SECURITY MANAGEMENT TODAY (SMT): Why DID YOU DECIDE TO SET UP A MANNED SECURITY COMPANY?
William Freear (WF): Pilgrims Security Services was established to provide consultancy, crisis management and response services. However, when a local authority requested help with a very large and complex manned security project, our future role in the manned guarding sector was pretty well defined.
There were initial concerns about entering an industry rife with problems and having a reputation for low quality service. We determined to overcome that view by establishing a commitment to providing high quality security services that would break the mould. We were convinced that providing a service in both the manned guarding and technical sectors of the security industry would not only offer Pilgrims an exciting challenge, but also offer an opportunity for us to help shape the future of the security industry.
SMT: How do you see Pilgrims Security Services differentiating itself from any other small-to-medium-sized enterprise in the contract security sector?
WF: Unlike most manned security companies we’ve purposely avoided a rapidly increasing turnover. Our development has been very controlled in order not to compromise the quality of our services, not to mention the integrity of the two specialist companies within the Pilgrims Group. Both of these companies operate in sensitive and highly complex environments.
The development of our manned guarding services has been sympathetic to the overall goal of the Pilgrims Group, which is to establish the Pilgrims brand as being synonymous with quality and professionalism.
SMT: What do you feel are the major weaknesses of the private security industry at the present time?
WF: There are obviously no simple answers to this question, but prices being pushed too low by clients, providers making unrealistic promises, security officers not being respected as they should, a lack of training, poorly-qualified contract managers and a distinct lack of any regulation from Government have all contributed to this industry’s poor image and reputation in the wider world.
SMT: Do you believe that this rather unfortunate picture will change when the Security Industry Authority is fully operational, and private sector licensing becomes a reality?
WF: I believe that regulation will certainly help. The Security Industry Authority will assist manned guarding organisations from a commercial point of view by establishing that an approved company is exactly what it says it is. Instead of the plethora of quality kitemarks currently in existence, there’ll be one that promotes the credibility of the industry.
SMT: A number of well-respected private sector commentators argue that the contract security industry could suffer as it becomes more of an expensive purchase for the client. For instance, the increased charges engendered by licensing may well encourage customers to take the service back in-house. Do you think there’s a real risk of that occurring?
WF: It’s inevitable that the cost of licensing will be passed on to the client, and yet the client will no doubt be receiving the same level of service as before. Post-licensing, though, end users will come to expect security officers to provide an even more professional service.
As an industry we are going to have to meet expectations of ‘added value’, or be faced by the prospect that our clients – in weighing up the increased costs of the service – decide that it will be more cost-effective to operate an in-house system where licensing is not required. That would inevitably undermine the regulation of the security industry.
SMT: Many end users are quick to emphasise the importance of training, and yet appear similarly unwilling to pay for it? How might we solve this problem?
WF: One of the biggest problems is that the training provided by many organisations doesn’t quite match the needs of the client, and thus doesn’t provide any tangible benefit. Our own experience of running a specialist training company has shown us that, to provide effective training, the instructors must have considerably more experience and knowledge than is required to simply teach the subject.
It’s little wonder that clients don’t feel obliged to pay for training from which they see no benefit in the short or longer term. We have generally found that our clients are converted to the value of training once they’re exposed to the effects and benefits provided by high quality bespoke training courses for officers.
The old saying that ‘you get what you pay for’ readily springs to mind, but it’s really up to the security service providers to demonstrate the value of their training before most clients will be prepared to pay for it.
SMT: It’s often argued that we’ll never have a respectable private security industry until all concerned fully comply with the terms and conditions laid down in the Working Time Directive. Do you agree with that long-held belief?
WF: The industry appears to be divided on this issue, really in terms of ideal versus reality. Yes, we all want more leisure time for our employees so that they come into work feeling fresh and keen to do the job. However, if you examine the reality of operating a 48-hour working week in this industry from the standpoint of an increase in recruitment numbers, management time and cost, I have to question whether there shouldn’t be more debate on the subject, and a thorough review of all the options open to us.
SMT: Another current cry in the industry concerns the much-talked about ‘extended police family’. What areas of policing work do you feel contract manned security companies should realistically try and ‘takeover’ from the police service?
WF: We already work closely with local police forces, and as a company fully approve of the ‘extended police family’ for certain roles. Part of the work that we’ve carried out for local councils has relieved the police of some duties, and we look forward to developing that part of our business further in the years ahead.
We’re only too well aware of the emergence of Community and Neighbourhood Wardens, and we’re aiming to offer our services in support of this ‘second tier’ policing. Of all the areas covered by regulation, this is one of the most important if the Government’s objectives are to be realised.
SMT: The Security Industry Authority has been talking a great deal about an ‘Approved Companies Scheme’. What fundamental requirements do you think should be included here to ensure that no ‘cowboy’ operations slip into the proposed scheme?
WF: I’m sure that the Security Industry Authority has considered closing every door to ensure that ‘cowboy’ companies aren’t allowed to enter the Approved Companies Scheme.
However, I believe that a ‘black market’ of companies could emerge. Firms that have suddenly abandoned the label of ‘security company’ and invented some other term to describe their service which falls outside of the Approved Companies Scheme as laid down by the Security Industry Authority. I have to say that I’ve already seen some small steps taken in that very direction.
SMT: Who, in particular, has caught the eye among your competitors as being a particularly good contract security company?
WF: It’s difficult to comment on our competitors without the benefit of a detailed insight into their business, but I’d say that I’ve met several individuals within the security industry for whom I have the greatest respect.
SMT: Finally, where do you think Pilgrims Security Services might be in the marketplace in two years’ time?
WF: Our aim is simple. To have the Pilgrims name become the byword for quality within the security industry, and to set standards to which all of our competitors aspire.