The growth of the private security industry in the UK since the 1970s can be seen as a direct response to three stimuli: a growth in crime, the threat of terrorism and (post-1979) substantial changes in Government policy (including deregulation, privatisation and contracting-out).
In the case of all three, there will be some truth in the assertion that an increase in the use of privately-financed security measures is in some way the result of a lack of confidence in the services provided by our 43 police forces.
However, this growth in private sector security provision has not been without its critics. Often, this criticism has been directed at the lack of accountability of the private security function operating in a public place.
You don’t have to be over-sensitive to determine that many of those who seek to constrain private security do so for political rather than ethical reasons. Thus here in the UK, the main critics have tended to be a strange coalition of civil libertarians, the extreme left wing and the Police Federation.
The fact that there has been little regulation and no formal licensing scheme for private security personnel or companies has provided such groups with a reasonable base on which to lobby. How far the Private Security Industry Act 2001 will influence the further development of the security profession is not yet clear, but at least it will now be possible for most security contractors to conduct legal checks of job applicants’ backgrounds and determine whether they have any criminal convictions.
Commitment from the clients
A distinguishing feature of the corporate security operation is the commitment demanded of it by its clients. The larger and more diverse the organisation, the greater the commitment. One need look no further than the organisation of the security functions of the major multinationals to work that one out.
Indeed, in some of the larger petrochemical companies the corporate security function enjoys resources and levels of support denied to many police departments. In practice, a range of specialist personnel provide full loss prevention services on a 24-hour global basis. Operating from well-equipped headquarters, such departments rival the security functions of smaller Governments.
At the departments’ heart is the primary mission of corporate security, defined as: protecting the people who work for the organisation, protecting the organisation’s property and preventing the organisation from incurring liability. In many cases, the implementation of these aims requires use of the full armoury available to industrial security, including sophisticated communications, surveillance and identification systems. Some multinationals provide their security forces with equipment which is every bit as up-to-date as that used by national police forces and the military.
However, unlike those individuals employed by Governments, the corporate security professional may have problems in doing his or her job. Just how much loyalty does one owe one’s employer? While there may be cases where interests of national security justify a transgression of the law, can corporate security interests ever make this ethical?
A global corporate culture
Almost paralleling the growth in security, the growth of a global corporate culture can be distinguished as one of the most prominent facets of the last quarter of the 20th Century. Starting with the export of global brands and the development of consumerism, the world has been changed dramatically since the end of World War II by an upsurge in the export of Western culture.
What was once decried by the former Eastern bloc as ‘Coca-colonisation’ is now seen as a statement of the power of the brand name, and the dominance of the cultural and consumer icons of the West and the Pacific Rim.
The power and influence of the corporations which operate globally has moulded markets, education, culture and even standards. A good case in point being the impact of Western hotel chains that import a whole range of technology in support of their operations.
Running in parallel with the development of corporate culture has been the trend towards internationalism. Most often identified with the individuals who work outside their home country for multinationals or international organisations, there is now a well-developed and sizeable group of people who often feel their allegiance is to the corporation rather than to their native country.
Such a tendency – when coupled with the fact that the revenue streams of large companies now comfortably exceed the Gross National Product (GNP) of many United Nations member countries – makes one thing quite clear. While the global corporation may well be a force for good, it has the potential to act against the best interests of its host country.
The bottom line might be for the security director of a multinational to have to decide whether his or her primary loyalty is to company or country.
Security: a management discipline
Back in 1980, Alex Smart – a former head of corporate security at Shell – stated that security would never be recognised as a profession until it developed both an academic base and a corpus of literature. This is now beginning to happen, and from humble beginnings in the USA, Europe and the Far East, it’s clear that security practitioners (and academics with an interest in the area) have been active in developing the foundations for our profession.
Basic security management qualifications have been available since the mid-1960s, when the Institute of Industrial Security was founded by the International Professional Security Association (IPSA) in the UK. In 1975, ASIS formed the Professional Certification Board, which then offered to test practitioners for certification Stateside. Developments in the US since 1975 and in the UK post-1990 now mean that it’s possible to obtain first degrees, post-graduate degrees and even doctorates in security-related disciplines.
US security degrees appear to have been derived largely from law enforcement-based qualifications, whereas in the UK we have allowed both of these areas to develop separately. It’s worth noting that the recently-formed, UK-based Institute of Security Professionals is to publish a directory of security qualifications which will list all exam and University-derived qualifications.
Only two decades ago, the sentence ‘career development and the security professional’ would not even have been mentioned at a security conference. There was no progression in the industry (unless you counted applying for better-paid jobs, of course). Most people working in security management did so after careers in the police service or the military. At the same time, for those who were ambitious, or for those of us who lacked substantial police or military experience, the only way forward appeared to be via the qualifications offered by the UK’s (then) Institute of Industrial Security (IISec). Set up by a number of IPSA members in 1966, by the mid-1970s the IISec offered two grades of examination and advancement to Fellowship via a piece of written work. And that was all that existed in the UK.
How different, then, is the position today? Six UK universities offer security qualifications at three or four different levels. National Vocational Qualifications will soon be available at management level. The IISec still offers its three grades. The Institute of Security Management offers memberships. The Institute of Professional Investigators offers a membership structure and its own examinations. The CPP can now be taken outside the US.
In related fields, there are qualifications in fire, safety, risk management, disaster planning and all manner of security ‘technology’ courses.
Missing the IT revolution
What, though, is the ambitious young security manager going to do if he or she is to make their way in the world? There are really two main choices on offer: to be a general practitioner or to specialise (for example, in IT security or in security systems technology).
One of the greatest missed opportunities for the security profession was when most of us ignored the introduction of the computer to our companies. Whether it was the keypad – which brought with it echoes of the typing pool – or simply the fact that most computer specialists of that period were extremely odd people I don’t really know. Those who jumped on that particular bandwagon, however, have profited.
A blend of skill and experience The general or corporate security practitioner will always represent the largest part of the profession. Although there are significant differences between, for example, providing security services in the retail industry compared with the banking and finance sector, there are also many similarities. Indeed, countless individuals have made successful moves between such sectors.
What is fundamentally important is that particular blend of skill and experience which distinguishes the true professional from someone just managing to get by. In fact, if one analyses the knowledge elements relating to the security professional’s day job, the uninitiated (especially among the personnel fraternity – or, increasingly – sorority) are always surprised at just how much we need to be able to deal with at any given time.
Academic security qualifications will teach you how to think, how to analyse other peoples’ work and provide some basic understanding of criminals and their psychology. The CPP and IISec qualifications will prove to others that you understand the nuts and bolts of your profession, but how you apply that knowledge and previous experience is really up to you.
What is certain is that employers will soon start to insist on professional qualifications for a job in security management. Previous military or police service experience alone will be insufficient to guarantee a job.
Ultimately, we in the profession must decide what qualifications are important and relevant. As security professionals, we must control our own destiny, and never allow others to dictate how we might develop.
