Building a Smarter Access Control Strategy: Lessons from Mercer University

Building a Smarter Access Control Strategy: Lessons from Mercer University

Replacing an aging access control system is a major undertaking for any campus. When that system manages thousands of doors across multiple locations, the challenge becomes even greater. How do you modernize the technology without disrupting daily operations? What existing hardware can you keep? And how do you make sure the new system will meet your institution's needs for years to come?

During NACCU's recent webinar, Building a Smarter Access Control Strategy, Ken Boyer and Jay Bonney from Mercer University shared their experience migrating from a legacy Transact access control system to a cloud based Genea platform integrated with Illumia.

With nearly 4,000 access controlled doors across 16 locations in Georgia, Mercer had plenty to consider. The university's approach offers practical lessons for other institutions facing similar decisions.

Start with What You Already Have

One of Mercer's priorities was finding a solution that wouldn't require replacing every piece of existing equipment.

The university had invested heavily in its access control infrastructure over the years, including wiring, readers, wireless locks, and controllers. Although some components had reached the end of their supported life, others still worked well.

Mercer ultimately selected a system that allowed the university to reuse its existing wiring and many of its Transact readers while replacing proprietary controllers with Mercury hardware. New installations now use Allegion readers.

That compatibility made a significant difference in the project's scope and cost.

Mercer also appreciated the flexibility of Mercury controllers, which work with multiple access control platforms. If the university decides to change providers in the future, it won't necessarily have to start over with another complete hardware replacement.

Consider the Cloud, but Evaluate Your Own Environment

Mercer's decision to move access control to the cloud wasn't automatic.

Boyer acknowledged that he initially preferred keeping servers on campus, where his team could physically access them. But the university had already experienced success with cloud based point of sale services, and Bonney encouraged the team to consider a similar approach for access control.

Several factors influenced their decision.

First, Mercer operates across 16 locations. A locally hosted system could create dependencies on network connections back to the main campus. A cloud based system offered another approach to managing those geographically dispersed facilities.

Second, Mercer wanted to reduce the downtime associated with server maintenance and upgrades. With students, faculty, and staff depending on access control around the clock, finding a convenient maintenance window had become increasingly difficult.

Finally, moving to the cloud reduced the need for Auxiliary Services to maintain additional campus servers.

The team also addressed a common concern: response time. Bonney reported that Mercer hasn't experienced noticeable delays compared with its previous system.

Cloud services do introduce different dependencies, however. During one cloud service disruption, Mercer temporarily lost the ability to log in and make system changes, although its readers continued operating normally. The team acknowledged that an outage affecting administrative access could complicate an emergency lockdown.

Make the Migration Manageable

Mercer didn't attempt to replace its entire access control system at once.

Instead, the university structured the project across approximately 25 to 26 months, spanning three fiscal years. That approach helped distribute costs while giving the team time to complete the transition.

The university also handled the physical migration with its own staff. Bonney explained that Mercer had spent years developing an internal team with the experience to install and maintain access control equipment.

Having that expertise in house proved valuable. The same employees who installed the equipment would ultimately support it, so they understood exactly how the system had been configured.

Not every institution has the staff or technical expertise to take that approach, but Mercer's experience highlights the importance of planning for ongoing support alongside installation.

Don't Bring Old Problems into a New System

One of the most valuable parts of Mercer's migration had little to do with hardware.

After more than 25 years of using its previous access control system, the university had accumulated outdated access plans, inconsistent naming conventions, and records for doors that no longer existed.

Rather than transferring everything into the new platform, the team chose to rebuild its configuration carefully.

They are reviewing each door, controller, interface, and access plan as part of the migration. That process takes additional time, but it also gives the university an opportunity to eliminate unnecessary records and establish consistent practices.

The team also changed how it manages access plans.

Previously, some building representatives could create their own plans and schedules. Over time, that flexibility contributed to confusing names and inconsistent configurations. Now, Bonney and his project manager control the creation of access plans.

Building stewards still determine who should have access to their areas, but the central team manages the system configuration. Access requests also follow documented approval procedures to support auditing.

This balance preserves departmental authority while improving consistency across the institution.

Vendor Support During Implementation

Technology capabilities and pricing often receive the most attention during vendor evaluations. Mercer emphasized another important consideration: the quality of support.

As an early higher education adopter of Genea, Mercer encountered situations that required close collaboration among its own technicians, Genea's developers, and Illumia's team.

During one residence hall migration, the team ran into technical problems while working on site. Through a live support conversation, Genea brought an engineer and developer directly into the discussion to help resolve the issues.

That responsiveness helped Mercer maintain progress during a complicated installation.

The team also discussed the value of accessible technical documentation and support resources. Genea's AI assisted support tool allows technicians to retrieve information, such as wiring diagrams, and help generate reports without waiting for a traditional support response.

Think Beyond Door Access

Mercer's migration also creates opportunities to connect access control with other campus systems.

The university is exploring integrations involving video surveillance, building automation, and environmental controls as it develops a new medical school facility in Macon.

The new platform also provides capabilities that weren't available in the previous system, including mobile administrative access and visual floor plans that identify reader locations and related security information.

These features could help campus teams manage facilities more efficiently and improve coordination among departments.

Importantly, Mercer isn't treating every potential feature as an immediate requirement. The university continues to focus on completing the migration while evaluating additional capabilities for future use.

Building a Strategy That Lasts

Mercer's experience shows how much planning goes into a successful access control modernization project.

The team evaluated its existing infrastructure, considered long term flexibility, coordinated a phased migration, and used the transition to improve its access management practices. Along the way, staff expertise and responsive vendor partnerships helped address unexpected challenges.

For campuses preparing to replace aging access control systems, the most useful starting point may be a series of practical questions:

• Which components of our current infrastructure can we continue using?
• How will our choice affect future hardware and software flexibility?
• What responsibilities will our staff and vendors have during and after implementation?
• Which existing access permissions, policies, and records need attention?
• How will the system operate during network disruptions or emergencies?
• What other institutional priorities could benefit from better access control integration?

Mercer is still completing its migration, and the team readily acknowledged that every campus has different needs. Their experience provides a valuable example of how institutions can approach a complex transition thoughtfully while continuing to support daily campus operations.

The goal is to choose a system your institution can support, manage, and adapt as its needs evolve.

This article is based on the webinar, "Building a Smarter Access Control Strategy," featuring Ken Boyer and Jay Bonney of Mercer University. 

Watch the Full Webinar here: