The growth of the bundled services providers (BSP) escalated with Sodexo joining the Top 20 with an annual turnover of £30 million as well as organic growth from the other bundled services providers. BSP’s accounted for approximately 59% of the regulated security sector with 11 BSP companies featuring in the Infologue.com Top 20. Two other new entrants to the Infologue.com Top 20 include TSS (Total Security Services) and CIS Security Limited. The turnover of the companies competing for the 20th position in the Infologue.com Top 20 was that close that we decided to create a joint 20th position. We have used the turnover of only one such business in our calculations.

The Infologue.com Top 20 mirrors the regulated private security sector which includes companies operating within the following security disciplines with the exception of Vehicle Immobilisers. The disciplines are Manned Guarding, Cash and Valuables in Transit, Close Protection, Door Supervision, Public Space Surveillance (CCTV), Security Guarding, and Key Holding.

Infologue.com Top 20 UK Companies in the Regulated Security Sector 2010

The above table is based on estimates and historical published data of annual turnover and should be viewed only as a guide to the approximate size of the largest companies in the manned security industry. The turnover is calculated on annualised basis as of November 2011 and relates only to revenue derived from the regulated sector of the Private Security Industry. Some companies have non related areas of business in their statutory accounts which Infologue.com attempts to estimate and factor out of the estimated turnover. Whilst some companies are now providing information on turnover to Infologue.com all figures will not be accurate as statutory information can be up to two years out of date. Infologue.com welcomes input from the companies in the Infologue.com Top 20 and will amend any verified inaccuracies as soon as possible. Therefore these figures should be treated with caution and be regarded as a best guess. The Infologue.com Top 20 UK Companies in the Regulated Security Sector 2011 is an exclusive production of Infologue.com and may not be replicated without the express written permission of the producers thereof.

From 2011 Logue Corporate will publish their annual analysis of the regulated security sector in September of each year in order to capture the current Security Industry Authority’s (SIA) Annual Report in the current review, writes Infologue.com Editor, Bobby Logue. Therefore, this current review will run from January 2010 until the end of August 2011. The four most significant events that have impacted on the licensable private security sector during this period were:

• The ideological decision by the Con – Lib Coalition Government to abolish the SIA as part of the Bonfire of the Quangos,
• The robust response from the private security industry to the proposed demise of the regulation of the private security industry,
• Greater consolidation of the licensable private security sector, especially within the top 20 companies, with managed or bundled service providers gaining significant market share, and;
• A continuing erosion of operating margins.

The Bonfire of the Quangos – The Planned Demise of the Security Industry Authority

On the 6th of July 2009, the then leader of the opposition, David Cameron delivered a speech, People Power – Reforming Quangos^[i]which become known as the Bonfire of the Quangos. It was clear to industry commentators^[ii] that the SIA was a likely target due to the negative publicity it had received since inception. It was not unexpected that on the 14th June 2010, the Chairman of the SIA, Baroness Ruth Henig, in her “Let’s build the industry together”^[iii] speech, suggested at their annual conference (SIA) that the industry should move towards a lighter touch style of regulation in the licensable private security sector, which became known as the “Change Blueprint”. Clearly, what the Baroness set out would negate the need for the SIA to be abolished. On the 22nd August 2010 the BBC claimed to have seen a leaked report in which the Government planned to abolish the SIA and other Quangos^[iv]. The Government at no stage denied that the leak was not true.

The Robust Response of the Private Security Industry

The security industry led by key bodies, the British Security Industry Association (BSIA), the International Professional Security Association (IPSA), The Security Institute and ASIS reacted emphatically and wrote to the Home Secretary imploring her to retain the SIA and suggested that the “Change Blueprint” be implemented. The Government backed down and announced on the 14th October 2010 that “the regulation of the private security industry should no longer be the responsibility of a Non-Departmental Public Body (NDPB) and that there should be a phased transition to a new regulatory regime.” This announcement created confusion in the security industry resulting in continued lobbying of the Government by the security industry. On the 22nd of October 2010 the key industry bodies formed a single issue coalition which became known as the Security Alliance.

