The system of protection against theft in the office. Anti-consulting
I was engaged in the implementation of RFID systems, and a little less than ever, customers - owners of the warehouse or production had an idea: let us make the protection from theft on the basis of this magic technology in our office.
I want to tell why, in most cases, I did not advise them to rush into this (although, of course, this would be a great opportunity to sell them a lot of expensive iron and go on vacation).
And you, before seriously thinking about it, read (or let your leadership read).
')
Before proceeding, let me remind you once again that all of the following applies to the office , but in no case is it a warehouse or a store - there are completely different conditions.
A certain employee sees poor (or good) material value, begins to "suck in the stomach", and sooner or later he stuffs the thing into his briefcase and takes it to his home, where she takes her place in the dump of his war trophies. At least, the anti-theft system and vigilant guards can save this theft. It’s at the very least, for most of the items that are stolen in this way are very easy to make out and impossible to personalize. However, the losses from this kind of theft - a penny.
The object of accounting, staying in good "health", is recognized as faulty, the procedure is written off and the thing is taken to his dacha. This can be done only by those who have the authority to write off, or conspires with such people.
Practically nothing will save from such a theft, since the removal of the object and its disappearance will be completely legal, and, moreover, not everyone will be suspicious of this theft.
The use of errors in the maintenance of material accounting.
In most organizations where I have been, material records are kept according to the principle “who is in what is ready”. Inaccurate accounting of certain things makes it easy to carry them away, and no one will notice this in the annual inventory, since accounting will still be fine. Below I will talk about these errors.
To commit such a theft, you need at least once to find out exactly how the records of certain objects are kept, and if they have a “bug,” then think of how to use it.
The removal of items can be prevented by vigilant security, but anti-theft electronics may be powerless here because of all the same errors in accounting.
Bring your own bad and cheap thing, and take a good and expensive one instead.
Most often, computers are subjected to such a “transplant” - good graphics cards, memory, hard drives, even processors are pulled out from there, and instead of them they put outdated, less volume, speed.
A robbery that is difficult enough to detect, which can only be discovered by chance, and that if it is good and meticulous to keep records. But if employees receive a good salary, you can not be afraid. Lovers of keeping workers on starvation rations will suffer much more.
This is when the boss appropriates a part of the property purchased at the expense of the company. Flourishes all the time. Nothing will save us from this, except for the anger of shareholders (hello to Navalny) and employees who have decided to go for slaughter for the sake of truth.
From the above review, it becomes clear that controlling the theft in the office is much more difficult than in a store, and it is probably not so much direct anti-theft measures that help that that are unrelated to protecting the property that help to do this help.
Modern society seeks to automate everything that can be automated, and, in some cases, this is good. But this case is exactly the one when, in response to a question about the need for automation, instead of a loud “YES !!!”, it would be better to hesitate to say “wait.”
It is obvious that the system of automatic protection against theft consists of checkpoints equipped with a kind of "electronic flair" and live security guards, and sensors located on the property and allowing the "electronic flair" to react to the introduction of these things through the checkpoint.
In addition, in the premises where the property is located, there are video cameras that help to detect or - much more often - backdate the fact of theft.
That is how the anti-theft is organized in all stores.
What happens to such a system when it gets to the office?
The “electronic sense”, be it a radio antenna or an acousto-magnetic receiver, will work only when the corresponding transponder enters their field. And, not only will it get, but it will also be successfully interviewed, despite the interference and all sorts of screening.
This means that before taking out the property, the transponders will not be removed from it and will not shield them with a “thick piece of iron”.
In stores, this happens (as a percentage) not so often, because video cameras, witnesses around, the lack of tools (screwdrivers, nippers, shielding boxes, etc.) prevent this, you cannot enter with bags, and there’s no time for that. not a lot of people.
However, in the office, a potential thief has all the opportunities to work on the elimination of the anti-theft transponders: there is time, and tools, and the ability to bring-carry rather impressive bags, and a time when you can be left without witnesses.
And fixing on a video camera the way a person picked up an item and went, it is almost impossible to find fault with this fact (except for quite exotic cases, for example, the secretary climbed on the ceiling to unscrew the light bulbs and put them in a bag).
In addition, the removal of many items outside the office does not mean theft.
Sales managers take out laptops and many other things to travel to presentations, engineers take out laptops and tools for customer service, employees are often not forbidden to take work at home.
