The Great Skills Debate

Such wide-sweeping and unclear statements in relation to education are not uncommon, and arguably one of the contributing factors to an unfortunate lack of interest among employers in the wider skills debate. The security industry is no exception to the rule.

Since joining SITO back in 1998, it has become apparent to me that – due to the very reactive nature of the provision of security services – very few industry employers are able to involve themselves in the semantics of skills strategies, funding regimes and the latest educational initiatives. This doesn't mean, though, that they don't believe in training and development for their people.

Indeed, many interesting discussions with my industry peers have established that the majority of them simply wish to focus on the job in hand, and offer their customers reassurances by way of providing long term and sustainable security solutions.

In doing so, most have requested that SITO should remain a strong educational lead partner that both anticipates and meets their expectations, at the same time providing the necessary training infrastructures.

With this in mind, it has become clear that whether or not we end up with a Sector Skills Council is really of secondary importance to most employers in the industry. They are more concerned with looking at the greater issues... "Where is our industry heading over the next ten to 15 years?"... "What will be the skills requirements needed of the security workforce?"... "Once we have identified the skills needs, how might we address them?"

To put it another way, by determining the Sector Skills Strategy, the industry will then be able to define the best way of implementing it, which may or may not involve the formation of a Sector Skills Council. What is immediately apparent is that a Sector Skills Council without a Sector Skills Strategy serves little purpose.

However, at this stage I don't really wish to speculate on the issue any further, but will later touch upon some of the exacting and detailed work that is being carried out by the Security Industry Authority (SIA) to address such fundamental questions.

Of prime importance now is the fact that we must concentrate on the direction the industry is taking, and upon the emerging roles that our people will have to adopt in order to address the needs of licensing, our customers and the wider community.

It’s widely known that the present Government views fighting crime and the need for reducing the fear of crime as priority issues. For those commentators who would question the private security industry’s role in what is now commonly known as

Interestingly, my own personal views appear to be mirrored by the work currently being undertaken at the SIA.

Training under the Act
There is certainly no lack of clarity in the messages emerging from the SIA. First of all, Section 1 of the Private Security Industry Act 2001 specifies that the functions of the SIA include "setting or approving standards of training" and "to make recommendations and proposals for the maintenance and improvement of standards in the provision of security industry services and other services involving the activities of security operatives".

In Section 7, the Act goes on to suggest that licensing criteria "may include such criteria as the Authority considers appropriate for securing that those persons have the training and skills necessary to engage in the conduct for which they are licensed". In Section 9, it states that the Authority may "prescribe or impose conditions as to training".

To those industry stakeholders who appear to be questioning the authority of the SIA in terms of them setting such industry standards, training and skills levels, I would say: "Read the Act. Don't be in denial"... and – most importantly – "Be prepared".

SIA chair Molly Meacher further enforced the issue at the official launch of the Authority on 2 April ('From aspiration springs reality', SMT, May 2003, pp20-26) when she stated: "Many members of staff in the private sector are indeed well trained, but a good deal of that training is cursory in too many companies. We know that, for some, the hurdles will be too high, but that's the only way we will ever improve standards."

At long last we have a regulatory body that has powers to improve training standards, is prepared to speak openly and frankly about education in the sector and, more importantly, has begun to implement the developmental stages needed to ensure that future skills requirements are addressed.

Extensive research speaks volumes
So why am I such a fan of the SIA, and why do I feel that the organisation is our greatest ally in educational matters? For a start, the Authority has engaged Professor Martin Gill and his research team at Perpetuity Research and Consultancy International to conduct the most extensive research project ever into the security industry's skills needs. I cannot even begin to explain how important this research actually is, but it will no doubt provide our industry with a starting point on which to base the all-important Sector Skills Strategy.

The SIA has also held numerous stakeholder consultation meetings with regard to the core competency requirements of all sub-sectors to be licensed. It is producing a Core Competency Strategy, and has developed the first draft specifications for Core Competency Training and Qualifications for Door Supervision, Manned Guarding and Cash-in-Transit.

Of prime importance now is the fact that we must concentrate on the direction the industry is taking, and upon the emerging roles that our people will have to adopt in order to address the needs of licensing, our customers and the wider community

Let us not forget, either, that the SIA has been directly involved in ongoing discussions with the Sector Skills Development Agency, the Learning and Skills Council, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, SITO and most of the major Awarding Bodies. This list is by no means exhaustive, but is already hugely impressive for an organisation that's officially less than two months old.

Preparing for the future
In the words of Professor Martin Gill: "Upskilling in the sector is not negotiable. The industry needs to recognise this".

That said, what are we upskilling our people for, exactly? Are we preparing them to take on a wider range of facilities-based roles? No. Like many of my industry peers, I don't believe that to be the case.

It's widely known that the present Government views fighting crime and the need for reducing the fear of crime as priority issues. For those commentators who would question the private security industry's role in what is now commonly known as the 'extended police family', the facts speak for themselves... Security operatives protect life, protect property, prevent loss and waste and prevent and deter crime.

By default, the hundreds of thousands of operatives in the industry have a huge impact on their communities and the wider society. Hundreds of security officers are now employed as town centre CCTV operators working in partnership with the police, while dozens of local initiatives – most notably the Trafford Guardsafe scheme ('On Guard', SMT, December 2001, pp20-24) – have created solid community and police partnerships.

In addition, thousands of retail security officers communicate every day and share crime intelligence – via radio links – with other security operatives and the police, something which Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir John Stevens and Richard Childs (chief constable of Lincolnshire Police) believe could become a more formal agreement in the future.

Many Community Warden schemes and Estate Patrols are operated by the private sector, and there's a growing belief that the security industry has an important role to play – albeit at a low level – in counter-terrorist strategies. As Securicor Group chief executive Nick Buckles said at the SIA launch: "We in the private sector have a duty to help in assessing the threat by acting as an extra set of eyes and ears for the police". Quite right.

The Police Reform Act
The Police Reform Act has paved the way for chief constables to accredit Community Support Organisations. To be more specific, Section 38 of that Act states: "A chief constable can designate a civilian employee to perform, among other functions, the roles of detention and escort officer". Section 40 of the Act states: "A chief constable may set up and maintain a community safety accreditation scheme."

To conclude, when Sir John Stevens said at the SIA launch: "There is a definite need for joined up initiatives between the police and private sector", he indicated the dawn of a new era for our industry.