This is what Colin Culleton told a recent Skills for Security-hosted event on reducing risk in retail through safer intervention.
This is a subject I feel passionately about and the only topic I’ve spoken on for a good number of years. This is also because I’m not a good speaker but if nothing else I can speak with some experience on the worst that can happen if businesses don’t implement best practise in the area of conflict management, arrest and detection. For background, I worked as store detective (SD) for the first three years of my career. I was good at catching thieves but it’s fair to say that there were some rich pickings to be had. There were no means of deterrent and prevention was not something the team I worked in had considered.<br><br>In 1983 the Home Office conducted a detailed piece of research on the SD activities and persons detained by the store detectives at HMV in Oxford Street. This was the first time I began to think about the alternatives to detection and arrest of shop thieves and I have been indebted to Paul Ekblom of the Home Office who managed this research throughout my career. It was some time before I was in a position to genuinely influence the policy in HMV but I implemented a gradual replacement of store detectives with high profile, uniform loss prevention officers (LPOs) from 1995 onwards. The LPOs were able to make arrests but they were encouraged to use this as a last resort and only when all attempts to permanently deter shop thieves from our stores had been exhausted.<br><br>HMV were in the middle of a significant expansion and we were often the catalyst for new radio networks or crime reduction partnerships and I am pleased to say that the shrinkage results reduced consistently through this period and between 1998 and 2009 the results were under 0.50 per cent of retail sales for all but one year. We benefited greatly from loss prevention focused tasking on stock receipt accuracy, internal risk and cash losses, aided by the fact LPOs were not spending great deals of time with detained shop thieves.<br><br>On December 18, 2006 in Norwich the worst event in HMV’s long history occurred when an 18 year old drug dealer was detained for theft of a £15.99 CD and after a period of detention and a violent struggle, he stabbed and killed a loss prevention officer, Paul Cavanagh. I am unable to discuss the full circumstances as it may still be subject to civil claims but what I can share with you is that this tragic event could easily have been prevented with better training and best practise. The impact on Paul’s family, friends and colleagues was immense. Paul’s fiancée was pregnant with their first child and Paul never got to see his beautiful (now three-year-old) daughter.<br><br>I spent a considerable time liaising with the police, the Health and Safety Executive, shopping centre management, insurers and colleagues in the months following this terrible incident. We implemented a non-arrest policy in all stores and conducted thorough risk assessments of all stores, focusing in particular on the detention area. Maybo proved to be great partners during this period, providing knowledgeable, sound advice and completing independent store risk assessments that aided HMV in implementing a proportionate response. Consultation with our 520 plus LPOs identified some issues with store managers views on how to best measure the contribution of LPOs and we identified some objections to adopting a complete non-arrest policy. We disappointingly parted company with a handful of LPOs who did not feel that they could support and implement the policy.<br><br>The most alarming statistic to emerge in the review and risk assessment period was the lack of information being collated about the circumstances of arrests and detentions. Arrests were being made with high risk factors but centrally we had no knowledge of these. It is the right of every head of loss prevention to determine and implement policies that best suit their business but I am surprised and disappointed that there remain league tables for the most prolific store detectives, who are lauded as the ‘Super Heroes’. I have recently seen league tables, or the ‘Hall of Fame’ that identify individual store detectives who have caught 95 shop thieves in one month – 95 occasions where he put himself, the general public and his colleagues at risk! I would be very surprised if the store manager and the person responsible for health and safety in this retailer would be able to say that the circumstances of each of these arrests was known? There will always be determined shop thieves for whom arrest and criminal sanctions is the best option but this should be like most smart profit protection solutions – intelligence led. Catching one prolific shop thief, with evidence of his activities documented and supplied to the police will have far more impact locally than measuring the benefit of store detectives by volume of arrests.<br><br>The key message therefore from me is to use this excellent best practise guide to review your existing policies and procedures around arrests and detentions. Ensure that you understand the insured ‘status’ of third parties – store detectives from other retailers, centre guards etc if they are assisting with arrests in your stores. Please ensure you at the very least have a process in place to monitor the volume of arrests and to review the circumstances of each arrest, ensuring that incidents of violence are recorded and investigated.<br><br>About Colin Culleton: In 2009 he left HMV after 29 years at the retailer, where he was head of risk and loss prevention, to join retail security contract company Cardinal Group.
