also allows the project team to proceed inan informed manner. From here, detailed design andimplementation follow naturally.KEY FINDINGS1. Understanding the functional requirementsis very important2. Identify the problem before the solution3. Performance based approach offersbest value4. Optimized solutions blend technologies tosolve problems16 17