So, it’s finally out in the open. After months of rumour, speculation and gossip, the cat is out of the bag and it is public knowledge that the AISC and Integrity 2000 are amalgamating with the SSAIB. And before anybody starts, it is not a case of the big fish eating the little fish – it is just plain common sense.
Before I start delving into the why’s and wherefore’s of the situation, I have to come clean and ‘declare my interests’ in the situation. It is common knowledge to readers that I am an independent inspector of alarm systems as my main core of business, and that all my inspections are done for the SSAIB; only the training and consultancy is done for other people. I must also declare that I believe the SSAIB to be the best of the inspectorates, but then again I have been with them from the very earliest days, first as an installer and later as an inspector, so it would be totally unreal for me to claim otherwise.
The SSAIB has now had the ‘benefit’ of more than 12 years’ worth of my input of ideas to contend with. Some have been accepted, others have had my superiors rolling about on the floor laughing. The end result is that I see a part of me in the SSAIB and the SSAIB is a very large part of my life, and I have to claim that I am proud of the SSAIB’s achievements over the years.
On the other hand, I have tried at all times to be fair, reasonable and totally independent with regard to the content of this column, even to the point of upsetting the boss from time to time and even as far as offering support to our largest rival, NACOSS, when I felt that it was getting a raw deal from the public opinion. Anyway, having got the air cleared on that one, back to the story.
In the beginning…
The problem started when ACPO (God bless its cotton socks) moved the goalposts yet again. In fact, they have been moved so many times now that we don’t know where to aim the next kick – although there have been a few suggestions.
Some years ago, you may remember, at the last major change in the ACPO policy, it was decreed that the police would stop doing their own inspections (very successfully in some areas, virtually non-existent in others) and pass the responsibility to the independent inspectorates.
A list of requirements was drawn up. Before you could blink, five independent bodies were set up to the ACPO requirements. Some, like the AISC and the SSAIB, were born out of trade associations; others, like Integrity 2000 and the IAI (who seem to have disappeared) were set up for the job.
The questions often asked at the time but never fully answered were: "Who inspects the inspectorates?" and "What qualifications have you got to inspect us?" Now the police (in the latest ACPO policy) have taken the situation a step further in an effort to clarify that point, and decreed that all recognised inspectorates have in turn got to prove that they are competent by being inspected themselves.
After much discussion and argument, they have decided that there is only one body suitable to act as the inspectors of inspectorates and that is UKAS (United Kingdom Accreditation Service), which was set up by the Government as an independent body for just that purpose.
Accreditation doesn’t come cheap
Now we come to the first big stumbling block for the smaller inspectorates – the cost. People like UKAS do not work cheap, and the SSAIB is expecting to have to cough up a sum that is well into five figures before the required accreditation is granted. It has already had to hike up the membership subscriptions to raise the required funds, and received a lot of flack from installers because of it. Eventually, the installers have seen that UKAS accreditation has got to be the way forward and all but the odd company have dug into their pockets and supported the cause.
There is, by the way, a very possible fringe benefit to getting UKAS accreditation – that of insurance recognition. The insurance companies’ support of NACOSS to the exclusion of all others has relaxed a great deal in recent years, and the SSAIB likes to think it is because it has constantly proved that the quality of installations and service provided by the smaller guys is equal to, if not better than, many of the larger outfits. I have no doubt that Integrity 2000 and the AISC both feel exactly the same, but at that point we are getting away from the current problem.
The achievement of UKAS accreditation should prove once and for all that all bodies holding the accreditation are equal, and this could well remove the final barrier to complete insurance recognition. So, with ACPO wielding UKAS as the stick, and the strong possibility of insurance recognition as the carrot, it’s quite obvious that there are potential benefits all round. On top of that, the SSAIB has now got around 800 enrolled companies and is expanding fast ( it is adding around 15 this month), so it has become a force to be reckoned with. The addition of three or four hundred more companies will be a great booster.
Joining forces
Looking at the ACPO/UKAS situation, the problem for Integrity 2000 and the AISC is the lack of similar numbers to the SSAIB’s (don’t knock them, they started much later in the game), so therefore the cost of getting UKAS accreditation for them is disproportionately high per enrolled company.
