How physical security is shaping corporate decisions
Physical security no longer just protects: it now helps guide decisions, coordinate efforts, and foster growth.
What is changing in the way organizations understand physical security?
For years, physical security was seen as a silent safeguard, present only when something went wrong. Today, that role is evolving. Increasingly, organizations are integrating it as a strategic component that influences how they operate, collaborate, and make critical decisions.
This is highlighted in the sixth annual Physical Security State of the Market report published by Genetec, based on responses from 7,368 industry professionals across six regions worldwide.
The study shows that physical security is taking on a significant role within organizations, fostering greater cross-departmental collaboration and driving interest in technologies that enhance operational awareness and informed decision-making.
Strategic Evolution
The report demonstrates a clear shift: physical security is moving beyond being merely a protective layer to becoming a business function with a direct impact on organizational objectives.This transformation reflects the need to operate in a more integrated, efficient manner while aligning with long-term challenges. Christian Morin, Vice President of Product Engineering at Genetec, explains:
“As it becomes more integrated into the overall fabric of the enterprise, security is emerging as a genuine enabler of business outcomes, helping organizations work more cohesively, respond more effectively, and stay focused on long-term objectives.”
Technological Modernization
One of the key drivers of this shift is technological modernization. More than 70% of respondents now use unified or integrated security systems. Additionally, 60% indicate that their main reason for replacing legacy technology is the ability to integrate new capabilities, while 51% cite access to new functionalities as a decisive factor.
These figures reflect a preference for multifunctional platforms that provide operational insights and maximize the value of existing investments.
Supplier selection is also evolving. The report notes that the long-term stability of the manufacturer has become a central criterion for choosing solutions.
Seventy-three percent of end users consider this a key factor, even above product performance (45%) and price (43%).
This trend reflects a search for partners who ensure continuity, support sustained modernization efforts, and maintain reliable product development.
AI and Cloud
At the same time, interest in artificial intelligence (AI) continues to grow. For the first time, AI appears alongside access control and video surveillance as a top priority for security projects heading into 2026.
Adoption of this technology among end users has more than doubled since the previous report, primarily due to its ability to manage alarms, support investigations, and reduce operational noise in busy environments. However, 70% of respondents express concerns regarding data usage and understanding how AI works, highlighting the need for greater clarity and guidance.
Infrastructure is also being redefined. Hybrid cloud is gaining traction as the foundation for the future of physical security. End users highlight benefits such as automatic updates, ease of deployment, and simplified maintenance.
Looking toward 2026, adoption is expected to continue, driven by operational flexibility that allows organizations to decide which workloads remain on-premises and which move to the cloud.
The report also includes a 2026 outlook, identifying priorities such as access control modernization, cybersecurity initiatives, and the growing use of analytics, along with regional insights designed to support strategic planning for organizations.
The study was conducted via a global survey between August 18 and September 15, 2025, targeting physical security professionals across six regions. Participants included end users, channel partners, consultants, and manufacturers from organizations of various sizes and sectors, with only complete responses considered in the analysis.
|
|
