As one of the UK’s leading retail supermarket chains – and with more than 1300 outlets – Somerfield Stores has built up a strong reputation among customers the length and breadth of the country. However, success can breed its own problems, and so it’s proved.
Recently, the sheer pace of the company’s growth had made it all-too-apparent that its internal security management structure was ‘unwieldy’. The support being provided was no longer cost-effective, and there were increasing concerns over whether or not the company’s in-house security team could stretch to meet its stringent performance criteria.
Faced with such a scenario, there’s one obvious route to take – outsourcing (at least part of) the security management function.
The in-house team at Somerfield has done just that. West Malling-based Security Support Services (SSS) was brought in to conduct a thorough audit of Somerfield’s electronic security infrastructure, evaluating its operational effectiveness and assessing various ways in which the company could enhance security provision.
SSS general manager Paul Burchfield takes up the story. “We found a number of problem areas that needed urgent attention, and a number of long-term issues that would have to be addressed. An immediate concern was the number of stores that had been removed from their local police alarm response lists.”
Under the ACPO Security Systems Policy 2000, of course, removal from the list is a ‘punishment’ meted out after a pre-determined number of call-outs to false alarms at a single site – and follows on from a warning letter issued after four such false alerts.
“During the audit we discovered a worryingly high number of activations,” adds Burchfield. “Almost 60% of them were police-notified false alarms”. This gave a high average false alarm rate nationally which, in turn, suggested that many of the stores would be on a police warning – if not fully-removed – from police response lists.
Not surprisingly, the Somerfield management team realised something had to be done – and fast. With this in mind, the powers-that-be appointed SSS to manage its security systems, and monitor services across all of its outlets. At the outset, operational protocols were implemented by SSS to improve lock-up procedures, ensure alarm repairs as soon as faults are identified, improve awareness of alarm abort procedures, restrict the issue of alarm access codes to trained users and – last, but not least – maintain accurate alarm records.
SSS then assumed responsibility for all security equipment procurement and maintenance, negotiating contracts and ensuring that all costs and working practices are properly regulated. As a direct result, all new Somerfield alarm systems are purchased outright rather than being leased (the latter, of course, being the more traditional way of doing things). In turn, this should result in long-term savings for the client.
Costs are further regulated by a policy of requiring maintenance engineers to submit to comprehensive one-year service contracts drawn up in Somerfield’s name – and with in-built penalty clauses for any non-compliance with the agreed SSS service level agreements.
The Alarm Receiving Centre
Arguably the most important aspect of SSS’ involvement, though, rounds on the management of a NACOSS-accredited Alarm Receiving Centre (ARC). Located at Somerfield House in Whitchurch Lane, Bristol, as you’d expect the ARC is fully BS 5979: 1993 and BS EN ISO 9002: 1994-compliant.
Somerfield was looking to close the facility when SSS came on board, and was reluctant to invest in it. Now, the very opposite has occurred. On top of a new telephone management system, equipment has been installed for Paknet and BT RedCare alarm signalling networks, confirmed alarm filtering techniques and ISDN connections – in unison with revised alarm management software.
“We’re monitoring 3,500 sites from the Bristol ARC,” adds Paul Burchfield, “taking in all of Somerfield’s premises as well as those of some other blue chip clients of ours, including Esso, Mappin & Webb, B&Q, CWS, Homebase and Waitrose.”
ARC manager Andy Baker leads a team of ten officers – some of whom were transferred from the original centre under the traditional TUPE arrangements – offering round-the-clock, 365 days-per-year monitoring. Shifts are typically 12 hours, with a ‘four days on, four days off’ policy in place. There are three officers on duty at any one time, monitoring 10 screens. “It’s a tight team, a small unit,” states Burchfield, “but that’s a strength. The team members quickly get to know the clients, their systems and how they like to operate.”
What about the training side of the equation? According to Burchfield, any new staff members are subject to a three-month accompanied training programme, followed by a six-month ‘in post’ programme (both of which are accredited and inspected by NACOSS). It’s a system that obviously works well. “Staff retention is extremely high,” he says. As any manager will know, team continuity is key to a successful security operation. Alas, it happens all-too-rarely.
“For each client we issue a daily report of all alarms monitored, with a brief narrative of any confirmed incidents on site,” adds Burchfield. “Where a premises has suffered an attack there will be immediate communication with the keyholder(s) until the systems are up-and-running again.” The advantage of regular reports is that they allow the SSS officers to work out false alarm trends, and how they’ve been triggered. “Regular monthly meetings with alarm contractors also allow us to filter down any changes at our regular client meetings,” states Burchfield.
What of the alarm systems themselves? What type of system would SSS recommend for end users? “We’re heavily into verifiable systems,” says Burchfield, “with sequential and audio verification to eliminate false response. To a certain extent this takes away the thought process of the operator, but it does give officers access to precise details of when and where an alarm has been generated.”
Burchfield feels that visual verification “still has some way to go” in terms of its development. When it comes to filtering the proof of the pudding is very much in the eating, and SSS is claiming a false alarm filtering rate of over 80% without police intervention being required. That’s pretty impressive.
There’s also a 24-hour help desk in the ARC. This acts as a single point of contact for all emergency requests from any of SSS’ clients. Urgent system repairs can then be actioned once notification is received. “Emergency requests could be about problems with the lighting and electrics, doors and signage, the CCTV or the PA systems,” says Burchfield. “In other words, any support structures in a building that might affect its secure status.”
In practice, data collected from all of these ‘variables’ is presented in a series of daily and weekly reports to SSS clients’ central group personnel, together with an annual report at the end of each year. Regular communication lines with local police forces are always open.
Benefits to the end user
The benefits of outsourcing elements of its security management function have already been felt by Somerfield. The new, centralised referral structure has ensured that security operations across the country are fully-integrated. By establishing an improved database for each store and maintaining detailed records of all relevant alarm events, management is kept fully up-to-date and can readily identify security issues for which preventive measures can be put in place.
“We’ve managed to improve the awareness of Somerfield’s staff when it comes to security,” opines Paul Burchfield. “They’re aware of what procedures have to be followed for remote alarm reset, ensuring that all event causes are accurately recorded and that reporting procedures are of the very highest standard.”
SSS can also point to dramatically reduced maintenance costs for CCTV systems in each Somerfield store (down by an estimated 64% during the last year), with overall (nett) cost savings in excess of GB pound 100,000 in the first year of the contract.
