An academic exercise

Looking back to your last job interview, it’s a fair bet that a familiar phrase was mentioned in conversation with your current company about the new post. Prospective employees often cite “a new challenge” as one reason for their interest, whatever the real scale and complexity of the role. Faced by the stark realities of the security situation at the University of Hertfordshire in the mid-1990s, many applicants would surely have been deterred by the sizeable task awaiting the new head of security. Yet if Erez Sharoni had any such qualms at the time, eight years on he most certainly isn’t conceding any.

Offered this tough assignment in April 1996, this highly intuitive Israeli professional had just spent five years in aviation security assisting the Israeli government at a number of UK airports while security manager at El-Al Israel Airlines. “We provided security for any Israeli carrier landing at British airports such as Heathrow, Gatwick and Manchester,” recalls Sharoni. “It was very intense and pressurised work – you’d be doing 60, 70, sometimes 80 hours per week. Having spent five years in post I felt it was time for me to move on.”

The workload and its linked level of responsibility was experience that nevertheless equipped Sharoni to begin coping with the University of Hertfordshire’s parlous circumstances. According to Sharoni, unacceptably high annual losses of equipment were occurring on site, and there was a clear perception that the University’s campuses weren’t as safe as they could be. A huge factor adversely affecting student intake.

A comprehensive review and security audit conducted by a team of independent consultants had also revealed significant strategic flaws. It was decided that remedial action should centre on addressing issues such as communications and proper awareness of the security strategy. Fundamental steps – such as making staff and students alike aware of the reasons for the access control system and its correct use – had to be taken.

As Sharoni points out, the reasons underpinning these moves were focused on the nature of the educational facility – which is relatively young, having been awarded its University status in 1992 – as well as the strongly competitive environment engendered by approximately 180 rival higher education providers in the UK.

The University boasts eight faculties situated on two main sites which physically straddle the A1(M) main road in Hatfield, Hertfordshire. The older (and larger) College Lane Campus is spread over 96 acres, while the 30-acre de Havilland Campus opened in September 2003.

A £120 million investment there has resulted in new facilities including a Learning Resource Centre, a £15 million Hertfordshire Sports Village that’s open to the general public and a 460-seat auditorium. There’s also no less than 1,600 student accommodation places to bolster the 2,500 scholars currently housed within the College Lane Campus (1,400 more students will be housed in Halls of Residence to be built over the next three years).

The two sites are home to just over 18,000 full-time and part-time students, plus 2,500 academic and support staff. Importantly, up to 15% of the student population is attracted from overseas and, accordingly, pay much higher fees than UK pupils. One of Sharoni’s major priorities, therefore, involves demonstrating the low risk nature of everyday life at the University to students and their financially supportive parents.

Explaining this aspect of his role, Sharoni provides an interesting insight into the philosophy involved: “We don’t use the phrase ‘tuition’ these days. Instead, we call it the ‘student’s experience’. That’s how I like to describe it. The ‘student’s experience’ consists of the teaching that leads to their academic qualification, their interaction with other people here, use of the facilities and so on. What we have to provide is an overall package that attracts them to come and study with us. Security forms an important element of that package, as they need to know they’re going to be safe while on campus.”

Starting from scratch to achieve this, back in 1996 a fundamental decision led to one of the standout features of the University’s present protective ‘envelope’. For instead of continuing with an in-house Security Department, a novel alternative was chosen instead. This entailed establishing a company – UniSecure – which, while owned by the University and primarily charged with protecting it, also has the flexibility to act commercially in serving other external clients.

“Taking this course meant, for example, that we could begin again with a clean sheet of paper in terms of recruitment policy, training and evaluation processes and job descriptions, and in terms of setting pay scales that compared favourably with local rates,” Sharoni remarks with conviction.

“The company is the best security provider for us. We can be independently inspected (UniSecure is certificated by the National Security Inspectorate for activities including the provision of manned security services, keyholding and alarm response services, plus the management and operation of a dedicated CCTV scheme) as a third party measure of our performance compared with other external security providers.”

