Mark of Authority

All of us are well aware of the criticisms that have been levelled at the sector over the past 20 years or so, and the negative images of security staff consistently displayed by the wider media. However, we're also very much aware of a sectoral landscape that's beginning to show signs of much-needed change.

Certainly, the ongoing threat of terrorism is turning peoples' attention to the security industry as never before. Something like 500,000 men and women guarding company headquarters, banks, shopping centres and factories are absolutely critical in the front line fight against terrorist activity. Given that those employed by the private sector out-number policemen and women by four-to-one, it's easy to see that the former's role is going to be of great importance in the years ahead.

The Private Security Industry Act 2001 is designed to bring England and Wales into line with the rest of Europe by way of introducing a new regulatory system for the sector. Indeed, we at the Security Industry Authority (SIA) intend to help this legislation by making strong overtures to the public that a properly skilled and trained private sector workforce will make a huge difference to their safety and security.

In a similar vein, the Police Reform Act coupled with a strong Government commitment to dealing with anti-social behaviour, muggings and a range of minor crimes will raise the profile of the private security industry over time.

The industry can only hope to respond to all of these challenges through a rigorous review of the likely skills needed by security firms and contractors in the years ahead, on top of an upgrading of education and training standards right across the sector.

Undoubtedly, one of the biggest challenges we face is to raise the standards of management and supervision such that everyone is in line with those who are the very best in the business. The security industry boasts some excellent managers, but it will be a huge challenge to bring all of them up to the level of the foremost practitioners.

The problems we face are similarly daunting at the operative level. It's our understanding that anything up to 50% of security staff may have literacy problems and/or difficulties in communicating with members of the public.

Rumour has it that the Government boasts more funds than it can allocate for basic training. For our part, we want to ensure that the private security industry wins its full share of those funds to help eliminate such literacy and communication problems among members of the workforce.

Developing talent in the industry
How, then, are we going to achieve these basic but essential aims? One obvious answer would be the creation of a Sector Skills Council (SSC) – a body financed by employers and Government to take forward skills development within the industry as a whole.

Let me make it clear that it wasn't the SIA which scuppered the development of such a body. Perhaps I should explain.

The basic problem is that, at this particular moment in time, it's far from clear in which direction the industry is heading. As the readership of Security Management Today (SMT) will know, the Security Industry Training Organisation (SITO) had plans in place to establish S5C (an SSC bringing together the security industry with the disciplines of safety, fire prevention and cleaning). These plans were first announced at the 2001 SITO National Conference ('Skilling time', SMT, December 2001, pp26-28), but many employers expressed reservations about the proposals.

At the SIA, we harboured our own concerns that such a Sector Skills Council might well take the industry in precisely the wrong direction. In other words, towards less-skilled cleaning rather than in the direction of more highly-skilled policing and counter-terrorist activities.

We were also aware that the central requirement of a Sector Skills Council is wholehearted support from employers. Alongside SIA chief executive John Saunders, I informed the Sector Skills Development Agency that we needed time to consider the future direction of the private security industry. We also required more time to gather employers' views concerning a possible alternative 'footprint' for a Sector Skills Council before we could endorse S5C, or indeed any other proposals laid before us.

The most obvious options for a future SSC 'footprint' appear to be a stand-alone Security Sector Skills Council, a Security and Safety Sector Skills Council, a specialist support SSC (along the lines of S5C) or some kind of involvement in the proposed justice SSC which is nearly on the table (this includes the prisons, police service and community justice sectors).

It is indeed a matter of great importance for the private security industry to have the right Sector Skills Council in place. A Council run by people with foresight and a commitment to ensuring that the industry is fully prepared for the many challenges that lie ahead.

Sector Skills Strategy Group
To assist employers in deciding the direction in which they'd like to move, the SIA has established a Sector Skills Strategy Group of opinion formers throughout the sector. At this point, one should emphasise that this sector is blessed with an abundance of opinion formers. Both myself and John have been on the receiving end of a good many of those opinions, sometimes pretty forcibly expressed.

The (necessarily) small Sector Skills Strategy Group includes employers within the major sub-sectors of the industry, users of private security services, training organisations, institutes and employers' associations. We hope that many others will be involved in sub-groups and consultation exercises. In this way, we'll ensure that the strategy properly reflects the views of the entire industry.

