It’s usually no easy task procuring effective and cost-effective security services, but Bill Muskin, Chairman of VSG writes that the job can be made a little easier if Facilities Managers can look for endorsements from satisfied customers. Who best can point the way in this rare field than this man who not only has an unparalleled knowledge of procurement, but is first amongst equals in the global security industry and presides over one of the world’s fastest growing providers of security services?
The main problem that facilities managers face when selecting suppliers of security services is easy to state – at present, there is no reliable indicator to help them differentiate between the many companies that currently offer such services.
One possible solution is for FMs to contact existing clients of the suppliers they are considering, and ask for comments and endorsements. However, that’s a very time consuming process, especially when you remember that there are hundreds of companies from which to choose.
What’s needed is some form of quality mark or certification that would show immediately which are the best security suppliers. This is by no means a new idea. As long ago as 2003, the British Security Industry Association (BSIA) started work on developing a new operating standard called ‘Towards the Future’. This was to have been a voluntary scheme that would highlight the best security providers within the BSIA.
Work on this project was stopped when the Security Industries Authority (SIA) announced plans for its own Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS) which the BSIA expected to do a similar job. Unfortunately, it doesn’t. The ACS scheme is certainly a step in the right direction, but the reality is that it indicates only that a security provider has met what can best be described as “entry level” requirements.
It’s not hard to provide evidence to support this point of view. There are currently around 650 ACS accredited suppliers of security services in the UK, yet there can be very few informed people who believe that there are 650 top-flight companies in the security industry. Put simply, the conclusion has to be that ACS accreditation does not provide the much-needed clear differentiation between the best and the rest.
But, for an FM selecting a new supplier of security services, does this really matter? After all, surely any ACS accredited company is going to fulfil the role demanded of it? In truth, such a company may do an “adequate job”, but that’s not at all the same thing as a “good job”.
The best providers bring real insight, knowhow and enthusiasm to their work, which ultimately translates into better security, the delivery of a solutions-led approach, and ultimately lower costs. And, on the subject of costs, it’s worth noting that lesser providers may initially appear cheaper but, because they do not or cannot deliver the benefits mentioned, they invariably end up costing more.
If the limitations of the ACS scheme mean that it doesn’t help with supplier differentiation, what alternatives are available to FMs? One possibility is the Contract Quality Marque that was recently introduced by the National Security Inspectorate (NSI). This is intended to acknowledge high service standards at contract level and is likely to be successful in doing so, but it is not likely to be particularly useful in guiding FMs in their choice of supplier.
The reason is apparent from the name. ‘The Contract Quality Marque’ is not about the service suppliers themselves. In fact, Dai Pritchard, the leader of the working group that developed the Marque, said, “The scheme is all about the contract, not the company. It certificates the partnership between the customer and the service provider.” But, of course, at the selection stage, that partnership doesn’t exist. The Contract Quality Marque can therefore only serve, at best, as a very indirect indicator in the selection process.
So how should FMs set about selecting suppliers of security services? For the time being, the only real answer is to do things the hard way. They should look for endorsements from satisfied customers, even though we have already mentioned how time consuming this can be. And, once a short list has been developed, it is essential that they have in depth discussions and visits to the suppliers on that list.
In such a process, the standard questions are easily deflected, so it pays to dig a little deeper. What is the candidate company’s record like on training? Has it received any form of industry recognition for its training achievements? Likewise, has it been recognised as an innovator within the industry? Can it offer a full range of services, human-based and electronic, so that it can advise on the best solutions without being biased because of the limits of its own capabilities?
Other specific areas worthy of attention include the number of portfolios handled by front line managers, as overloaded managers invariably means poor client service; the level of out-of-hours supervision and support; and the clarity of escalation procedures for incidents of all types, in particular how their 24 hour Control Room operates.
Searching questions along the lines suggested will help to sort the wheat from the chaff but having to go to this level of detail makes procuring effective security services a time consuming and costly process. Fortunately, there’s a better solution on the horizon.
The BSIA, supported by the NSI and Skills for Industry, has once again started work on a new standard that will provide real and reliable differentiation among security service providers. The objective is to produce a standard that will be universally recognised as a credible and reliable indicator of true quality.
There will be no restrictions on who can apply – award of the standard will NOT be restricted to BSIA members; accreditation will be based only on a thorough assessment of business ethics, practices and performance. The assessors will look for best practice in areas such as corporate governance, terms and conditions of employment, employee welfare and training. Service delivery will, of course, also be evaluated in detail, with particular attention given to the areas mentioned earlier in this article.
Finding an efficient and cost-effective supplier of security services is not an easy task for FMs, although things will become much easier in the future when the new quality standard currently under development is launched. Until then, however, the only solution is to put in the time and effort, drawing on the information and guidelines provided in this article.