On the 23rd of March 2011, the Government announced in the House of Lords that it had accepted a proposed amendment to the Public Bodies Bill and had withdrawn the Security Industry Authority from the list of organization’s that would be abolished by way of secondary legislation. The security minister at that time, Baroness Pauline Neville-Jones, told the Lords that it remained the coalition Government’s intention “to abolish the Security Industry Authority in its present form.” The Government had decided that it would achieve its aim through a different piece of primary legislation.

In the latest SIA Annual Report 2010/11, the Chairman, Ruth Henig and the Chief Executive, Bill Butler wrote in their joint statement “We had already announced at our conference in June 2010 that we wanted to develop a new approach to regulation – our “Change Blueprint”. This proposed greater responsibility for the industry in respect of individuals, supported by a system of compulsory business registration. Following the Government’s announcement, we received strong support from across the industry for the Change Blueprint approach and the continuation of a robust regulatory regime. The devolved governments in Scotland and Northern Ireland expressed strong support for the continuation of effective regulation. Working with the industry and government, we have proposed arrangements for a new regulatory regime which would be the responsibility of a new body, outside the NDPB sector, and which would involve the licensing of private security businesses and the registration of individuals, supported by robust compliance arrangements. The Government accepted these proposals and has asked us to lead the development of detailed proposals with the industry, and has indicated that it will now bring forward legislation in the next Parliamentary session to create the new regime. “

“The willingness of many in the industry, suppliers, buyers and those who use and rely on private security, to work with us to create a new approach to regulation has been a key element in allowing us to develop the Change Blueprint. We are grateful to all those involved and are looking forward to continuing this partnership as we address the Government’s aim to bring forward a new regime by the end of 2013. ”^[v]

The SIA, the Security Alliance and other industry stakeholders have worked closely since October 2010 in formulating, discussing, and agreeing the way forward based on the Change Blueprint.

Speaking at the BSIA Annual lunch on 13 July 2011, Lynne Featherstone, the parliamentary under-secretary of state for equalities, criminal information and responsible for overseeing the SIA said “Work is continuing on the details of the new regulatory regime, but certain key features have already been agreed:

• Regulation will be a primary focus through the licensing of businesses that will in turn have to adhere to stringent conditions set by the new regulator.
• Licensed businesses will be responsible for the registration and management of the individuals who work for them.
• The new regulator will be able to impose sanctions up to and including the removal of the right to trade from businesses that are not compliant.

The Government is grateful for the joined-up and positive approach taken by the industry in working closely with the SIA to develop these proposals through the Security Alliance.”

Infologue.com understands that the broad principles of the Security Alliance were used by the SIA in recommendations the Home Office Minister before the Parliamentary recess.

The Business End of the Security Review

Analysis of the UK outsourced licensed private security services market The current annualised turnover of the regulated security industry is estimated to have remained flat in the region of ?3.3 billion. There are in excess of 7000 businesses operating with the security sector of which it is conservatively estimated that there are more than 2522 businesses operating within the regulated security industry. These figures are consistent with data held by both the Security Industry Authority (SIA) and the British Security Industry Association (BSIA).It is, however believed that there could be up to 25 % more businesses operating in regulated security industry than calculated in this analysis due to individual businesses operating in multiple sub sectors as outlined below:-

• 575 operate in the regulated CCTV sector,
• 357 operate in the regulated Close Protection sector,
• 44 operate in the regulated CVIT sector,
• 617 operate in the regulated Door Supervision sector,
• 919 operate in the regulated Key Holding sector,
• 1915 operate in the regulated Security Guarding sector,
• 279 operate in the regulated Vehicle Immobilisation sector.