Effectively, although it probably wasn’t the intention, ACPO and the UKAS requirement has put Integrity 2000 and the AISC members in a very difficult position – a lot of head scratching and soul searching has gone on in their respective camps. The answer was obvious – join forces! The more to share the costs, the less each one has to pay. However, the big question for the AISC and Integrity 2000 was who to approach, NACOSS or SSAIB? Which one would be the best for their existing memberships? The answer may seem obvious, but is it? The SSAIB, like themselves, has been battling for recognition and may have got a little further because of its longer track record, but the ongoing costs will be somewhat similar so the adaptation and amalgamation would be the least costly and the least painful.
To ally with NACOSS, on the other hand, may seem to be a better step forward. OK, it means having to jump through the ISO9000 hoop and a fair old rise in fees, but the benefit is instant insurance recognition – if the insurance companies would wear it. Because NACOSS has always done a very thorough job of financial vetting and the weeding out and refusal of entry to any company that doesn’t quite fit the requirements, I find it hard to believe that the insurance companies would let them just drop the rules and allow in whole blocks of ‘outside’ companies en masse. And this is not to even think about the outcry from the rest of the NACOSS membership who have coughed, jumped and sweated to the NACOSS tune.
The third option – joining up with the new ICON group – was probably a non-starter. Even though it is a stepping-stone towards NACOSS, it is new and untried and I do understand there is some doubt about its ACPO recognition at the time of writing. No, to step down from ACPO recognition is definitely not on.
The best move
So, as you can see, after a lot of hard thinking, adding the combined weight of the AISC and Integrity 2000 behind the SSAIB is probably their best move in the end, and there are many advantages to be had.
The new combined inspectorate will have well over 1,200 enrolled companies, even after allowing for potential losses if some companies decide that this is an appropriate time to move on to NACOSS and the ISO 9000 regime. The one factor to stand out above all others is that there is great strength in numbers. The size and type of companies attached to all three inspectorates are very much the same, so the changes to be experienced in the changeover should be minimal. But don’t forget, there will be some changes – UKAS will see to that.
The question on everybody’s lips now is, "What will the new combined inspectorate be called?" A good question, and at the moment it has not been resolved. It could go the NACOSS route, where a new ‘umbrella’ organisation is set up and each inspectorate gets to keep its own name and identity, or it may be required that one inspectorate is ‘adopted’ as the overall ‘spokes-body’ for our section of the industry. Which way it will go is largely dependent on the UKAS requirements, and at the time of writing these are not known.
There is also the potential to rationalise a lot of costs and methods currently in use. Take the inspectors’ areas, for example. It would be daft for an inspector from one outfit to go across the country when there is an inspector from another outfit based nearby. They could swap around and save a lot of travelling time (and cost). Experience is another factor. Each inspectorate will bring its own methods and procedures so there will be an excellent opportunity to select the best that each has to offer.
It can only get bigger
There are other factors to consider, too, like the potential growth areas of the respective inspectorates. Because NACOSS has actively targeted and selected only the larger companies as befitting its requirements, it has effectively limited its potential growth market. There can’t be many companies out there of ‘NACOSS size’ that are not already enrolled with NACOSS, so to increase its market it would have to plunder the other inspectorates for their larger companies.
But there are thousands of smaller businesses out there just waiting to gain some sort of recognition – all they have to do is to install to the required standards and run their companies along suitable lines. No, in my opinion the growth potential for NACOSS is severely limited, but for the new combined inspectorate it is wide open. As the organisation gets bigger and gains more clout, there will be an ever increasing number of companies that want a piece of the action and I expect recruitment to accelerate fast.
The final thing to remember is that as more and more smaller companies get their act together and become recognised, life is going to get much tougher for the "I can install it cheaper than you because I don’t know how to sell burglar alarms at their proper price" companies. I can well see a day when the enrolled companies will outnumber the non-enrolled, because the public is going to get wise and follow the insurance-led requirement to have an enrolled company install their systems.
Then, at long last, the industry will be seen to be policing its own quality, and not before time.
By the way, all the above options are just my speculation, so please don’t take it as Inspectorate policy. I am, after all, only a humble inspector and the bosses and the boards of directors don’t always choose to keep me informed.
Finally, just to be helpful, I suggested to the boss a new name for the combined inspectorate – ‘Alarms R Us’. Alas, like Queen Victoria, he was not amused.
