Security: essential asset or expensive overhead? Exploring the key benefits

Enter into any search engine the question “Do companies need security guarding in the UK” and you will get page after page extolling the virtues of a physical presence on your site. But is it really necessary?

As I approach 20 years in the business of protective security, from all levels and on both sides of the fence, this question is probably the most raised of any.  “Do we really need security in our business?”

Reducing costs

As we, amongst most other countries, go through yet another struggle to find the money to pay for things, the mighty financial axe is raised against the function of security, particularly the corporate security organisation. Frequently, this is accompanied by the overused mantra of convergence!

Businesses are looking with great enthusiasm into reducing costs for many reasons: increased dividend to shareholders, increased profit margin to report at year end, to return into bonus to staff, or simply to remove so-called “security theatre”, a presence’s sake.  What this means is that any cost that is not considered “business critical” is shaved and this includes the traditional forms of security.  It is also looking into the removal of organic security and risk management as these can all be done via third-party suppliers who offer the services with the ability to cancel if found to be good money after bad.

The end of the in-house security team?

But where is the line drawn between the capability of the third-party supplier and the internal knowledge of the corporate security team?  Are we, in the physical world, now redundant?  Has our time finally come?

Excluding contracts, typically with government, where physical or protective requirements are mandated, more and more business sectors are looking very closely at the benefits of having a non-cyber, security function within their structure.  Many, including some well-known names, are simply removing or not including it at all.  Is this right?

Cost-benefit analysis is usually the culprit when the hatchet man/person comes-a-calling at the desk of the corporate security manager. Either in removal of designated space that can be used by another profit-generating function, through to the savings in pay/IT/resources et al.  Very often an argument that is difficult to challenge.

The fine art of corporate security

What do we bring to the table that cannot be obtained elsewhere and for a reduced cost?  Do the years of experience within a business, or the profession, not count for something?  Is the understanding and capability of identifying issues, mitigating them before they reach the business and its people, something that is not quantifiable in this world of litigation?  What about changes in legislation that require greater use of security to protect the building user and visitor; does this not count?

Corporate security is a fine art of understanding the risk appetite, the threat to those you are employed to protect and the ability for the business to agree to pay for the controls.  Without significant and recognisable threats to the general public or business, the ever-present problem of convincing the newer generation of business leaders that there is a threat to the country, the sector(s) we operate in or the way we do business, gets larger every day.  A number of years ago, I had it explained to me by a member of the C-Suite that because there are no terrorist acts going on around the business areas, “there is no real need for you to be here”.  Yet again, someone who forgets the benefits that we bring to the business.

As business enablers, we bring to the table confidence in whom they are engaging with and how to assist in bringing that product to fruition.  We provide intelligence-based solutions, with a due-diligence background screening of prospective engagements that will give the business leaders the ability to operate with the sureness that the shared operational, legal and ethical focuses are in place.  We do this through a much different lens (never rose-tinted) and do this very well, in full confidence and discretion.

Add-ons such as travel security, emergency planning, events and front-of- house (FoH) functions are all included in the package.  In many cases electronic reception capabilities are growing in capacity, accuracy and functionality; simply not providing an FoH service at all is increasing, much to the detriment of the “visitor’s journey”!  A similar juxtaposition to an electric vehicle being charged by a coal-powered supply – has the change been fully prepared and thought out?

As we are seeing, since the return from the imposed national restrictions for the COVID-19 pandemic, the developing imposition of the return to the office/site along with the return to face-to-face operations cannot be fully managed by remote means.  We, as security professionals, need to ensure that our business leaders understand we are a crucial function of their ability to operate, providing duty of care to their employees, contractors and visitors. With the changes in the laws current and anticipated, the requirement to protect all within the business confines is becoming paramount.

The provision of a safe and secure workplace is both a legal and moral right, which we in protective security provide; it cannot be done without the fully embedded security professional and a well-managed, motivated organisation.  This costs money and is the cost of doing business that needs to be ingrained into all business decisions, regardless of the size of the business.

Rod Stobie MSyI, RISC, M.ISRM, DBCI

Adanac Services