Biometric and RFID access control integrated with attendance and payroll — a searchable record, not just a lock.
Locks keep honest people out. The real value of electronic access control is the record: who went where, when, and whether they should have been able to.
We install biometric and card-based access and attendance, and — more importantly — integrate it with the systems that use the data. Attendance feeds payroll directly. Access is revoked the moment employment ends, because it is tied to HR rather than to somebody remembering.
For plants and campuses we also handle the parts that get overlooked: what happens to each door in a power cut, contractor and visitor handling, and alerts on doors that open when nobody should be there.
Fingerprint, face or card capture at gates and departments, sized for shift-change throughput.
Attendance feeding shift, overtime and payroll rules directly, with no monthly spreadsheet in between.
Zone-based permissions, anti-passback where needed, and a per-door decision on fail-safe versus fail-secure.
Registration, time-bounded access and a record of who was on site — including the people not on payroll.
Access tied to HR status so it ends when employment does, rather than when someone remembers.
Notifications on out-of-hours or forced-door events, and a searchable audit trail against camera footage.
We are vendor-neutral. The stack follows the requirement — including the parts of it you already run.
The sectors where this work most often lands, and what specifically changes for each.
Six hundred people through the gate in ten minutes is a throughput calculation, not a device preference. Too few readers and you create a queue at the gate; the number and placement matter more than the technology chosen.
Round-the-clock rostering feeding payroll, plus controlled access to pharmacy, records and restricted wards. Face capture generally works better than fingerprint where staff are gloved or hands are frequently sanitised.
Staff attendance for payroll, student attendance for records, and hostel entry with out-of-hours alerting. Three different populations with three different rule sets, which is why a single generic configuration satisfies none of them.
Site-wise daily labour count with a transient workforce and no fixed office. Capture has to work on a temporary connection and feed wage calculation directly, because the alternative is a register somebody transcribes and nobody can audit.
Attendance is frequently an audit artefact rather than an internal convenience, so the trail has to be tamper-evident and retained. Integration with the establishment register matters more than convenience features.
Staff working across outlets, part-time hours and high turnover mean enrolment and deprovisioning happen constantly. Tying access to HR status is what stops a former employee still having a working credential three months later.
Each door gets an explicit fail-safe or fail-secure decision. Fire exits and strong-rooms need opposite answers, and getting it wrong is either a safety or a security problem.
Face capture where hands are gloved or dirty, fingerprint where it is reliable and cheaper. Recommended on conditions, not on whichever is newer.
The capture side and the integration are separate pieces of work. The second is where the value is, and it is the one most installations never do.
So a failed reader and a broken payroll feed are the same phone call.
None of it has to be tidy. Discovering that your data is messier than expected is part of the job, not a reason to delay starting.
Understand goals, constraints and success metrics.
Map processes, data and integration surface.
Design intuitive, accessible enterprise interfaces.
Design for scale, security and future backend.
Build in modular, reviewed increments.
Automated, security and acceptance testing.
Ship to cloud, private cloud or on-prem.
Long-term partnership, SLAs and iteration.
Straight answers, including the cases where our answer is that you should not buy this from us.
In most cases yes, either through an API or a scheduled data exchange. Integration is the point — an attendance device whose output is a spreadsheet somebody edits by hand has solved the capture problem and left the expensive one untouched.
That is a per-door decision made at design time: fail-safe doors unlock for life safety, fail-secure doors stay locked to protect assets. Fire exits and strong-rooms need opposite answers, and getting it wrong is either a safety or a security problem.
Yes, and it is often the bigger gap. Time-bounded access, a registration record and a report of who was on site covers the people who are not on payroll but are on the premises.
It depends on the environment. Face capture works better where hands are dirty or gloved — plants, food processing, healthcare — while fingerprint remains reliable and cheaper in office settings. We recommend against a preference for whichever is newer.
Each page covers local context — the sectors, the constraints and the questions specific to that market.
Describe the problem in your own words. We will tell you what it takes to solve — and whether it is worth solving this way.