These assumptions are based on a 2009 study and anecdotal views of the current industry conditions. The regulated security industry has “long tail” with only approximately 25% of the regulated security businesses having some form of industry recognised quality accreditation, principally the ACS.  This highlights the need for compulsory company registration in the regulated security industry to fully understand the nature of the businesses currently operating outside the scope of accredited quality frameworks. There are regulatory changes due to affect the licensable security sector in 2013 when the emphasis on licensing will shift from licensing of individuals to licensing businesses.  Fit and proper criteria will be introduced and security businesses will have to meet these in order to operate These criteria are expected to include:

• Identity and legal status
• Financial probity
• Integrity
• Competence which is expected to include conformance to the relevant sector specific standards such BS 7499 – Security Guarding, BS 7984 – Key Holding and  BS 7858 – Vetting

The new regulatory regime is likely to impact on businesses that do not comply with basic standards and those who lack infrastructure.

There are currently over 365,000 licensed individuals in the regulated security sector. There are approximately 35 security businesses turning over more than ?7 million annually.  The top 20 companies in the UK regulated security sector represent 77.73 % (?2.56 Billion) of the ?3.3 billion annual turnover in the market.  Bundled or outsourced services companies represent 54% of the turnover of the security sector.

There was further consolidation of the Infologue.com Top 20 companies in the licensable security sector with bundled service providers, Compass and Initial Facility Services significantly improving their stakes in the licensable private security sector. Compass acquired VSG (Vision Security Group)^[vi] and Initial Facilities Services acquired Knightsbridge Guarding Limited . In addition the bundled service provider OCS increased their presence with the acquisition of the business of Legion Group. The focused security services provider Securitas Security Services UK acquired the business of Reliance Security Services^[vii] as well as Chubb Security Personnel^[ix]. The Securitas acquisitions moved the company from 7th in the Infologue.com Top 20 2009^[x] to 2nd in the Infologue.com Top 20 2010^[xi]. The current annualised turnover of Securitas in the UK is estimated at ?385 million.

Security specialists or Bundled service Providers?

Such was the movement globally towards managed services that the Securitas AB President and CEO, Alf Goransson commented as he introduced the 2010 Securitas Annual Report on the 13th April 2011 “If you had a serious heart problem – who would you see? A cardiologist or your family doctor? If you had serious security concerns, I would strongly recommend seeing a security specialist rather than a service bundler. We believe in specialization, not diversification.” It is no surprise that 54% of security services in the Infologue.com Top 20 are now supplied by managed services companies. There is an emerging trend where end users are requiring a security specialism within the managed services offering. Bob Forsyth, Managing Director at MITIE Total Security Management , who announced a more security focussed approach earlier this year, commented; “We take a risk-based approach to security through our Risk and Resilience team. Security services are critical to business continuity and shouldn’t be treated as a commoditised service and should be delivered by a provider with specialist knowledge; if that provider is part of a group with other specialisms then total facilities management works well.”

The Constant Spiral of Eroding Margins

Whilst there is no empirical evidence to reinforce the anecdotal assumption, it appears common cause that margin continues to travel southwards. As the managed services providers can offer services over a greater spectrum the overhead costs can be more efficiently spread. Recently the Managing Director of a UK Top 10 Security Guarding Company commented; “The economy continues to underperform the governments growth targets, it is of little surprise therefore that the latest survey by the company restructuring expert BegbiesTraynor found in Q1 2011 a 46% year on year increase in the number of support service companies experiencing greater financial distress. Taking all business sectors together the increase was 15%.

“A recent mail shot from a ‘fully BSIA compliant (Whatever that means)’, ‘SIA Approved Contractor’ offered to supply guards in London on a charge rate of ?8 per hour. The current London living wage is ?8.30 per hour, the minimum wage is ?5.93. Inadequate pay with an inadequate gross margin makes a classic ‘lose/lose’ contract. Does this portend a return to the ‘dark ages’? Many guarding companies entered the recession with weak balance sheets and then suffered higher employment costs – notably the 17% hike in statutory holidays. A significant number rely on certain aspects of the current fiscal arrangements to reduce cash operating costs – not a structurally sound strategy for the long term.

