Richard Evans, managing director, The Watch Security

However, there's still much to be done to gain our members of staff, the security officers, the recognition and rewards they richly deserve. I hope that private sector regulation will help to achieve this.

SMT: The Watch Security has justifiably earned a reputation over the years for providing a good service. Speaking purely as a security services client, why should an end user use your company as opposed to one of your competitors?
RE: Like you, I run a business with a strong family involvement. I think that counts with customers who want some sort of continuity in their dealings with an appointed security services provider. More importantly, we have always restricted our operational area such that we can cope with inevitable manning problems. We've never sought to grow too quickly.

SMT: We understand that you're deputy chairman of the Manned Services Section of the British Security Industry Association (BSIA). Do you not feel that manned security companies in the BSIA could work more closely together?
RE: I do feel that there's a great deal of very useful debate within the Manned Services Section Committee chaired by Tony O'Neill. Some important, democratically achieved decisions are reached and acted upon.

Among the wider membership there seems to be a degree of lethargy, though, which manifests itself in the generally rather poor attendances at regional meetings (with the exception of the South East Region, whose members make a lot of noise).

BSIA chief executive David Dickinson has already done much to develop co-operation between BSIA member companies, but at the end of the day we're competitive animals operating in a market where the margins are being squeezed ever tighter.

Within the bounds of the law, we must be able to continue to offer differences in style and substance in the marketplace.

SMT: Screening to BS 7858 is vital in a non-regulated industry. Do you see it as being just as important once licensing has been established throughout the manned guarding sector?
RE: We shall always want to look into potential employees' work histories. Security Industry Authority (SIA) licensing should remove past criminality from the equation, but competence and reliability are essential characteristics for any security officer. If you land yourself with a bad individual on the books it can be extremely irksome trying to get rid of them.

SMT: Everyone's excited about the emergence of the SIA. Notwithstanding that, do you see this body having the same sort of impact if we fail to embrace at the same time the terms and conditions laid down by the Working Time Directive?
RE: Time for some honesty here. I'm concerned that an over zealous dose of regulation could seriously damage our industry. The SIA's plans for licensing and the Approved Companies Scheme for 2005 and beyond will add between 4% and 7% to the costs of manned guarding contracts. That's the BSIA's estimate. This will be quite enough for customers to absorb over and above inflationary increases. The idea that they should also be expected to accept perhaps a further 20% increase because of enforcement of the Working Time Regulations is both a naïve and very dangerous assumption.

Many clients would opt for an in-house security provision, or begin to rely more and more on systems. On that basis, much of the manned security industry would disappear. That's all well and good for the smart city office block owners, but what about hard-pressed Midlands manufacturing companies, for example, who want to secure their premises?

SMT: Do you think the industry should be based on a 56-hour, 48-hour or 42-hour standard working week, Richard?
RE: It seems to me that far too much attention is being directed towards the whole work-life balance issue. We're all individuals, and we're all different animals. Some people actually enjoy their work, and while technology has been an enormous help to many the basic job functions of the security officer haven't changed a great deal down the years.

As guarding contractors, we could undertake straightforward tasks such as wide load escort and scenes of crime security, but I’m worried by PCSO and Community Warden roles as they require much higher levels of training and competency. There are dangers as

For the most part, those functions tend to centre on access control, camera monitoring, patrolling and alarm setting, etc. That's not what you'd call stressful work.

A norm of 12-hour shifts for an average of 56 hours and a maximum of 60 hours per week is right for this industry. More importantly, I believe that most security officers feel this is the correct pattern for the private sector. Why should they be restricted to working 48 hours or less? As a serviceman, I thought I was once defending just such freedoms of choice.

Maintaining regular work patterns should be a much higher priority than enforcing a 48-hour limit. I find it very difficult to believe claims from companies who profess to restrict their staff to eight-hour shifts and 48-hour weeks. I suspect there must be a good lot of 'overtime' sanctioned by hard pressed controllers! Perhaps The Security Watchdog would like to investigate, Terry?

SMT: You and I have good naturedly (I hope!) clashed in the past – often in the pages of Security Management Today – concerning the perceived effectiveness of inspectorates currently operating in the private security industry. Do you feel that if inspections were tougher then the overall reputation of the manned guarding industry could be enhanced?
RE: Let me tell you that I've always held a very high regard for your integrity, energy and laudable desire to improve the security industry, Terry. Clearly, you have found a market for your inspection and other security services. That said, I do believe that the industry would benefit from a single trade association, a single trading standards organisation and one inspection body. Competition in assessing service standards is counter-productive, not to mention thoroughly confusing for the industry's customer base.