SMT's readers will be aware that Professor Martin Gill and members of his team of consultants and researchers from Perpetuity Research and Consultancy International (PRCI) are now working with the SIA and the Sector Skills Strategy Group. Proposals are being developed to be sent out in due course for comment by the industry. It's a huge task.

To illustrate the enormity of Professor Gill's undertaking, you need to understand what's being done. His model comprises nine elements, and includes:

• a review of current roles and tasks in the private security sector, not to mention anticipated changes to them;
  
• an analysis of existing qualifications and skills requirements;
  
• an in-depth analysis of the new skills arising from the main drivers for change;
  
• producing – we hope – a realistic estimate of the numbers in each sector of the industry;
  
• specifying apparent skills shortages and defining training priorities.

Much of the information concerning the demand for skills will be obtained through surveys of employers and users of private security services. A more detailed understanding of the drivers for change and future skills needs will be developed by way of independently-facilitated workshops involving key practitioners and strategic partners.

Industry demand versus supply
In addition to all of this demand-side work, the SIA will need to examine labour supply issues. Important features of the private security industry workforce will affect that supply and, hence, the skills strategy. There'll be a need to replace staff who fail to meet the requirements of licensing. There's a widespread lack of basic skills among the labour pool, which must be addressed. We must also realise that there will be increased competition in the labour pool for employees with communication and IT skills (to name but two examples). And, as previously stated, there is a limited supply of highly qualified managers out there.

Another feature of the strategy centres on funding for the massive increases in training that will be needed to meet the requirements for licensing, the counter-terrorist agenda, the Police Reform Act – and the creation of an 'extended police family' – and the Government's crime reduction plans. Who will foot the bill for all this? We've estimated that we'll need around £30 million from Government coffers to fund our training agenda for the private security industry.

The SIA will be analysing funding options in detail, and also talking to the Learning and Skills Council on a national basis to do whatever we can in a bid to reach agreement on the considerable levels of support which will be needed. By early Spring of next year, we hope to announce draft proposals to the industry which we trust will assist employers in deciding the most appropriate 'footprint' for a Sector Skills Council, and lay the foundations for a sustainable improvement in standards that will meet the demands of tomorrow.

Setting the SIA in context
Many of you will of course be familiar with the core functions of the SIA, as laid down in Section One of the Private Security Industry Act 2001. To recap, our aim is to ensure that all those who carry out any activities specified by the Act are licensed to do so. These individuals include door supervisors, wheel clampers (on private ground), security officers, keyholders, private investigators and security consultants.

At present, the plan remains to begin licensing at the end of next year – at which time the first licenses will be issued to wheel clampers and door supervisors. We are experiencing some teething problems with the Criminal Records Bureau, but work is in progress to overcome those obstacles.

“One of the SIA’s key objectives is to raise standards across the country, and ensure that individuals achieve the entry level skills necessary to do the job as it stands today. A serious issue for us is how we tackle the literacy and communication skills

Molly Meacher, chair, security industry authority

The licensing process for security officers (including keyholders) is planned to roll-out in 2004-2005, with that for private investigators and security consultants following in 2005-2006. The SIA is also required to make arrangements for a voluntary Approved Contractors' scheme (setting standards for contractor approval and maintaining a register of approved contractors/companies).

Of more relevance to this discussion are the statutory duties of the SIA directly relating to the setting of standards. We are required to set or approve standards of conduct, training and levels of supervision. These responsibilities apply to directors, managers, supervisors and operatives. We are also required to make recommendations for the maintenance and improvement of standards in the industry.

It is primarily to undertake this last duty that the SIA has established the Sector Skills Strategy Group. Quite simply, there's insufficient evidence available at present to enable us to do our job in relation to the setting of standards in the medium term.

We have been working hard on establishing training standards in preparation for licensing 'going live'. From the outset, the approach we've adopted has been one of consultation. The time has long since passed when Government bodies would have imposed radical changes on an industry without talking to its major stakeholders beforehand.

Indeed, we have greatly valued the views and contributions of those Stakeholder Working Groups with whom we've consulted to date. It's vital that the training standards for the security sector are relevant, reasonable, affordable and widely supported. We hope that our collaborative approach will help to ensure that this is indeed the case.