“Industry practitioners know that contract margins are inadequate, this ought to lead procurers to query their own risk analysis metrics when discussing pricing with suppliers. Similarly, guarding companies need to be honest with their clients about the real cost of operating a sound and sustainable contract (company).

“And all this while the current threat level for Great Britain is ‘substantial’.”

The Regulated Security Industry in 2010/11

Whilst there was significant contract promiscuity and consolidation within the licensable sector, there was no empirical evidence to suggest any growth during the period of analysis.  The annual turnover of the regulated security industry is estimated to be in the region of ?3.3 billion. There are in excess of 7000 businesses operating with the security sector of which it is conservatively estimated that there are more than 2522 businesses operating within the regulated security industry. It is believed that there could be up to 25 % more businesses operating in regulated security industry than calculated in this analysis. These figures are consistent with data held in late 2009 by both the Security Industry Authority (SIA) and the British Security Industry Association (BSIA). There has been no new sectorial analysis of businesses operating in the regulated security industry since the 2009 analysis save to say anecdotal evidence suggests the figures set out below reveal cross over with businesses operating in multiple sectors;

• 575 operate in the regulated CCTV sector,
• 357 operate in the regulated Close Protection sector,
• 44 operate in the regulated CVIT sector,
• 617 operate in the regulated Door Supervision sector,
• 919 operate in the regulated Key Holding sector,
• 1915 operate in the regulated Security Guarding sector,
• 279 operate in the regulated Vehicle Immobilisation sector.

This analysis highlights that the regulated security industry has “long tail” with only approximately 28% (25% – 2009) of the regulated security businesses having some form of industry recognised quality accreditation, principally the ACS. These statistics reveal the need for compulsory company registration in the regulated security industry to fully understand the nature of the businesses operating outside the scope of accredited quality frameworks. As suggested earlier, regulation in 2013/14 is likely to require all security businesses in the licensable sector to be licensed. This should provide more accurate data.^[xii]

Regulatory Analysis

The regulatory process of the SIA continued to be robust during the reporting period of January 2010 until the 20^th of September 2011. Whilst there was only an increase in the overall number of active licences of 13.10% from 2009 there was a marked increase in the number of revoked licences (27.67%), in refusals to issue licenses(31.38%) and in qualifications (20.91%) The full analysis of the SIA licensing statistics^[xiii] are set out in the table below;

The Long Arm of the SIA

SIA Enforcement Activity The SIA has a range of sanctions available whilst falling short of criminal proceedings they believe are effective in ensuring increased compliance quickly whilst avoiding costly formal proceedings. The sanctions include the issuing of written warnings and improvement notices for non-compliance, and the revocation or suspension of licences.

The table set out below details statistics of enforcement activity for the periods 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011 (12 Months) and 1 April to 31 August 2011 (5 Months)

This Financial Year (2011-2012) (5 Months)

Previous Financial Year (2010-2011) (12 Months)

Please visit the SIA Website for full descriptions on the types of sanctions and updated statistics

SIA Prosecutions

Due to considerations which range from data protection issues, prosecutions by police forces and other government agencies, to commercial considerations the majority of the Private Security Industry Act enforcement activity goes unreported. As successful prosecutions are a matter of public record all the SIA activity is reported on their website. In the 12 months to the 9th of September 2011 there were ten successful prosecutions (2 businesses and 8 individuals.) For further details please visit the prosecutions section on the SIA website.

The Security Industry Authority – Approved Contractors Scheme (ACS)^[xiv]

Number of Approved Contractors

The number of contractors in the Approved Contractors Scheme (ACS) of the Security Industry Authority (SIA) increased by 8.3% (656 to 711), during the period of analysis. It is likely, based on current industry thinking that the ACS could be transferred to anindustry run hallmark type scheme under the planned new licensing regime in 2013.

