How to better screen job candidates, and to make sure you get the right officer, and the officer knows this is the job for him (or her)? Take them for a walk.
If you have – as the University of Bristol did – 180 replying to a security officer advertisement, as head of security Jerry Woods and ops manager Tim Moore told the Association of University Chief Security Officers (AUCSO) conference, how to narrow that, and be sure you have selected the right ones and not simply those who look good on paper? Tim Moore described the ‘stage one interview’ – walking the candidates around, ‘at quite a fast pace’, in the dark in the evening around some buildings, “as they would be doing in the job. We would see whether they engaged with us, whether they were clever enough to take note.” Tim taking the group round would point out various buildings. “We would labour a few of the points for later on. We found just the walking around weeding out a few people. One chap was afraid of heights – “ as the group found when the stairs reached the third floor. But for the walk-around, neither employee nor employer would have realised this was a stumbling-block, until the actual work. “Some people decided at the end of the walk, 25 to 30 minutes, they knew already the job wasn’t for them. At the end of that we would go into a room and have a written test, where we would ask them to report on the patrol they just did. We would ask specific things on the points we laboured.” The testers would give a short dictation to see if the candidates could take notes, quickly; and a small test on computer, to see if a candidate could cut and paste something on computer; and each candidate was given a score. The candidates would be told beforehand to wear sensible shoes; so if they didn’t, that showed they were not paying attention. A couple of supervisers would ask people to keep up; so if any candidates fell behind, that suggested they were not physically fit enough. That short written test was enough to show that some people had obviously not filled in their own application form; they could hardly read or write. So by the time of the job interview proper, candidates and employer alike had a good idea of the other. Jerry Woods added that of the original 180, the uni recruited two and put four on a waiting list (which was a genuine waiting list, as some candidates said they were willing to wait, and indeed did join, a year or more later). One member of the audience took up the point of officers having to be fit. An institution had given security staff across all teams three months to come up to a fitness standard; HR had seen the requirement and said there was nothing wrong with it, if the role required fitness.
Talking of fitness, the security department did an exercise with the uni’s sports department, seeking to improve the well-being of officers, and to tackle staff sickness. Staff went on a one-day well-being course, for example how to eat healthier, and how to quit smoking (if they wanted to). For instance, to sleep better after a night shift of 12 hours, you should avoid fatty snacks such as chocolate. Hence the security department provided fresh fruit and juice, and nuts, and healthy cereals such as porridge. For the couple of thousand pounds it cost, it was appreciated by staff, and was worth it for the falling in staff time off through sickness. The department awaits a study into the evidence of the scheme, though there is the ‘feel-good’ factor. It’s one thing being awake and more alert; you have to know your way around the campus, and if necessary take the 999 services to a scene. Buildings are forever changing. As Tim Moore said: “It’s a lot of effort to keep up to date.” Officers are given a booklet with details of buildings; from the full names to location of fire panels. Once a year, the department will test staff on a random location and ask officers to go to some other building from there. Officers can make sure on their patrols that they improve their site knowledge. To know the campus, to be table to work in the control room, could take 12 months.
Woods and Moore went into other aspects of the security department: such as single patrollers (on foot or in a vehicle) rather than double. To have single patrols spreads resources more (although it may run the risk of giving a false impression that there are more security resources than there really are!). They stressed risk assessment, to be sure that single patrols were a safe practice. While officers patrolling in pairs may chat and be over-confident, a single patrollers might be more circumspect. As for the risk assessment, given Bristol had 300 buildings it was felt better to patrol the high-risk buildings, rather than patrol all buildings but poorly. Should a building have an internal patrol at all, if its perimeter is secure? Why send someone into a building, if that involves taking the intruder alarm off; might that actually increase risk? As Woods and Moore pointed out, here security and police forces share an issue; that someone may say they ‘never see a bobby on the beat’? But if the data shows no or low risk, does that justify a patrol, rather than putting resources into response to alarm activations? If insurance companies dictate terms, that suggest the auditors are less skilled than you are, you could move insurers. Some buildings may be open 24 hours; some rooms may be alarmed, while communal areas are accessible. It all adds up, as Tim Moore said, to an officer job that’s interesting and varied: “Anyone can leave and go as a superviser elsewhere.” The security department can point to reduced crime and staff productivity more than doubled.
Professional Security asked Tim Moore afterwards about the healthy eating. He said: “Any guardforce is better being healthy than not. If you have eaten your sandwiches already, what do you do? Go to a vending machine and get a bar of chocolate or a bag of crisps.” If you can have a bowl of porridge instead, that’s more healthy. And as for the walk-through, Tim Moore made the point that the employer can find people who prove adaptable, enthusiastic, and good at the job, who might not at a glance look suitable; and vice versa. For instance, the burly man who may seem ideal for the job, may prove to be afraid of the dark.
Pictured, looking up Park Street in Bristol, is the Wills Memorial Building, the venue for the 2011 AUCSO conference.
