Amateurism makes the costs take off.

The Cost of Improvisation: When Saving Money Jeopardises Security

At Delmont Factory, a company specialising in the assembly of electronic components, management sought substantial cost savings by independently designing and implementing its own security system. Surveillance cameras, alarm systems, motion detectors, and a guard post were installed without consulting external experts. This self-reliant approach was initially perceived as pragmatic and budget-conscious.

However, technical shortcomings quickly became evident. Poorly positioned surveillance equipment created significant blind spots, alarms triggered frequent false positives, and the guard post, poorly located, disrupted logistical flows. Additionally, the overly complex and ill-adapted security protocols severely hindered daily operations: employees had to follow illogical routes, seek redundant approvals, and undergo unnecessary checks.

As system failures accumulated, management turned to a low-cost, minimally experienced security company. The assessment was clear: a complete overhaul of the installations was imperative to meet the required standards. This overhaul entailed dismantling recent infrastructure, relocating equipment, reprogramming alarms, and redesigning surveillance routes. Consequently, parts of production had to be temporarily suspended, exacerbating financial losses.

The total cost rapidly exceeded initial estimates. An intended cost-saving measure evolved into a financial disaster, while overall security performance remained inadequate, further impacting productivity.

In this critical context, an HR manager familiar with security challenges recommended consulting SDS, a global security specialist. SDS conducted a comprehensive site audit, concluding that a simple initial analysis of personnel and material flows, along with targeted organisational adjustments, would have achieved optimal security without massive investment.

Hearing of this misadventure, a General Manager from a leading international hotel group requested an SDS audit. Billed at 160,000 baht, the audit was approved after consultation. SDS ultimately recommended strategic adjustments totalling 110,000 baht. By comparison, a previous proposal by another company amounted to 870,000 baht, stemming not from a proper security audit but from a sales-driven feasibility assessment focused on equipment.

SDS recommended a strategic simplification of access points, optimisation of existing equipment placement, and implementation of streamlined yet effective protocols. Employee awareness programs were also enhanced, and internal flows rationalised.

This intervention substantially improved site security and restored operational efficiency. The final adjustment cost, modest relative to prior losses, underscored the value of a preventive, expertise-driven approach.

Delmont Company's management retained a vital lesson: in security, "cheap is always too expensive." Henceforth, any modification to security systems must be preceded by a comprehensive risk assessment and validated through an external audit.

Today, Delmont harmonises optimised security with industrial performance, demonstrating that genuine economy stems from rigorous planning and professional excellence, not from improvisation and false savings.