Industry forecasts often serve as a warning of the potential for a slowdown in economic growth. The more cautious security managers out there will often be taken in by contra indications, such as the marketing efforts of many organisations and Governments. Ultimately, the manager is subject to mixed and confusing clues about the true impact of a slowdown.
The more adept security managers out there will recognise any early warning signs as an opportunity to look at established contracts (are they as lean as they could be, or might they be renegotiated?). Many organisations will also consider reducing headcount growth, in particular the invisible means of hiring staff such as those without the legal grips and benefits escalators (perhaps by using fixed-term contracts, agency staff or consultants).
In the uncertain times of today, some of SMT’s readers will be the victims of such management practices. Others will be the villains. What’s important is that you don’t make any rash and costly decisions simply because you have reacted too little, too late.
Downturn versus loss of contract
Many organisations will react very slowly when their income falls, often due to the lack of clear data available to them (ie the gradual, spiralling effect of a downturn is less clear than the more pronounced loss of a contract).
Simple economics tell us that, if income remains on a gradual downward spiral and costs remain the same, the probability of a need for redundancies will loom large. In turn, it’s important for security managers to monitor headcount, sales revenue and profitability ratios – all of which demonstrate a clear relationship between headcount and what economists refer to as a ‘headcount fat’ (viz an excess of employees).
Contrary to popular myth employees are not stupid. Having an informed workforce makes good economic sense, but they will also be susceptible to workplace conditioning. If every time an employer declares that profits are falling, then announces redundancies in the same breath, employees will soon learn to run for cover at the very mention of profits. In other words, your supervisors, line managers and officers have been conditioned to expect bad news every time you talk about the company’s performance. Employees will adopt the ostrich position at exactly the wrong time! Wherever the manager keeps staff fully informed of the cyclic nature of the company’s fortunes, the majority of employees will respond to the prevailing economic climate in a positive manner. Some reactions may be overt – ie officers going the extra mile with clients or employer – while others will be less visible (such as an officer not taking the odd day off ‘sick’). Just as a general will marshal his troops before battle, so too effective security managers need to take a hard look at the disposition of their security teams.
Relocation: a possible alternative
All managers are encouraged to take steps to identify people suitable and willing to relocate. Before announcing their intentions, though, managers should identify the practicalities (skill sets) as well as the desirability of moving (motivations) and an understanding of the barriers restricting movement (whether contractual, or concerning domestic circumstances or travel, etc).
While all good security managers will have a fair idea of the skills and competencies of their staff, it’s very unusual that they’ll be asked to actively move staff out of their natural domain. As such, their senior managers must be supportive, perhaps by attaching incentives for officers and supervisors alike.
A slowdown is the ideal time to take a keen look at the real cost of delivering non-core services. Can such services be provided by an external supplier? Reviews are a good idea.
Creating new security roles
As a manager, one of your key roles is to continuously monitor the ‘means of production’ (ie the delivery of the security service). In many organisations this is an ongoing process. However, when change is intrinsically linked to bad news or is simply poorly delivered, the after-effects can exacerbate matters for the worst.
Performance management is another important aspect of redundancy avoidance. Within many organisations, under-performers are as acceptable as taking home the odd biro. In times of recession, though, such wastage borders on the unacceptable. Any lack of performance will soon stack up. Passengers must not be carried. All security managers must be vigilant against malingerers, and those who are known to be disenfranchised.
In the UK, the legislation that impacts directly on redundancy is enshrined within the Employment Rights Act (1996). The Act defines redundancies as arising where: the employer ceases to carry on the business, the business ceases to require people with the particular skills demanded by the employer or where the dismissal is for a reason not related to the individual concerned.
Note here that the application of redundancies relates to roles and not individuals. As such, by following some of the practices outlined, security managers will be ready and able to select those positions that they can afford to make redundant – while ensuring that those who remain focus on the future and not the past.
