In this ISJ exclusive, Eve Goode, Digital Content Editor speaks with Neil Voce, Director of Business Development of Ambient System.
Can you tell me why it is important that voice communication systems are designed and manufactured in the EU?
The EN54 standards – the core European requirements for fire detection, voice alarm and evacuation systems – were developed to codify practices already established across CENELEC member countries (the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation).
This is why our experience enables us not only to meet these standards, but also to continuously improve our products while remaining fully compliant and delivering the best possible solutions.
If your product ideas don’t build on that initial background, then maybe your products could meet code, but still miss the valued add-ons of years of experience in the life-safety field.
From your experience working with critical infrastructure and public safety projects, how do EU regulations and standards influence the quality and reliability of voice communications systems?
There’s no doubt that the EU regulations have enhanced public safety by removing the ‘home-grown’ solutions that were commonplace before.
Standardisation also leads to users being able to understand systems quickly through common indications – a vital time-saving familiarity in an emergency.
Designing and manufacturing in the EU also means stronger traceability, transparent certification and long-term support – which are critical in life-safety systems.
Do you think that customers are more concerned about the origin of their voice communication technology and why?
We see with customers in all countries, particularly those outside the EU that they value the rigour of our standards and the independent testing of the products that goes to assure their investment in life-safety equipment will perform and last.
Unfortunately, in markets where EN rules are not enforced, we still encounter exaggerated or even fabricated claims of compliance and certification.
This concern is even stronger today, as more projects are treated as dual-use public safety infrastructure – requiring not just compliance, but trusted origin, traceable supply chains and credible long-term support.
What are the biggest security risks facing modern voice communication systems today?
Cyber-attacks are clearly a growing risk, particularly as more voice communication and evacuation systems become IP-connected and integrated into wider networks.
If infrastructure is not properly protected, an attacker could gain unauthorised access, connect rogue equipment or inject messages – for example triggering an evacuation at a busy transport hub as part of a coordinated disruption.
From a practical standpoint, strong segmentation, secure access controls and minimising exposure to open LAN networks are key.
In some projects, analogue connectivity can still be the safest option.
In others, we recommend secure point-to-point links such as dark fibre between protected equipment.
In the near future, how will the voice communication technology/security market change?
I predict cybersecurity to become an even bigger priority, with manufacturers taking it far more seriously. Not just at product level, but across the full lifecycle.
That will raise expectations for installation and commissioning, including stronger access control, role-based permissions, audit trails and higher competency standards for engineers who configure and maintain critical systems.
At the same time, technology trends are clear: AI will increasingly support operations, monitoring and faulting diagnostics.
However, in critical infrastructure and vital communications, AI adoption will be shaped by security, sovereignty and resilience requirements.
If AI relies on cloud connectivity and remote computing, many operators will treat that as a risk – which is why we expect growing interest in edge or on-premise intelligence, where control remains local and systems can continue operating even during outages or cyber-incidents.