Raising standards across the industry
One of the SIA's key objectives is to raise standards across the country, and ensure that individuals achieve the entry level skills necessary to do the job as it stands today.

A serious issue for us is how we tackle the literacy and communication skills problems which are all-too-readily apparent in some parts of the security industry. Those problems cannot be resolved overnight. That said, we must ensure that they're addressed quickly. Communication skills will be a basic requirement of the SIA licence. If security operatives cannot communicate effectively with customers then they will not pass basic level courses, and will not qualify for a licence.

Let us be clear that ministers will not agree to a 'no change' agenda. They are looking for an improvement in standards over time.

On a personal level, I have found it enormously encouraging that our Stakeholder Working Groups for the initial two sectors have been forward-looking and more than ready to propose improvements in training standards. We can only hope that the remaining industry sectors will be every bit as constructive.

One of the key drivers for change in the next five years or so will be the Police Reform Act. It's impossible to understate the opportunities for the private security industry which can arise from this piece of legislation when combined with the effects of regulation.

Police Reform in context
Under the Act, any chief constable can decide to establish a Community Safety Accreditation Scheme – and could appoint a private security company as a provider of core policing services. Clearly, chief constables will not turn to the private sector until it has shown itself to be rid of the criminal element, employing instead members of staff of the very highest calibre with the right skills levels and degree of training to match. Much has already been achieved in this regard, but there's a great deal more work to be done.

The aforementioned Community Safety Accreditation Schemes will involve private security or local authority officers undertaking core policing work to combat crime and disorder, public nuisance and other forms of anti-social behaviour. The roles envisaged for such officers include the powers of a constable to issue Fixed Penalty Notices in certain categories, and to require the name and address of a person whom they believe to have committed a fixed penalty offence (or who appear to have committed an act of assault or a mugging, stolen or otherwise damaged property or acted in an anti-social manner).

Accredited persons will also have a range of other powers in relation to alcohol consumption in a public place, confiscation of alcohol or tobacco from young people, the removal of abandoned vehicles and escorting wide loads.

Given adequate vetting by employers, criminality screening by the SIA and training in a wide range of skills under the SIA licensing provision or Approved Contractors' scheme, these new opportunities will open up for employers and employees alike.

In the first wave of licensing, then, we will establish basic level training standards right across the industry. We are hoping to announce the standards for wheel clamping and door supervision within a matter of weeks – and to make proposals for a basic level training standard specifically geared towards security officers sometime in the first half of 2003.

Through the Sector Skills Strategy Group and the Approved Contractors' scheme we'll then seek to work with employers and raise those initial standards over time.

The skills level barometer
We don't yet know where we're going to be with skills levels in five years' time. A good look at the Swedish equivalent of the SIA provides us with some interesting targets.

Their security officers must complete 217 hours of basic training, of which 97 hours are 'off-the-job' and 120 hours at work. Further to this, the Swedish authorities are boosting security operatives' communication skills and conflict management training from what would be an already healthy level in comparison to the UK. Would it be reasonable to suppose that we will have a similar level of training in place come 2006-2007? The rewards would be considerable if we can.

The wages of security officers in Sweden are on a par with those of industrial operatives, while their status is comparable with that of clerical workers. Very different, then, from the situation pertaining on home shores.

Security companies in Sweden are profitable, whereas a significant employer operating in England and Wales recently told me this is the only country in which his company makes a loss.

The benefits of higher standards are there to be enjoyed by the industry as a whole – from the managing director to the supervisor, right down to the most junior operative. Regulation will also engender significant opportunities for good trainers. Ultimately, without them none of our aims and objectives will be realised.

Harking back to my opening comments, the private security industry is facing a period of great change. One in which training and skills development will play a key role. For this to happen we need a strong and independent awarding body framework capable of ensuring high standards in all sectors.

Equally important will be the need for strong training of the trainers themselves, independent and separate from the awarding body framework.

I firmly believe that the Security Industry Training Organisation is in good hands, and have absolute confidence that acting chief executive David Dickinson and general manager Stefan Hay will together create the structures which the industry so badly needs.