星空传媒

D-Day has come and gone and, post-1 October 2005, the world of security looks much the same as it did before. That said, we are all a little wiser, perhaps, having learned our PDs, DDs and ENs!

Without doubt, the introduction of the new European Standards for intruder alarms has set us on a course towards a more structured approach to system design. An approach that should result in enhanced systems and further reductions in false alarm activations.

The development of the European Standard (EN) seemed a simple task - to create a reference document that would enable manufacturers to sell, installers to work and customers to fairly compare products on a pan-European basis. In reality, however, the introduction of such a mark was never going to be easy. Striking a balance between the differing standards across the European Union was a challenge without a simple solution.

It was back in the late 1990s that CENELEC (the European Committee for Electro-technical Standardisation) published its first response in the shape of EN 50131:1997. In the UK, take-up of the standard was poor due to a lack of compliant equipment, added to the fact that the existing British Standard suited the peculiarities of our market. The industry found itself in something of a quandary, with a European Standard that no-one wanted to use and a British Standard that was soon to be retired because it couldn't run in tandem with an EN Standard covering the same area.

Challenges for the UK

In 2004, a provisional part-revised EN Standard - prEN 50131-1 - appeared, but still it didn't cover the specific requirements of police response, alarm confirmation and other historical customs germane to the UK.

As a result, the British Standards Institution published PD 6662. This collated all of the requirements for UK installations, resulting in a 鈥榮cheme document' which cross-referenced relevant sections of the revised European Standard. Stakeholders including the British Security Industry Association, the British Standards Institution, the Association of British Insurers, the National Security Inspectorate (NSI) and the Association of Chief Police Officers - in conjunction with system manufacturers - agreed an introduction date of 1 October 2005, as well as a dual running period prior to introduction when BS 4737 or PD 6662-compliant systems could be installed.

We are now at the point where dual running is a thing of the past, and we are all installing to PD 6662:2004.

The new European Standards have presented the UK security industry with some serious challenges. One of the biggest - and most debated - has been the formalisation of the risk assessment. Without the need to produce evidence that the risk assessment was taking place, surely there were many organisations less rigorous with this process than they might have been? The standards have required us all to examine this aspect of our consultancy. A culture shock for some, but is it a good thing? Yes. Without any doubt.

ADT has been carrying out formal risk assessments since the early part of last year, and we've seen benefits to our client relationships which go far beyond 鈥榓dded value'. The risk assessment process has unearthed several gaps in system configuration, resulting in additional sales opportunities that may well have been missed had such a procedure not been followed.

Products have had to change

There is little doubt that, for larger businesses, the implementation of the new European Standards has been easier. For those smaller organisations who have struggled to follow suit, perhaps the incentive to do so lies in understanding business benefits that go beyond the mere 鈥榮tamp of approval'.

In order for companies to meet the EN, products have necessarily had to change. Although there were concerns early on that a perceived lack of clarity in the requirements placed unnecessary demands on manufacturers, it's my firm belief that they have delivered what was required on time, and have thus reduced the pressure on end users' preferred installers.

We can only offer a 鈥榞uesstimate' as to how many of our colleagues have their 鈥楽tandards Shop' in order. This picture will certainly become clearer over the next few months when the NSI and the Security Systems and Alarms Inspection Board visit installations in a bid to find out just how many businesses are compliant with PD 6662.

The strength of the UK's self-regulated market, coupled with strong drivers from the police service as well as the insurers, has encouraged us all to push forward in this area. The prospect of losing accreditation if installations are non-compliant has meant that, of its own volition, the UK security industry has been motivated to address these requirements head on.

However, in spite of this I do think that one day we will achieve a universal standard acceptable to all - but it's not going to be easy. A long and tortuous path lies ahead before that Utopia is attained. Every country has its own customs and practices, and special requirements regarding installations. What we may see, then, is the development of a modular approach as adopted here in the UK. Countries with their own unique requirements will bolt these on to the bare bones of the EN Standards (rather like the British Standards Institution's PD 6662) to provide a comprehensive solution.

Common ground in the future

The development of EN Standards is still ongoing. With a further revision due for publication this year, I'm convinced that the industry will benefit from them when an holistic solution finally arrives. Not only will these standards make installations across Europe easier, but the financial benefits to all from having common equipment suitable for use in all nations will be tremendous.

Changes to the European security industry will ultimately enhance all businesses, but may well be a long time coming while other countries bring themselves up-to-speed and the EN Standards are adapted to address every country's needs. For the moment, all we can do is wait and see what develops.