Key statistics for the ACS as of 31 August 2011 are;

• the total number of approved contractors was 711;
• more than 129,000 licensed operatives were working for these companies.

In terms of the ACS rules, approved contractors must re-register and undergo assessment every year to maintain their approval. 91% of ACS approved contractors have successfully re-registered since March 2011.

Types of Organisations Represented

Approvals by Sector^[xv]

Bobby Logue believes the desire of the private security industry to include in house security operatives in regulatory framework is not born out protectionism, or discrepancies in remuneration, hours of work or even training levels. There are four good and cogent underlying reasons for this desire which are;

• The creation of a level playing field which will protect the public by ensuring minimum levels of training, criminality and conduct,
• The drive by the security industry towards professionalism, which is important to a much maligned industry who have mostly been in the public scrutiny for the wrong reasons,
• In the age of austerity greater reliance will be made of the security industry, contract or in house, to support the police in their never ending battle against terrorism, crime and social disorder and,
• Finally, common sense, there appears to no logic or fairness where the determination of who requires a licence is based on the type or category of employer. In essence it implies one type of employer is inferior to another. As Lord Digby Jones, former Director-General of the CBI and former United Kingdom Minister of State for Trade & Investment responded in 2003 to the In House issue “It b*ll*cks!!!”

The In House debate has long been a bone of contention within the private security industry being the prime motivation in initiating the award winning campaign “Four Issues Once Voice” by the Editor of Infologue.com, Bobby Logue and the Editor of SMT Online/ Info4Security.com, Brian Sims. The campaign resulted in the SIA conducting an extensive consultation exercise which included; “Our conclusion is that there is no clearly defined or substantiated risk to public protection to be addressed and that we are unable, at this time, to make a case which would justify extending our remit to include licensing of in-house guards. We will review the situation again in the 2012-2013 financial year.” (SIA Website) There was much comment on the findings made as a result of the consultation undertaken by the SIA which were “Our conclusion is that there is no clearly defined or substantiated risk to public protection to be addressed and that we are unable, at this time, to make a case which would justify extending our remit to include licensing of in-house guards.” (SIA Website)

We believe that this decision was made due to a lack of will on the part of the government of the day as well as a lack of cohesion on the part of the private security industry resulting in a lacklustre response to the consultation.

Bobby Logue wonders what the reaction will be if the industry made its case on the in-house issue to the devolved governments of Scotland and Northern Ireland. Both authorities have shown steel by rejecting the planned demise of the Security Industry Authority. If the current cohesive mood of the industry persists there may be a better chance of success.

British Security Industry Association Website

Download the report from the SIA Consultation on In-House Security

Logue Corporate’s Bobby Logue said: “Once again our industry focus has assisted our client in selecting the right target with the right geographical fit to develop their soft bundled services strategy. 2010 has been an exceptional year for Logue Corporate resulting in a significant contribution to the turnover of Interconnective Limited.”

‘Churchill has grown into one of the UK’s leading providers of soft bundled services and we believe security is a core element of our offering’ says Joel Briggs, MD of Churchill.  ‘We have embarked on a strategic acquisition programme that will result in Churchill Services Group becoming a Top 20 provider of security in the UK within the next eighteen months and we are currently examining further acquisition opportunities within the security sector. The management team at Knighthawk complements our existing skills base, enabling Churchill to achieve our planned ambition in the area of bundled soft services’.

Established in 1989, Knighthawk Security has provided tailor-made security solutions to an extensive range of public and private blue-chip organisations, and the hands-on management approach which has made Knighthawk a success will continue within the Churchill Services Group

“We are looking forward to uncovering further business opportunities as part of the Churchill Services Group, and are pleased to be part of the growth of such a dynamic organisation.” said Ian Wookey, Managing Director of Knighthawk. “We look forward very much to being an integral part of the Security Division, where Churchill’s commitment to the sector will enable us to build extensively upon our achievements to date and to target key markets in a robust and innovative way”.