Therefore, the question about automatic protection against theft in the office today can only be answered in two ways:
1) Fully tightening the screws: a total inspection of employees' stuff at the checkpoint when entering and leaving, prohibiting entry and exit with bags, prohibition on the use of personal property at work and workplace is outside the office. With this method, automation does not make sense, since the main burden is carried by live guards.
2) Indirect measures that do not directly prevent thefts, but increase the measure of responsibility of employees for the safety of things and reduce their desire to steal. Automation is also useless here, because we go to the problem from a completely different side.
The choice between one method or another is made on the basis of an analysis of the cases of theft and the value of what could potentially be stolen at the current level of protection.
In most cases, there is no point in resorting to tightening the screws. It is, although effective, but it is very difficult job and just insulting to the staff.
We will have to talk about indirect measures separately, because there is a lot of this, which the managers do not realize, and the accountants know, but prefer not to recall.
This is very trite, and very difficult to practice.
Here we are not talking at all about the fact that those who receive 60 thousand have to start paying 90.
Just do not keep workers on a starvation diet. If people only have enough salary for food, they will definitely steal .
If flash drives, mice, calculators, keyboards disappear in your office, soap disappears from the toilet, office paper is lost from printers, and paper hangers are removed from the closets, light bulb stocks are taken away, then an impressive part of the staff cannot afford to buy even such cheap things.
Do not be lazy to look at the payroll of their wards. Most likely you will find there ahtung. It is better to cut staff and increase salaries than to recruit a large staff and underpay them. At the very least - it's more honest.
One of the skeletons in the closet of your bookkeeping.
It is often done this way: all property is hung on one, two or several MOLs (for example, on a supply manager) with a staff of 600 employees.
This is a serious mistake. With such an accounting system, things start to disappear, and often not even because of theft, but they are simply lost. In order to avoid losses, the unfortunate must conduct an audit of the items written to him monthly, which threatens to turn into his only occupation.
No matter how wild it may seem to your accountants, ALL employees must be financially responsible and responsible for the things they personally use.
That is, the list of property for each person, ideally, should not exceed 10-15 items that each employee demonstrates during the inventory.
There is another scary skeleton with an ax, waiting in the wings in the bookkeeping cabinets.
This is when 1000 chairs are registered not as 1000 objects called “chairs” , but as 1 object called “1000 chairs” or - even worse, 1 object called “set of office chairs” .
More real life examples:
- 90 air conditioners as “air conditioning system”.
- 5 tables, 10 cabinets, a leather chair, an aquarium, two paintings, 8 chairs and a fan, as a “furniture set for the director’s office”.
- monitor, system unit, keyboard, mouse, printer, table, chair, network filter, as a “workplace kit”.
- monitor, system unit, keyboard, mouse, as a “computer”.
Meets pretty often. A scourge of almost every large organization. Look in the database of fixed assets of your organization and you will be afraid that there is a lot of it.
In addition, any attempt to automate the accounting of material resources is stumbled upon these “composite sets”: any automated system working with a database will consider one object as one object, even if it is written in the “comment” field that in fact there are 1000 of them .
To avoid such confusion, enter the iron rule:
1 item = 1 accounting item.
Yes, I know that if an invoice came to the accounting department for the purchase of a “set of office furniture” that was not broken down into components, then they are forced to register it exactly this way. Let them demand the same atomization from suppliers. If you want order, it should start with someone.
In addition, similar chaos reigns in the description of the location of objects.
For example, 5 tables, 10 system units and 1 refrigerator are physically located in the same room at number 101.
By accounting, the same: 5 tables are registered in the room “101”, 10 system units - in the room “office 101” and a refrigerator - in the room “k.101”. From the point of view of the database - these are three different rooms.
Actually, all this is dangerous because it can be very difficult to detect items missing in inventory, and knowing this, it is easy to steal them, and it is even easier to just lose somewhere in your own building.
If it seems to you that a malicious write-off of an entirely suitable property occurs in your organization, reorganize the business process so that the items written off pass through the control of the commission, in which you personally participate. Will help.
Here, almost everything.
I hope that the described examples from experience helped you make the right decision about protecting your office from theft. If other useful thoughts come as we discuss, I promise to finish it.
I want to tell why, in most cases, I did not advise them to rush into this (although, of course, this would be a great opportunity to sell them a lot of expensive iron and go on vacation).
