18 KEYNOTES NOVEMBER 2023 WWW.ALOA.ORG INSTITUTIONAL SPOTLIGHT Adopting New Technologies: Is the Future Now? Many fear employing new technologies, but planning and research can alleviate concerns. By Steve B. Fryman, CRL, CAI, CISM, AFDI I n the 45-plus years I have been involved in physical security, I have seen many changes in technology. In this article, I would like to share some of that experience with you. As a second-generation locksmith, living the secu- rity life and culture has been very exciting. My dad could not have imagined some of the technology that is commonly used today — integrated security in smart buildings, electronic key boxes and electrified hardware, just to name a few. Throughout history, we have seen early adopters as being on the “cutting edge.” When we think of the term “cutting edge,” do we associate it with challenge, risk, danger, slow acceptance and pushback? There are unseen pitfalls often associated with instituting innovative technologies into our buildings, both new and old. The pushback against and fear of advanced technology is not new. There is docu- mented rejection of the use of steam engines in the Industrial Age of the mid- to late 1800s. The idea of using steam to drive industry was very slowly accepted, and change happens slowly in many industries to this day. Early adopters are end users who often provide feedback to help refine manufac- turers’ new products. This helps manufacturers with future releases, which helps our institutions. The public at large often have more belief in the need for change. Ma- chine power in the 1800s was viewed as dangerous. The fear in the Industrial Age was very real, as there were no safety standards, and workers were working 18-hour days in squalid conditions. Child labor was a widespread practice subjecting children to hostile working conditions. This coupled with the fear of steam and the witnessing of initial failure was a deterrent. After many years of proving the advantages associ- ated with steam technology, many industrialists were still hesitant . We know that doing nothing and playing it safe is not a good option as we watch antiquated systems bleed valuable resources and waste workforce hours. We sim- ply cannot afford to misuse time and resources by throwing good money after bad. More often, the thought and desire for upgrading systems in our buildings are not completely thought through. Like a good detective, it is our responsibility to investigate how and where the new systems can be implemented. Case studies are valuable indi- cators of success or failure in real-world terms. This could be a new networked light- ing system, roofing membranes or touchless electronic sink faucets. We had an issue with one of our new buildings’ sink faucets. Every sink in a new five-story building needed reprograming by the distributor/ manufacturer’s rep because the touchless aspect of the faucet caused the water not to come out, or the wait time was delayed. You may have experienced building occupants and facilities managers say- ing, “It was a good idea at the time.” We often face steep learning curves regarding fully reaping the benefits of a major sys- tem upgrade, and we are always looking to the matrix for the holy ROI. Success or failure in implementing recent technol- ogy usually lies directly with implemen- tation and training — or the lack thereof. We put the cart before the horse, to use an old, worn-out cliché. We have had a positive experience at a regional conference meeting a vendor that wound up overpromising and un- derperforming. Sadly, the promised re- sults are often too good to be true. I’m not wanting to sound jaded, but we often put too much credence in what salespeople say. Investigate for yourself to prove the system out. Regrets are a terrible thing to have when it comes to system perfor- mance issues, so don’t ignore that feeling in your gut that it sounded too good to be true. Rushing into a new system too quickly can have adverse results. Your heart overruled your head, and your in- stitution suffered the consequences.