Churchill Services Website

THE LESSONS ON FIRST RESPONSE FROM 9/11

Since the tragedy of 9/11 the role of the civilian first responder has become a critical element of any disaster response framework.  This was reinforced in the following extracts from the 9/11 Commission Report;

 “The lesson of 9/11 for civilians and first responders can be stated simply: in the new age of terror, they-we-are the primary targets. The losses America suffered that day demonstrated both the gravity of the terrorist threat and the commensurate need to prepare ourselves to meet it. The first responders of today live in a world transformed by the attacks on 9/11. Because no one believes that every conceivable form of attack can be prevented, civilians and first responders will again find themselves on the front lines. We must plan for that eventuality,” and;

“… for the private sector controls 85 percent of the critical infrastructure in the nation. Indeed, unless a terrorist’s target is a military or other secure government facility, the “first” first responders will almost certainly be civilians. Homeland security and national preparedness therefore often begins with the private sector. … Preparedness in the private sector and public sector for rescue, restart, and recovery of operations should include (1) a plan for evacuation, (2) adequate communications capabilities, and (3) a plan for continuity of operations. As we examined the emergency response to 9/11, witness after witness told us that despite 9/11, the private sector remains largely unprepared for a terrorist attack. We were also advised that the lack of a widely embraced private-sector preparedness standard was a principal contributing factor to this lack of preparedness. “

 “The professional approach to first response by Rick Rescorla, the security chief at Morgan Stanley in the World Trade Centre, saved all but six of Morgan Stanley’s employees after the 9/11 attack. “Rescorla felt it was foolish to rely on first responders (Emergency Services in this case) to save his employees. Morgan Stanley’s employees would need to take care of one another. He ordered them not to listen to any instructions from the Port Authority in a real emergency. In his eyes, it had lost all legitimacy after it failed to respond to his 1990 warnings. And so Rescorla started running the entire company through his own frequent, surprise fire drills. He trained employees to meet in the hallway between the stairwells and go down the stairs, two by two, to the 44^th floor,” as reported by Amanda Ripley in A Survival Guide to Catastrophe in TIME Magazine May. 29, 2008

PEOPLE SAFETY AND SAFER BUILDINGS

Key to the first response function is the role of the modern security officer who today should have a wider remit than security which could be described as “people safety” It is my belief that First on Scene skills in the area of evacuation basics, first aid and fire, including marshalling and practical use of fire fighting equipment are critical constituents in the DNA of the modern frontline security officer.  There are other areas that require attention in the skills arsenal of the modern security officer which include report writing, counter surveillance, effective patrolling and customer service. Most of the training improvements suggested are currently available in the form of standalone courses. It was therefore surprising to see minimal increase in the modern security officer’s training requirements for the SIA licence this year. When asked by Infologue.com, the SIA said “When we re-developed the specifications, we involved the industry fully in the development process.  We were very keen that we had an industry-led process.”  Another surprising element of the training improvement was the failure to introduce “top up” training for security guards who had previously been trained.

CREATIVE USE OF TRAINING CAPABILITY

Extra training does not necessarily mean extra time, if creative use is made of classroom time i.e. there are elements of the current training that could be evolved into a theory test which is administered prior to classroom training. However, if extra training time is needed for the SIA required training then all security officers would have to undertake such training resulting in a costs “level playing field”. Another creative method of adding extra training is through “pop up” training sessions, a practise currently been deployed by some security companies, for refresher or top up training. The SIA could also consider using the South African security industry regulatory model which grades security personnel according to the skills deployed. This would allow training skills to be added to security personnel that require such skills in there deployment. What is also interesting is the South African Regulator, the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) provides an illustrative costing model as a guideline for end users and the standard maximum hours allowed to be worked by a security officer is forty eight.

