How Live Monitoring Eliminates 95% of All False Alarms

Live digital monitoring has been shown to eliminate 95% of all false alarms. This isn’t just a matter of making your security program more efficient, it can save you money in the long run.

Third party false alarm response costs money

Every time your security system triggers an alert that calls in a third party response, it costs money. More and more districts are requiring that companies pay for the cost of responses in the event of real and false alarms. The majority of the alarms issued by human manned security stations are considered “false alarms” due to the fact that the response is not appropriate to the situation. Knowing this fact, you can see how having a digital system in place can save you time and resources from having local law enforcement called to the premises for a false alarm.

The wrong in-house response can also be costly

It isn’t just with third party responders that false alarms can get expensive; the wrong in-house call for response can also be costly. There are numerous cases in which a human security guard made the decision to lock down an area, disrupting production, in an inappropriate response to a perceived security threat. If you add into this the potential damage caused by triggering a fire retardant system in a whole area, rather than a targeted response – the potential for costly error gets even higher. Systems using video analytics are designed to evaluate the risk against a prioritized list of goals and objectives. They can tell the difference between objects to better understand the interplay of the properties of the environment with the risk assessed. All of these  system implentations work together to reduce the instances of false alarms.

Live monitoring has to be reliable

Live monitoring has to be reliable. If your monitors prove unreliable, then it isn’t helping your security at all. While sitting 4 guards in a room with a bank of monitors may seem like a solution, it is their potential for human error that can make live monitoring with human guards so costly. The majority of false alarms can be traced back to the events in a security guard’s life prior to the misinterpreted instance that led to the alarm. Guards are influenced by stress and fatigue no matter how well trained.

Comparing digital monitoring to human monitoring

There really isn’t a comparison between digital monitoring and human monitoring. One of the reasons that digital monitoring eliminates 95% of all false alarms is that the system is designed for multi-focal task analysis. The human brain just can’t process the same amount of data and compartmentalize a situation to analyze an appropriate response the same way a computer this designed for the specific function can. Also, if a response is needed to a situation human guards won’t be providing the same level of monitoring to the rest of the system. Digital monitoring with video analytics can compartmentalize a threat and continue monitoring the rest of the system with the same level of effectiveness.  With video analytics, the goals and priorities are set and come first in all situations. There is much more of a factor of error possible with a human security guard that can create costly problems.

The new role of the human security guard

Where does this leave the real-time security guard? Today security guards should be tasked with doing things that no digital system can do, for example, interacting with the environment in a way that a digital system can’t. This can include being a visible deterrent, responding in physical emergencies, controlling crowds and helping with evacuations. Human security guards are going to have to take on a more IT specific role requiring a much different training system. The system will need fewer human guards each possessing more technical skillsets.

How video analytics also works to make responding to real alarms more effective

Video Analytics as a cost saving prevention solution is well documented in the security industry, but awareness of the savings is only just now beginning to make it to consumer awareness. With digital systems, you can set priorities when calibrating cameras and determine what view and environmental disturbances get what level of response. Response priority control is the root of cost control. A digital system can make an instantaneous determination based on pre-calibrated priorities and goals that can and will save you money. With a human decision, there is often added costs as the response is initiated and followed through. Due to the limited ability to focus on more than one situation at a time, human guards will then be required to leave monitors unattended causing other potential issues. Live digital monitoring with technically skilled human operators is the most cost effective tool you can use to keep your property save and minimize false alarms.

Join the Secure Check Family TODAY!

Click To Join The Family

Leave a Reply