At a recent conference focused on campus safety, I addressed a crowd of higher education security professionals. Returning to a setting that shaped my early career in security, I reflected on large-scale campus projects where the balance between openness and control proved difficult. Those lessons still guide us today.
Over the years, I led installations of access control and emergency systems across sprawling campuses. I witnessed pilot efforts stall, encountered systems that lost support, and faced the consequences of poor planning. Every setback taught me the importance of solid organization and consistent follow-through.
Even with cloud platforms, mobile credentials, artificial intelligence analytics and other modern solutions, discussions from a decade ago still resonate. Technology rarely fails on its own; weaknesses arise when projects lack sustained commitment.
If there’s one key idea for campus leaders, it’s simple: before adding new tools, strengthen what’s in place.
Two core components remain vital but often overlooked:
- A cross-department team that includes public safety, IT, facilities, human resources and academic leadership. This group must meet regularly to align objectives, assign accountability and reinforce strategies and policies.
- Equipment and processes governed by documented, enforced and routinely reviewed standards. These guidelines should cover door hardware, software integrations, construction planning, emergency response procedures and credential management.
At the conference, I challenged attendees to consider technology they’ve added on top of shaky support: blue light emergency phones that never get repaired, key storage units without recent audits, access control systems installed only on select entrances.
Rather than launching endless pilot programs, campuses benefit from comprehensive playbooks that turn technology from unused inventory into operational assets.
Written policies support personnel training, regular audits and budget planning, helping each innovation integrate smoothly with existing systems.
During my talk, I asked how many campuses have security tools with no clear owner, initiatives that started strong but faded and installations that fell short when stakeholders weren’t engaged. Nearly every hand rose.
Trust matters. If students and staff don’t believe in the systems you install—propping open doors, skipping check-ins or disabling alarms—they risk campus security and undermine your efforts.
A number of emerging solutions promise faster response times, real-time data for decision-makers and seamless experiences for end users. Yet none of these tools fulfill their potential without a sturdy base of people, policy and process.
Begin with your team. Align your strategy. Standardize current systems before introducing new technology. It may lack flash, but proven results come from a solid foundation.
After almost twenty years in campus security, I can confirm: institutions that invest in structure, communication and clear ownership adapt faster, maintain safer environments and support their educational mission more effectively.
Each department—whether law enforcement units, IT specialists, facilities managers, HR teams or academic administrators—has unique insights into campus life. When these groups meet on a fixed schedule, they share incident data, discuss budget impacts and refine operational guidelines. This collaboration prevents finger-pointing and speeds up decision cycles.
Standards act as a guiding framework. For example, specifying vendor-neutral hardware options provides compatibility during upgrades. Defined procedures for credential issuance and revocation keep access lists current. Regular safety drills test both technology and protocols, highlighting weaknesses before they escalate into crises.
Deploying facial recognition without clear privacy policies can erode confidence and spark legal concerns. Mobile-first credential systems require user training and backup processes to avoid lockouts.
Regular feedback loops with end users highlight areas for improvement.