According to Sharoni: “This helps keep us on our toes. It also benefits the University in several different ways. The University receives a professional service that is regarded as such internally. As a department within the University, how else would we be inspected, compared and our output judged externally in such a satisfactory way?”

Adds Sharoni: “Accountability is a key issue, particularly given the present environment of the University operating as a business providing educational services, rather than just acting as an educational establishment.”

Examining the commercial reality

Sharoni was instrumental in the 1997 formation of UniSecure, of which he is the general manager, and is quick to underline another central advantage of the company – namely its commercial enterprises. These include the production of business and ID card systems and card bureau services for clients such as Local Authorities, schools, nursing agencies and blue chip companies.

UniSecure staff also supply custom-made access control/time and attendance systems, though their installation is sub-contracted. As an independent services provider, the company can offer improved discounts to end user clients by utilising approved companies already employed by the University.

“We’re not incentivised to use particular products or indeed promote the installation of unnecessary equipment,” Sharoni adds, “so we can provide the best system for the particular application requirements. The end user benefits accordingly, while we’re able to generate funds that subsidise approximately 30% of our running costs.” A pretty neat solution, it must be said.

Another significant move was made early on in the shake-up of security provision at the University. Firstly, Sharoni pressed for direct reporting to senior managers in order to influence strategic decisions taken within the organisation. The previous mechanism meant his predecessor reported one step away from the decision makers within the University’s Estates Department.

Reflects Sharoni: “This direct access does, however, mean that you need to be politically shrewd and able to convincingly argue your case for any resources and procedural changes you might wish to implement. It also involves making effective presentations and writing business cases quite regularly.”

Sharoni also pressed the need for meaningful liaison between UniSecure and departments within the University, with the aim of winning their support for various security functions. “We need to keep them on our side,” he explains. “Security doesn’t operate in a vacuum. It’s a service function, much like catering, and if people don’t like it they will ignore it. So it’s really important to engage with your ‘audience’ and ensure they can see the value of what you’re doing.”

He’s keenly aware, too, of the great value that lies in team building, both in terms of structuring his 70-strong squad of officers (backed up by ten support staff) and implementing other measures to help ensure long-term staff retention.

Continues Sharoni: “We’ve learned from other security companies that if you want people to have a career path, and to reduce staff turnover, you need to pay attention to how your team is established. For instance, we have a four-tier scale, ranging from security officer level right up to chief supervisor. A number of advantageous Terms and Conditions that apply to University staff are also available to our team, including the pension scheme, staff discounts, transport provision and leisure amenities. The use of on-site educational facilities is also encouraged. Officers can benefit from training in IT skills, for example.”

Accountability is a key issue, particularly given the present environment of the University operating as a business providing educational services as opposed to just acting as an educational establishment

An operational strategy

Having laid down all of this groundwork, Sharoni next began to address improvements to the University’s security systems and operating procedures. Two types of access control are currently in use: an online system using magstripe technology – which is due for an upgrade to proximity cards/readers in 2005 – supports 40,000 users and controls entry to something in the region of 300 doors, while an off-line network deploys PC-controlled smart cards and specially developed software for other specific tasks. These include time and attendance monitoring and car park entry.

Longer-term consideration is also being given to potential building management functions, such as energy usage in unoccupied rooms or even computerised room bookings to improve the use of University facilities.

Sharoni explains that responsibility for the level of protection is not centralised, but devolved to staff working in each area of the University. This is said to improve overall protection and cost-effectiveness. “Our strategy is to control entry to the exterior of buildings, but once someone is inside their movements are restricted according to specific needs. For instance, the Faculty of Art and Design contains different studios and staff maintain their own controls over them. As a further example, in the Halls of Residence there are three access levels – to each building, each flat and each room.”

Integrated surveillance measures support these access controls as part of the overall site monitoring carried out by two dedicated Control Rooms serving both campuses. Though operated independently, the Control Rooms are connected by a bi-directional fibre optic link allowing either one to take over from the other following an incident.

Members of the Security Team use 96 cameras to keep watch over the larger College Lane site and 76 to survey the de Havilland complex. These cameras can automatically zoom in on two-way emergency Help Points scattered around the sites to improve safety. Directly connected to the Control Rooms, they allow visitors and students to speak with the operators on duty around-the-clock.