My vote would be for the BSIA, the Security Industry Training Organisation (SITO) and the National Security Inspectorate (NSI). I very much hope the SIA will determine this to be the way forward. I'm delighted that The Security Watchdog has rejoined the BSIA, and also hope that there can be some sort of marriage for your organisation with the NSI.

To be honest, though, the inspections that I value most remain those carried out by The Watch Security's own management team.

SMT: You have always been an advocate of good training. What do you think should be included in the basic induction course of the future (as envisaged by the SIA's powers-that-be as part of their Approved Contractors Scheme)?
RE: It isn't the time that you do things that counts, rather it's what you do in the time allocated to you that matters most. I'm happy that the SITO basic induction course provides enough training with a skilled instructor to launch a recruit on his or her new career path.

Assignment-specific training is then very important, and must be thoroughly conducted on site. More advanced follow-up instruction covering first aid, fire fighting, conflict management and customer handling, etc is much better carried out when the officer is settled and happy in their new career.

I understand that the SIA – with SITO assistance – is currently establishing "core competencies" for security personnel (see this month's Special Report covering the 2003 SITO National Conference on pages 30-33 for further details), and that a test on those competencies will form part of the licensing process.

The industry will never require brain surgeon or even police officer academic standards. Rather, it demands good, honest and hard-working men and women blessed with the basic knowledge, common sense and personality to go about their security duties in the correct fashion.

A norm of 12-hour shifts for an average of 56 hours and a maximum of 60 hours per week is right for this industry. More importantly, perhaps, I believe that most security officers feel this is the correct pattern for the private sector. Why should they be

SMT: Are you concerned that the various new designations of officer – such as Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) and Community Wardens, to name but two – are going to undermine the future development of contract manned guarding in any way?
RE: As guarding contractors, we could undertake straightforward tasks such as wide load escort and scenes of crime security, but I'm worried by PCSO and Community Warden roles as they require much higher levels of training and competency. There are dangers associated with PCSOs operating with limited support in 'gang land' inner city areas. The differences between PCSOs and vigilantes may become blurred.

The image of the manned security industry will not benefit from it becoming involved with police roles it's not properly qualified to undertake. The yob culture and anti-social behaviour problems would be solved more effectively in the home, at school or by 'Pastor Patrols', and if there are situations the police cannot handle then the military are trained and equipped to aid the civil power, as they do – and have done – in Northern Ireland.

SMT: Do you think that the insurance industry could play a far more significant role in helping to raise standards in the manned security sector?
RE: Insurance companies are facing huge problems at the moment, what with the growing claims culture that appears to have taken hold. It must be in their own interests to recommend that their clients place security in the hands of properly regulated security companies. For me, that means members of the BSIA. With the best will in the world, I don't believe that insurers could play any direct role in raising standards within the manned guarding industry.

SMT: If you were a client, Richard, would you prefer to work with a large, medium or small-scale guarding contractor, and why?
RE: I don't think that the size of the company matters to the average client. What's important is the security officers' performance and the continuity, availability and competence of their management team.

I guess that a medium-sized family business like ours has some advantage in that we have virtually no management turnover. That appeals to regional clients for sure.

Of course, some national businesses want national security contracts such that they can realise economies of scale. We're unable to tender for those jobs.

SMT: Other than The Watch Security, who do you rate as the better manned security companies in the industry?
RE: I have a great deal of respect for The Shield Guarding Company, who share many of our own aims and ambitions. Their 'colonial' connections and sound leadership generally attracts reliable, hard-working and loyal members of staff who get on with the job. We're able to share customers with them that require Home Counties and Midlands-based cover with the confidence that common service standards will be delivered.

SMT: Finally, Richard, where do you see The Watch Security in ten years' time? Will it be a major force in the industry and, if so, do you intend to grow by acquisition or in an organic fashion – or even a combination of the two?
RE: We have no wish to take over any other company. We'll be planning for steady, organic growth. Now that we've formed our own Watch Systems Division, I fully expect this part of the business to expand at a higher rate than our manned security contracts. Perhaps in ten years' time there'll be a 50-50 split between the two divisions.

I'd like to think that The Watch Security will maintain its own identity, but I suppose that we could end up joining forces with a facilities management company, for example, and become their security arm.