PSIM – The ‘promise’ and the ‘practical’ of it

When the PSIM solutions started appearing on the market in the end of the first decade of the third millennium, they were considered to be the holy grail of centralization of security management and the answer to all integration woes for the average system integrator. But alas! close to a decade later, they are just beginning to make their presence felt. I feel they were just unfortunate as this was the same time period when the VMS solutions started rapidly expanding their realm of funactionality and became the popular rivals rather than the contributors to the success of the PSIMs. VMS solutions are much simpler to deploy, train and use as well as integrate the 3 most used sub-systems viz CCTV, Access control and Intrusion alarm. Consequentially these are much cheaper to deploy and there lies the biggest incentive for end-user, cost of ownership.

I feel the PSIM was marketed with a slightly disadvantageous approach, making it sound like a star trek solution rather than a high-tech solution.

I feel the biggest advantage of the PSIM is its capability to provide ROI on all investments done on the sub-systems in addition to its own cost, not to mention increase in security levels of the facility and reduction of the cost and losses resulting from a ‘security incident’ which while it may also have been prevented by the individual sub-systems, would have potentially resulted in larger collateral damage. 

Personally I feel the PSIM solution manufacturers have been targeting the wrong end of the customer spectrum.

It is also evident that the PSIM solution providers have not focused on advertising the reduced cost of ownership of the whole facility it has been installed in, which is a direct result of using PSIM solutions be it the simplification of training needs, freedom in choosing the correct product rather than being forced to use the same previously installed product for the sake of standardization, being able to manage any incident better and coordinated way and the obvious reduction in manpower requirements to manage the facility.

The low and more importantly the middle end of the customer spectrum is where the real need is.

The large customers or the enterprise multi-nationals can afford the sub-systems and have the vision and funding to spend as and when required, can afford the extra cost of man-power to train and manage various sub-systems. The low and more importantly the middle end of the customer spectrum is where the real need is. They spend on sub-systems although grudgingly and have to huff and puff through the budgeting and justification process. If these SME’s are given the tool for better and faster ROI on the security sub-systems, they will invest in them more easily, thereby creating a safer environment in the city as a welcome by-product.

“Reach out to me and let’s talk”.

It is all very well to come to the conclusion that the SME’s have to be the target market. However they cannot afford the PSIM solutions for the most part. Now this is where a little ingenuity will help. I can write a white paper on how this can be achieved, albeit with a bit of huffing and puffing on the manufacturer side (for a change), but resulting in enormous gains in terms of business and financial gains and a whole new strategic direction for the business. In fact I can disclose that this could actually be interesting and profitable enough to spin off a side venture for manufacturers who are willing to go ‘All In’.