Reviewed by Gary E. Wilson, President & Designated Broker · Managing Greater Seattle rentals since 1982
An office building's security posture is largely an administrative achievement rather than a technological one. Most buildings have adequate hardware. What separates a genuinely controlled building from one that merely has card readers is whether the credential list reflects who should actually have access today.
That list decays continuously. Tenants hire and lose staff, contractors come and go, cards are lost and replaced without the original being disabled, and tenancies end with cards still in circulation. Unless somebody is actively maintaining it, a building's access system gradually becomes a record of everyone who has ever worked there.
Wilson Management manages access control and security for office property across Bellevue, Seattle and the Eastside. For the wider service see Office Property Management.
Credential Hygiene
The single highest-value security practice in an office building is keeping the credential list current, and it is mostly a matter of process rather than expenditure.
Issue against authorisation. Credentials granted only on request from an authorised contact at the tenant, with a record of who authorised what. Buildings that issue cards on a verbal request at the desk have no way to establish later whether access was legitimate.
Revoke promptly. Tenants need a route to report departures, and it needs to be easy enough that they actually use it. A tenant who has to email three people to disable a card will eventually stop bothering.
Audit periodically. Sending each tenant a list of the credentials active for their premises and asking them to confirm is unglamorous and reliably finds cards belonging to people who left months ago. Annual is a reasonable minimum; more often in buildings with high turnover.
Close out tenancies. Collecting or disabling all credentials at move-out, including contractor and cleaning access granted during the tenancy.
Match access to need. A cleaning contractor requiring access to common areas and a specific suite does not need building-wide after-hours access, which is what they are frequently given because it is simpler.
Visitor Management
How a building handles visitors is both a security control and the first impression it makes.
The practical requirements are knowing who is in the building, ensuring visitors reach the tenant they came for without wandering, and doing it without making legitimate visitors feel processed. Buildings with a staffed lobby have more options; buildings without one rely on tenant-managed access, which works provided tenants understand it is their responsibility.
Deliveries and couriers are the recurring gap. They arrive constantly, they need to reach specific suites, and they are the most common way an unescorted stranger ends up on an upper floor. Having a defined arrangement — a delivery point, a procedure — is better than the default of whoever holds the door.
After-Hours Access
Office buildings lock down outside business hours, and the arrangements need to work for tenants who genuinely work late without leaving the building open.
That means credentials that function after hours for those entitled to them, a defined position on guests after hours, lighting and lift access that work in the after-hours mode, and a clear procedure when someone is locked out — because the default, propping a door, defeats the entire system.
After-hours access records are worth retaining. They are the first thing anyone asks for after an incident, and they resolve most questions about who was present without requiring anyone's recollection.
Cameras
Camera coverage in office buildings should follow where incidents actually occur: entrances, lobbies, lifts and lift lobbies, parking, loading and service areas, and the paths between them.
The recurring failures are the same as anywhere. Coverage that shows a person arrived but not what they did. Footage unusable in the conditions incidents happen in — low light, glare, or at the distance the camera is actually mounted. And retention windows shorter than the time it takes for something to be reported.
Retention deserves thought in an office context because incidents are often reported days later, when a tenant notices something missing. Footage that rotated after a short window is gone before anyone asks.
The Landlord and Tenant Boundary
The division of responsibility is worth stating explicitly, because both sides otherwise assume the other has it covered.
The landlord is generally responsible for the building envelope, common areas, the base access control system, and common area cameras. The tenant is responsible for security within its own premises, including any additional access control, alarms or cameras it installs inside the suite.
Where a tenant installs its own systems, coordination matters — a tenant alarm that summons police to the building without the landlord's knowledge, or a suite access system that conflicts with the base building's, causes avoidable problems.
Emergency contacts for each tenant should be current, which is the same administrative decay problem as credentials and needs the same annual refresh.
Systems Ageing Out
Access control systems have a working life, and office buildings frequently run them well past it because they still appear to function.
The signs that a system is approaching its end are practical rather than dramatic. Credentials using older card technologies that are trivially cloned. Controllers or software no longer supported, so a failure cannot be repaired and a security patch cannot be applied. Software running on an operating system that is itself unsupported. An inability to integrate with anything else, or to produce the reporting an audit needs. And parts sourced from secondary markets because the manufacturer no longer makes them.
The risk is not that the system stops working. It is that it fails at a point where replacement is urgent, and an urgent access control replacement in an occupied building is disruptive as well as expensive — every credential in the building has to be reissued, which touches every tenant.
Planned replacement can be phased, scheduled around tenant operations, and used as the moment to rebuild the credential list properly rather than migrating years of accumulated inaccuracy into the new system. That last point is the real opportunity: a replacement is the one occasion when a building can start its access list from scratch, and it is routinely wasted by importing the old one wholesale.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the highest-value security practice?
Keeping the credential list current. Most buildings have adequate hardware; what distinguishes a controlled building is whether the list reflects who should have access today.
How do access lists become inaccurate?
Continuously and invisibly — staff leave, cards are replaced without disabling the original, contractors finish, tenancies end with cards in circulation. Without active maintenance the system becomes a record of everyone who ever worked there.
How often should we audit credentials?
Annually at minimum, by sending each tenant the list active for their premises and asking them to confirm. It reliably finds cards belonging to people who left months ago.
What is the most common visitor gap?
Deliveries and couriers. They arrive constantly, need to reach specific suites, and are the most common route by which an unescorted stranger reaches an upper floor.
How long should footage be kept?
Long enough to cover reporting delay. Office incidents are often noticed days later, and short retention loses the footage before anyone asks for it.
Who is responsible for security inside a tenant's suite?
The tenant. The landlord covers the envelope, common areas, base access control and common area cameras. Being explicit about the boundary prevents both sides assuming the other has it.
What defeats an access system fastest?
A propped door, which is what happens when there is no workable procedure for legitimate after-hours access or lockouts.
How do we know our access system is ageing out?
Card technologies that are trivially cloned, controllers or software no longer supported, parts sourced from secondary markets, and an inability to produce the reporting an audit needs. The system usually still appears to work throughout.
What is the hidden opportunity in replacing it?
Rebuilding the credential list from scratch. A replacement is the one occasion a building can start its access list clean, and it is routinely wasted by importing years of accumulated inaccuracy wholesale.
Get Started
Office security is mostly administrative — the credential list, the visitor procedure and the records — rather than a hardware purchase. Wilson Management, Inc. manages it that way.
Request a free analysis or contact us. You can also reach our Bellevue office at (425) 453-0089, 1380 112th Ave NE #203, Bellevue, WA 98004.