THE PUBLIC REASSURANCE AGENDA

Part of the Home Office public reassurance agenda surely has to be that when people walk into a building they should feel safe and secure when they see a security officer who they know is trained to respond to emergencies. The wider agenda should be developed into a “safer buildings” programme involving the SIA, HSE and ACPO.

Bobby Logue is the Editor of Infologue.com.

In his closing speech at the SIA conference, Bill Butler said; “I’m going to say one thing that we are not going to do and this is something that we said originally we were going to do. I’d like to think that I may have said it differently but at the outset we said we were going to create a golden age in the industry where pay goes up where there’s limit-less opportunities for people to do work. I think that over time the standard and the approach of the industry can improve but I think that was an unrealistic promise to make and regardless of what we have said in the past I am taking it back. This is about what the industry does and the improvements that have taken place over the last few years are things that you have done. I like to think we create the environment, I like to think we help but the reason there are more women working in the industry, that there’s more professionalism and there can be conversations about creating an effective profession for the industry, the fact that there is recognition of the standards that the industry create and better partnership with the police, I could go on, is because of what you in the industry have done to take things forward.  We want to carry on helping you do that but that’s what you do – that’s your success.”

In her speech Ruth Henig said; “To move forward in tacking these areas of improvement, and others, we will need to work closely with our partners, and with private security industry businesses, to discuss how we can share regulatory responsibilities effectively and to mutual benefit. This is the time to start planning for, and working towards, greater empowerment and lighter touch regulation for those working in the private security industry. We would like to see key industry figures and organisations, such as the Security Institute, BSIA and Skills for Security, to name but a few, as well as individual companies, joining in the discussions, leading the drive for higher standards and for innovation. This means working with the SIA to explain to Parliamentarians, civil servants and to those who work in the industry how regulation in the industry will evolve, and helping to achieve the goals we will all hopefully be united in pursuing. You can all help the SIA to move forward, building on the benefits of regulation which have been achieved so far, and working together to drive forward a joint agenda of professionalisation of the industry and of higher skill levels and continuous training for those who work within it.”

My comments in the June Editorial of Infologue.com, ENERGISING THE SECURITY INDUSTRY, underpins the opening paragraph of this month’s editorial; “It is my belief that one of the flaws in the industry is our wish to create today tomorrow, in other words we are always one step behind. It is my opinion that the current approach of our industry is to examine challenges on a piecemeal basis instead of adopting a holistic approach. Examples include skills development, the Working Time Directive and company differentiation. My belief is that a holistic approach is adopted where security industry best process, practice and output is identified. This will give all stakeholders of the security industry a vision of excellence instead of focussing on minimum requirements. From this vision, standards, skill levels and other “items” on the industry’s shopping list could flow. Part of this approach would require the regulator, the Security Industry Authority to give more weight to their relationships with the security industry trade bodies on industry matters. The trade organisations would in turn have to ensure its positions are fully mandated by its membership.” Before we can move forward we as an industry need to created this vision.

There are some outstanding legacy issues that require resolution such as the In House issue, Cutting Red Tape and other issues raised by Brian Sims the editor of SMT Online and myself in the award winning campaign, FOUR ISSUES ONE VOICE.

 When nominating Logue for the Award the Chairman of The Security Institute wrote; “Bobby Logue has made a significant and outstanding contribution to media and communications within the UK security industry. His innovative and informative online journal ‘Infologue.com’, is widely read by both security suppliers and end-users. Through an ongoing series of articles, reports and statistics, Bobby has made the facts and news about the security industry, and in particular, the guarding sector, more widely available to a broader audience, and always in real-time. He has the knack of knowing things before anyone else! Bobby has never shied away from tackling some very sensitive issues. Moreover, he has succeeded in harnessing through ‘Infologue.com’, the viewpoints of the regulator and key representatives of the private security sector, often instigating fascinating debates and exchanges. Infologue.com is read by security personnel at every level, thereby creating an electronic forum from which the industry’s newest recruits, as well as the most experienced security manager, can benefit. “ 

In 2006 Bobby Logue, was recognized for his efforts in respect of his role as Editor of Infologue.com, when he received the initial Skills for Security Special Award for Outstanding Contribution to the Security Business Sector.

