Train your team

We may be at the dawn of a new millennium, but as far as formal education and qualifications in the security industry are concerned we're still not out of the 1960s. For years now installers have been on your premises, on your site, installing a host of sophisticated equipment. It is only by the grace of God that serious accidents – following installations by individuals not formally trained – have not hit the headlines.

Imagine if a pan, tilt and zoom camera, weighing some 20kg, were to fall from a high-rise building and kill or seriously maim a pedestrian. Because perhaps the installer, at 4 o'clock on a wet Friday afternoon, only drilled the bracket into mortar and didn't use the correct fixing plates and materials. Disaster! Or how about access control turnstiles that impede or trap individuals and there are no emergency procedures in place?

Or indeed a massive fire that develops in a bonded warehouse following installation by an untrained intruder alarm company? Although these issues are primarily Health & Safety orientated, they should also form part and parcel of professional training.

SELF-STYLED EXPERTS

Competence equals proficiency, skill, capability, says the Thesaurus. However, in the security and surveillance industry the cupboard is quite bare when it comes to standards or levels of recognised competence in the systems category. (Gas installers have to be CORGI-registered. Electrical installers have to comply with BS7671-16th edition IEE regulations. Security installers? Best price will do!)

Just about anyone, from any walk of life, can stroll into our industry and brandish themselves as expert CCTV installers, specialist access control and intruder alarm installers, worldwide perimeter detection service providers or international consultants for electronic security. How can our industry tolerate the term 'consultant' when there are no formal qualifications that permit individuals to consult?

I am both disappointed and saddened that for each genuine, well-qualified, experienced and professional person there are 500 unqualified, inexperienced people in the consultant field. Many an installation company that has tried to comply with a consultant specification in system integration has found it a 'mission impossible', while the bemused customer has no measurement of consulting performance until after the project is a fait accompli.

Tavcom Training and TKC Training, two highly respected training providers, recognise that no one individual can be an expert on every electronic system.

The training programmes run by these two companies feature tutors who are specialists in their own fields and openly admit that they do not know all subjects. In fact, most tutors are individual consultants in their own rights, but they do network between each other to ensure that system design and specification is both possible and cost effective.

WHO SHOULD CONDUCT TRAINING?

Manufacturers in general are most supportive of proper training and many employ excellent technical support staff to conduct specific product training. The downside, however, is their general lack of understanding of competitors' equipment which is often interfaced with their own.

How about distributors? Distributor sales engineers are, in general, employed because of their specialist sales techniques, not because they have successfully installed sophisticated equipment and are therefore able to pass on their experience and information to customers. However, distributors do have the powerful potential to prove immensely valuable to the industry.

A very high percentage of electronic equipment is sold via the distributor route, meaning that most installers purchase from these areas. This in turn means that distributors are in a prime position to assist with the educational programme, and I would like to see the major ones working closely with the independent training providers rather than conducting their own bespoke training as just another product on their books.

As a result, I feel sure that the directors of each and every distribution company would welcome more sales, less returns for the wrong product specified, and less time spent on technical support for 'simple' problem solving.

LACKING PRACTICALITY

Technical colleges are generally well-suited to provide the underpinning electronic knowledge for students but practical, real-world training isn't usually a specialist skill of the college tutor. Many of these have attended a two-day foundation course with Tavcom Training and immediately begun to teach the subject in their own colleges.

Independent training organisations that work closely with the National Standards, City & Guilds and NVQs are extremely well-organised and have specialist tutors to conduct the educational programmes. In some cases there is also the availability of NVQ assessing on the courses.

Tutors on these courses should not only have a wealth of underpinning knowledge, great experience and formal educational qualifications, they should also have undergone and passed the professional tutorial training with recognised authorities.

Finally, we come to individuals who, having either retired or been made redundant, take up training. Although many of these may be highly experienced and able to offer excellent advice, they begin to lose touch with current trends and standards. Because of the rapid changes in technology this can happen as quickly as within six months of giving up their jobs.

COMMON STANDARD

I am particularly troubled to see 'certificates of attendance' displayed in various rooms around the world. This proves no level of understanding or competence by the recipient nor does it indicate the skill level of the particular tutor.

As with associations and inspectorates there is no central point of authority, and training providers must not fall into the same trap and provide different levels of training. They should work closely with SITO, the NTO (National Training Organisation) to provide a common standard, which could be set in consultation with installers, users, specifiers, distributors and manufacturers. All standards are a minimum level, and that level can be raised through the skill and expertise of the training providers.

TRAINER DANGER?

Some companies are concerned that after investing heavily in their employees to help them successfully gain professional and accredited training they will be tempted away to less scrupulous employers by the promise of a higher pay packet. In my opinion, simple contracts, which would hit the individuals financially, would curb this activity.

Then, of course, there's always loyalty. A friend once told me that loyalty only goes upwards - from employee to boss! To make the most of this, it's important to consider giving your team the very best training for the job.

AIM HIGH

At the end of the day, professional training should:

• prove immediately effective in the workplace

• prove more profitable

• enable the user and the installation company to agree a system to meet their mutual expectations

• raise standards

• improve the quality of equipment installed

• and provide a platform for cost-effective maintenance.