THE SUCCESS OF ANY BUSINESS – OR, TO BE more specific, a contract security company – lies very much in the future. The past is the past, and we must indeed always learn from it, but the future lies in giving security officers and their supervisors the right tools with which they can deliver the very highest quality service to end users. The goal to which we all aspire.
Clients want a quality service, and why shouldn’t they receive one? After all, they are investing hundreds of thousands of pounds to help safeguard their people, property and assets and, as with any kind of investment, they should see some sort of return on their money.
In turn, that places the onus on contractors to adopt the highest possible standards when it comes to recruiting policies and vetting procedures. They must also have an accessible senior management team.
Today, there is too much emphasis placed on turnover and profit. Turnover is not a particularly impressive measure of success. It’s the quality of client from which a given contractor wins and then administers contracts that is the true yardstick of its success. We can number Capital Shopping Centres (owner of the Gateshead Metro Centre), financial services concern Northern Rock, WH Smith, transport operator Nexus and the Strathclyde Passenger Transport Authority among our own client base. That says a good deal more about us and our company ethos than a balance sheet.
The managing directors of security companies should always make a point of hosting regular meetings with rank-and-file security officers to find out what’s happening ‘at the coalface’. Just as importantly, they need to remind officers of the standards expected of them when on duty. They should also become personally involved at every opportunity when tendering for new business, and beginning TUPE negotiations.
Devolved responsibilities
Looking farther afield, as a former senior police officer I’m cautious yet quietly optimistic about the Home Secretary’s plans to free up operational police time – and devolve what are deemed to be ‘non-essential’ police duties to private security companies.
Given that the industry is now in transition from self-regulation to control by legislation and registration, the Government’s plans must be seen to be rather bold. It’s little wonder that there are mixed feelings about companies in the private sector taking on certain police duties. Feelings that are shared by the police and a host of senior managers within the industry. Why? Put simply, companies in the private security industry have given themselves an appalling reputation for quality of service delivery and methods of operation.
Thankfully, over the last 15 years many factions within the industry have dragged themselves up by the bootlaces, and in the last two-to-three years we’ve seen some big improvements on the service delivery front.
Thanks largely to the efforts of the Association of Chief Police Officers and the British Security Industry Association (BSIA), we are now on the cusp of a new beginning for the manned security sector.
If the industry is genuine about its credentials and public perceptions, then the reality of turning this industry into a profession will become palpable. The way forward must be to have security companies built on strict lines of discipline and accountability.
Those companies which have police-based systems in place will be able to deliver the standards of service demanded by clients who are tired of years of sloppy, ill-disciplined and poor service. Just as importantly, they’ll help move the entire industry further down the road towards professionalism. A professionalism that’s backed up by defined Codes of Practice, training regimes and accountability.
Legitimising the industry
Legislation requiring the comprehensive vetting and registration of manned security companies will imbue additional confidence among clients. Added to that, an unprecedented commitment to training must be seen as the essential right of staff and not just as a cosmetic procedure.
These fundamentals, coupled with the intense procedures to be meted out by the Security Industry Authority – and backed up by the British Security Industry Association – should do much to legitimise the industry.
It’s only by reaching such standards that the industry will begin to receive a ‘warming of interest’ from the police service. Once confidences are established, we’ll start to see the security sector joining in the ‘extended police family’ as a full and equal partner.
Ultimately, the security industry is going to have to walk before it can run. There is still much talking to be done at all levels of Government. After all, it needed years of discussions before the Home Office and the police were completely convinced of the value of outsourcing prisoner movement and handling tasks for the prison service in general.
The private sector cannot afford to skimp on developing credible benchmarks in the specification of recruited individuals, training and the quality and management systems needed to support these schemes.
If we get it right, we’ll be welcomed with open arms. If we get it wrong, then there follows a process which happens to most dysfunctional families. Divorce.