Logue then discussed the security industry in general “The industry is constantly dynamic, but far too many organizations are standing still, While gross margins for security companies are now seriously low, the industry remains resistant to change. Let me be clear that this situation is not the fault of the Regulator. Clients are driving prices downwards because they know there will be companies out there willing to take this work. Smaller security companies either need to be smarter and – or better you are going to compete your larger rivals. This is why smaller companies should look outside of their traditional markets by identifying niche business areas.”

Moving onto skills in security sector, Bobby Logue was critical at the lack of raising the training levels within the industry.  “Four days training by the regulator is nearly not enough. Most modern security officers are first responders in fire and first aid, requiring such skills to adequately perform their duties. We should be talking in terms of 8-10 days basic training. Literacy in English is also an issue and in addition to the multiple choice questions already included in the SIA required examination, there should also be a 300-word essay.”

SEE – INFO4SECURITY – IPSA AGM 2010: LOGUE ENERGISES STRONG DEBATE ON GUARDING INDUSTRY STRUCTURE

 “The opportunity for the security industry to display its true credentials has never been greater”

“Key to driving our industry forward is positive leadership from our trade bodies such as the BSIA and acceptance by the new government of our true capabilities. The strength and strategic importance of our industry is not emphasised enough, through unity and focus, we, as an industry could achieve this. A little known but important fact is the largest employer on the LSE is a security company. We however cannot demand respect, we have to earn it.”

“We cannot demand respect, we have to earn it”

“By its defensive nature the security industry tends to focus on the negative. The position is further aggravated by negative mutterings by the likes of Top Gear presenter, Jeremy Clarkson and the unsavoury antics of wheel clampers, who have inexplicably been lumped into our industry by the previous government. This view is entirely contrary to reality, which is that several hundred thousand men and woman protect the public and property daily. Annually, it is my privilege to be one of the judges of the BSIA Security Officer of the Year awards. It is during this process that you begin to realise the level of performance, dedication, levels of customer service, life saving actions and bravery that our frontline personnel deliver selflessly on a regular basis. This is a far cry from some of the poor perceptions of our industry that are regularly espoused by the ill informed. It is clear that our industry requires positive vision and leadership which should emanate from security industry trade bodies.”

 “Our industry requires positive vision and leadership which should emanate from security industry trade bodies”

“It is my belief that one of the flaws in the industry is our wish to create today tomorrow, in other words we are always one step behind. It is my opinion that the current approach of our industry is to examine challenges on a piecemeal basis instead of adopting a holistic approach. Examples include skills development, the Working Time Directive and company differentiation. My belief is that a holistic approach is adopted where security industry best process, practice and output is identified. This will give all stakeholders of the security industry a vision of excellence instead of focussing on minimum requirements. From this vision, standards, skill levels and other “items” on the industry’s shopping list could flow.”

 “From this vision, standards, skill levels and other “items” on the industry’s shopping list could flow”

“Part of this approach would require the regulator, the Security Industry Authority to give more weight to their relationships with the security industry trade bodies on industry matters. The trade organisations would in turn have to ensure its positions are fully mandated by its membership. This appears to be the case with the British Security Industry Association (BSIA) when the new Chief Executive James Kelly, committed to offering BSIA members the opportunity to sign off on key new policies.”

Bobby Logue is the Managing Director of UK based Interconnective Ltd, who specialises in consultancy to security businesses through Logue Corporate, distributes a range of innovative security products through Interconnective Security Products and supplies specialist training to the security industry through its subsidiary, Beyond Basics Limited.