And you, before seriously thinking about it, read (or let your leadership read).
')
Before proceeding, let me remind you once again that all of the following applies to the office , but in no case is it a warehouse or a store - there are completely different conditions.
Like what employees can steal from the office
Kleptomania
A certain employee sees poor (or good) material value, begins to "suck in the stomach", and sooner or later he stuffs the thing into his briefcase and takes it to his home, where she takes her place in the dump of his war trophies. At least, the anti-theft system and vigilant guards can save this theft. It’s at the very least, for most of the items that are stolen in this way are very easy to make out and impossible to personalize. However, the losses from this kind of theft - a penny.
Malicious write-off
The object of accounting, staying in good "health", is recognized as faulty, the procedure is written off and the thing is taken to his dacha. This can be done only by those who have the authority to write off, or conspires with such people.
Practically nothing will save from such a theft, since the removal of the object and its disappearance will be completely legal, and, moreover, not everyone will be suspicious of this theft.
"Bagouzanie"
The use of errors in the maintenance of material accounting.
In most organizations where I have been, material records are kept according to the principle “who is in what is ready”. Inaccurate accounting of certain things makes it easy to carry them away, and no one will notice this in the annual inventory, since accounting will still be fine. Below I will talk about these errors.
To commit such a theft, you need at least once to find out exactly how the records of certain objects are kept, and if they have a “bug,” then think of how to use it.
The removal of items can be prevented by vigilant security, but anti-theft electronics may be powerless here because of all the same errors in accounting.
The substitution of "God's gift" to "scrambled eggs"
Bring your own bad and cheap thing, and take a good and expensive one instead.
Most often, computers are subjected to such a “transplant” - good graphics cards, memory, hard drives, even processors are pulled out from there, and instead of them they put outdated, less volume, speed.
A robbery that is difficult enough to detect, which can only be discovered by chance, and that if it is good and meticulous to keep records. But if employees receive a good salary, you can not be afraid. Lovers of keeping workers on starvation rations will suffer much more.
Intruder in the manual
This is when the boss appropriates a part of the property purchased at the expense of the company. Flourishes all the time. Nothing will save us from this, except for the anger of shareholders (hello to Navalny) and employees who have decided to go for slaughter for the sake of truth.
From the above review, it becomes clear that controlling the theft in the office is much more difficult than in a store, and it is probably not so much direct anti-theft measures that help that that are unrelated to protecting the property that help to do this help.
“So it was like this: the enemy enters, and the electric fist is in his face!”
Modern society seeks to automate everything that can be automated, and, in some cases, this is good. But this case is exactly the one when, in response to a question about the need for automation, instead of a loud “YES !!!”, it would be better to hesitate to say “wait.”
It is obvious that the system of automatic protection against theft consists of checkpoints equipped with a kind of "electronic flair" and live security guards, and sensors located on the property and allowing the "electronic flair" to react to the introduction of these things through the checkpoint.
In addition, in the premises where the property is located, there are video cameras that help to detect or - much more often - backdate the fact of theft.
That is how the anti-theft is organized in all stores.
What happens to such a system when it gets to the office?
The “electronic sense”, be it a radio antenna or an acousto-magnetic receiver, will work only when the corresponding transponder enters their field. And, not only will it get, but it will also be successfully interviewed, despite the interference and all sorts of screening.
This means that before taking out the property, the transponders will not be removed from it and will not shield them with a “thick piece of iron”.
In stores, this happens (as a percentage) not so often, because video cameras, witnesses around, the lack of tools (screwdrivers, nippers, shielding boxes, etc.) prevent this, you cannot enter with bags, and there’s no time for that. not a lot of people.
However, in the office, a potential thief has all the opportunities to work on the elimination of the anti-theft transponders: there is time, and tools, and the ability to bring-carry rather impressive bags, and a time when you can be left without witnesses.
And fixing on a video camera the way a person picked up an item and went, it is almost impossible to find fault with this fact (except for quite exotic cases, for example, the secretary climbed on the ceiling to unscrew the light bulbs and put them in a bag).
In addition, the removal of many items outside the office does not mean theft.
Sales managers take out laptops and many other things to travel to presentations, engineers take out laptops and tools for customer service, employees are often not forbidden to take work at home.