The newer de Havilland Campus Control Room is kitted out with space-saving TFT flat-screen monitors mounted on an open framework, surrounding a 40-inch central plasma screen. Digital recording equipment is used on both sites.

Sharoni reveals he’s now working on a plan to install ten more cameras to monitor the area separating the two campuses as a means of improving safety for students.

Meanwhile, one external camera covering the South Hatfield shopping area situated close to the University is also controlled and monitored by the Security Team, acting on behalf of the Welwyn Hatfield Community Safety Partnership. The University is a member of the Partnership, which is administered by Welwyn Hatfield Council.

Working with the local police

As part of Erez Sharoni’s own links with the Hertfordshire Constabulary, he recently organised the printing of 2,000 copies of a pocket-sized booklet providing a list of contact details at the University for use by local police officers. Meanwhile, Sharoni has also joined forces with other security managers operating within the large area of new residential and commercial regeneration sites situated next to the University on Hatfield Business Park. A ‘Park Watch’ scheme aims to share intelligence for mutual benefit.

“It’s important that we look at crime both on and off campus. Our ethos is that there should be no ‘town and gown’ attitude here in Hatfield. In some other towns and cities the presence of a University can cause conflict. We actively contribute to Hatfield’s well-being through initiatives such as the Universitybus scheme.”

Operating a 50-strong fleet, Universitybus Ltd is a wholly-owned commercial subsidiary of the University. Providing a network of bus services across Hertfordshire for staff, students and the general public alike to use, it’s protected by the Security Team. The service provides a link between the main campuses and the University’s other small sites in the county, as well as student flats and houses.

Alongside this operation, Sharoni’s team is also responsible for overseeing other facilities located outside of the two main campuses. These include a stand-alone observatory, as well as The Fielder Centre (a purpose-built conference venue located within Hatfield Business Park). The Fielder Centre is owned and operated by UH Hospitality Ltd, another of the University’s five subsidiary companies.

The flexibility of Sharoni’s security operation allows him to welcome events organised by students and outside organisations. Two Student Union Balls are held each year, for instance. Up to 3,500 revellers attend each one. A specific Security Task Force designs protection for these and other events, which include gala swimming contests and Ministry of Sound club events (the latter arranged in conjunction with the Student Union to accommodate around 1,800 people). The recent Ministry of Sound gathering involved no less than 50 door supervisors, 30 security officers and the use of sniffer dogs to search for drugs and explosives.

Sharoni believes the high level of campus security is beneficial to the University in many ways. “We have two art galleries and were able to bring in more expensive items to display at a Picasso exhibition that would otherwise have been denied for insurance reasons if our overall standard of protection had been under question,” he asserts. “There are also many research activities conducted here for commercial contracts, many of which also require appropriate security to ensure that sensitive material is not vulnerable to tampering or at risk of being stolen.”

Coming to terms with licensing

Looking towards the immediate future for manned security, the UniSecure general manager believes that while his operation could be classed as an in-house team, he doesn’t intend to hide behind such a definition. He and his officers will apply to be licensed by the Security Industry Authority in 2005, while UniSecure also intends to join the Approved Contractor Scheme.

The University itself is not standing still either, with fresh developments underway (including a Post-Graduate Medical School scheduled to open in 2005). A 24/7 access Computer Centre is also at the planning stage, while a new Health Research Centre is expected at some point during 2006.

“The unique operating environment we’ve created with UniSecure has benefited from the University’s forward thinking,” Sharoni reflects. “Ultimately, you need five elements for a good security system. First, the people – it’s down to who you recruit and what you want them to do. Second, the equipment you invest in. How you install this, and make it function properly, makes all the difference. The third element comprises the procedures and skills employed. Fourthly, you need adequate training, with the final element being the intelligence you gather during daily operations.”

Sharoni concludes: “We’ve joined all of those key elements together. The net gains from doing so have helped the University protect its staff, students and contractors, attract fee-paying international students in competition with other education providers and develop its commercial business interests while maintaining adequate control over costs.” n