Studying The Form

That is the core finding of a major survey conducted by Reliance Security Services among the readers of Security Management Today (SMT) – the only dedicated journal solely for end users in the industry which circulates to all of the major corporate decision makers and managers. The survey, sent out with the September edition, asked questions about end user premises and contracts, regulation of the industry in general, the licensing of outsourced versus in-house teams, the likely impact of the Working Time Directive and plans for future spending on security.

The results suggest that managers of in-house security officers are key proponents of regulation and licensing, with 80% of the readership calling for their own staff to be licensed. Any increases in the cost of manned security as a result of the licensing process are also likely to be absorbed by customers, it seems. 68% of those organisations quizzed stated that they have no plans to switch their investment in manned security over to security systems in the next one-to-three years.

Also surveying end users across the public sector, the questionnaire revealed that:

• nearly all security managers – 99% of them, in fact – are in full support of regulation for the private security industry;

• while 42% of security managers are fully aware of the implications of the Private Security Industry Act, 58% have little or no knowledge at all of what it will mean to them;

• the majority (90%) of respondents want to see all security company employees licensed, from security officers right through to the chairman and chief executive;

• most feel the Government legislation should also apply to new and existing personnel;

• nearly 60% of all security managers are concerned about exemptions for in-house officers;

• 80% of those security managers who manage in-house teams believe that they should also be regulated;

• only 15% of all managers would consider cutting manning levels to reduce costs.

Absorbing the costs
Speaking exclusively to SMT about the survey results, Reliance Security Services chairman Ken Allison commented: "What this survey shows is very clear support for the regulation of in-house teams. Most organisations are also in no doubt about the benefits to be reaped from deploying manned security, in particular when it comes to deterring crime. For this reason, manned security services will still remain one of the most favoured security solutions."

Allison continued: "Much has been said about regulation increasing the cost of manned services, and how this might affect demand. However, the statistics realised in this survey show that end user organisations are willing to absorb the additional cost. Indeed, they're all in favour of regulation and want to take advantage of the benefits it will bring."

Security managers are indeed convinced about the plusses licensing will induce, as evidenced by the fact that 99% of them favour regulation. Improved service levels were cited by 83% of respondents as the main benefit, followed by an improved calibre of personnel in terms of education and training (76%) and ensuring that security personnel don't possess any form of criminal record (also cited by 76% of respondents). Interestingly, 66% of those security managers surveyed suggested that unscrupulous security companies being forced out of business is central to regulation.

As stated, this immense confidence in the benefits of licensing was further emphasised in the survey by a strong support for regulation to be extended to in-house security teams. More than half (58%) of the survey respondents stated that they'd begin to vet their own in-house people more thoroughly once regulation comes into effect. Nearly 20% suggested they'd be tempted to consider outsourcing in order to take full advantage of industry regulation.

"The acknowledged benefits of regulation are such that some corporate managers are prepared to switch from managing in-house security teams to outsourcing their requirements to private sector contractors," added Ken Allison. "What we're really seeing here is a reaction to the fear that the tougher criteria imposed on individuals seeking employment in private security companies may cause those with criminal records to specifically target in-house security jobs. Vetting your new security employees more thoroughly is a 'must' for managers of in-house personnel."

In Allison's eyes, the best solution is to regulate in-house officers under the exact same legislation. "In this way," he said, "we'll not only ensure we don't displace the rogue element associated with the security industry to in-house security, but also that we avoid the creation of a two-tier industry in which the personnel employed are vetted and licensed to different standards."

A range of end solutions
The Reliance Security Services/SMT survey revealed a continuing steady demand for a range of security solutions, with manned services and electronic security being the preferred areas of increased expenditure. Half of the companies surveyed had increased their spending on manned services over the past year, while 68% had upped financial outlays on electronic surveillance. These two types of security look to be favoured, and should experience further increases in expenditure during the next three years.

Meantime, it seems that mobile patrol and remote surveillance services are also gaining in popularity. Whereas only 8% of security managers increased their spending on mobile services this year, 10% plan to do so over the next three years. Likewise, whereas only 11% increased their spend on remote surveillance in 2002, more than twice that amount (ie 23%) plan to do so in the next three years.

"Clearly, given the enhanced awareness of security matters in the light of recent world events, not to mention the general security concerns that most organisations continue to face such as theft, vandalism and illegal intrusion, it's only sensible for companies to continue boosting their defences by increasing spending on effective security solutions," opined Ken Allison. "For most companies, we feel the future lies in deploying a combination of manned, mobile and electronic solutions integrated to meet the end user's own individual requirements."

Ultimately, host companies should be looking to harness the Best-of-Breed offering for each service area with the aim of creating one total security solution that works in a seamless and co-ordinated way. Only then can they achieve the tight security they need – by day and night – in an organised, effective and cost efficient way.

Much has been said about regulation increasing the cost of manned services, and how this might affect demand. However, the statistics realised in this survey show that end user organisations are willing to absorb the additional cost

Our survey also indicated that 68% of security managers wouldn't be prepared to switch their investment in security personnel over to technology regardless of any potential increase in the cost of manned services due to regulation. The fact that manned security acts as an effective deterrent (the feeling of 25% of survey respondents), and that security personnel can provide additional services and manage employee and visitor contact (21%) were cited as the main reasons for this.

"There's general agreement that security technology can't replace the human touch," suggested Allison. "This is the prime reason why end user organisations will always need to combine any element of electronic security they deploy with security personnel that can do the jobs technology can't. Such roles would range from operating the security systems in question to providing an immediate, on-the-spot response to any incidents that may occur."

Benefits from the EU Directive
While 90% of respondents to the Reliance Security Services/SMT survey were well aware of the implications of potential changes to the Working Time Directive, the survey revealed mixed attitudes towards them.

Nearly half (47%) of those questioned said they'd be happy to limit weekly working hours for all operatives to 48 – a move that would eliminate the right to opt out from this legislation. Here again, most respondents (63%) agreed that higher calibre security personnel would be an important benefit, with shorter working hours for the same pay making a career in the security industry more appealing to a broader spectrum of people.

Reduced staff turnover resulting from improved working conditions (61%), security officers being less tired and (consequently) able to do a better job (55%) and a generally better quality of life for officers (56%) were also cited as key benefits.

However, there were a few misgivings concerning the Working Time Directive, with an increase in the cost of employing security personnel (67%), labour shortages resulting from the fact that a greater number of security officers would be required to work more shifts (60%) and costs rising while service quality remains the same (41% of respondents) cited as potential disadvantages.

Nonetheless, the aims of the Directive have been welcomed by the BSIA as well as a number of leading private sector security companies as a major step towards an improved quality of life for security officers and better end user service.