Therefore, the question about automatic protection against theft in the office today can only be answered in two ways:
1) Fully tightening the screws: a total inspection of employees' stuff at the checkpoint when entering and leaving, prohibiting entry and exit with bags, prohibition on the use of personal property at work and workplace is outside the office. With this method, automation does not make sense, since the main burden is carried by live guards.
2) Indirect measures that do not directly prevent thefts, but increase the measure of responsibility of employees for the safety of things and reduce their desire to steal. Automation is also useless here, because we go to the problem from a completely different side.
The choice between one method or another is made on the basis of an analysis of the cases of theft and the value of what could potentially be stolen at the current level of protection.
In most cases, there is no point in resorting to tightening the screws. It is, although effective, but it is very difficult job and just insulting to the staff.
Measures to reduce the conditions for theft.
We will have to talk about indirect measures separately, because there is a lot of this, which the managers do not realize, and the accountants know, but prefer not to recall.
Raise Wages
This is very trite, and very difficult to practice.
Here we are not talking at all about the fact that those who receive 60 thousand have to start paying 90.
Just do not keep workers on a starvation diet. If people only have enough salary for food, they will definitely steal .
If flash drives, mice, calculators, keyboards disappear in your office, soap disappears from the toilet, office paper is lost from printers, and paper hangers are removed from the closets, light bulb stocks are taken away, then an impressive part of the staff cannot afford to buy even such cheap things.
Do not be lazy to look at the payroll of their wards. Most likely you will find there ahtung. It is better to cut staff and increase salaries than to recruit a large staff and underpay them. At the very least - it's more honest.
Rebuild the system of materially responsible persons (MOL)
One of the skeletons in the closet of your bookkeeping.
It is often done this way: all property is hung on one, two or several MOLs (for example, on a supply manager) with a staff of 600 employees.
This is a serious mistake. With such an accounting system, things start to disappear, and often not even because of theft, but they are simply lost. In order to avoid losses, the unfortunate must conduct an audit of the items written to him monthly, which threatens to turn into his only occupation.
No matter how wild it may seem to your accountants, ALL employees must be financially responsible and responsible for the things they personally use.
That is, the list of property for each person, ideally, should not exceed 10-15 items that each employee demonstrates during the inventory.
Atomize property accounting
There is another scary skeleton with an ax, waiting in the wings in the bookkeeping cabinets.
This is when 1000 chairs are registered not as 1000 objects called “chairs” , but as 1 object called “1000 chairs” or - even worse, 1 object called “set of office chairs” .
More real life examples:
- 90 air conditioners as “air conditioning system”.
- 5 tables, 10 cabinets, a leather chair, an aquarium, two paintings, 8 chairs and a fan, as a “furniture set for the director’s office”.
- monitor, system unit, keyboard, mouse, printer, table, chair, network filter, as a “workplace kit”.
- monitor, system unit, keyboard, mouse, as a “computer”.
Meets pretty often. A scourge of almost every large organization. Look in the database of fixed assets of your organization and you will be afraid that there is a lot of it.
In addition, any attempt to automate the accounting of material resources is stumbled upon these “composite sets”: any automated system working with a database will consider one object as one object, even if it is written in the “comment” field that in fact there are 1000 of them .
To avoid such confusion, enter the iron rule:
1 item = 1 accounting item.
Yes, I know that if an invoice came to the accounting department for the purchase of a “set of office furniture” that was not broken down into components, then they are forced to register it exactly this way. Let them demand the same atomization from suppliers. If you want order, it should start with someone.
In addition, similar chaos reigns in the description of the location of objects.
For example, 5 tables, 10 system units and 1 refrigerator are physically located in the same room at number 101.
By accounting, the same: 5 tables are registered in the room “101”, 10 system units - in the room “office 101” and a refrigerator - in the room “k.101”. From the point of view of the database - these are three different rooms.
Actually, all this is dangerous because it can be very difficult to detect items missing in inventory, and knowing this, it is easy to steal them, and it is even easier to just lose somewhere in your own building.
Control decisions on the write-off and destruction of property
If it seems to you that a malicious write-off of an entirely suitable property occurs in your organization, reorganize the business process so that the items written off pass through the control of the commission, in which you personally participate. Will help.
Here, almost everything.
I hope that the described examples from experience helped you make the right decision about protecting your office from theft. If other useful thoughts come as we discuss, I promise to finish it.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/120941/
All Articles