In the last couple of years Professional Security has published accounts from Wilson Chowdhry of AA Security, a guarding firm based in Ilford, about changes in manned guarding. Now that the Essex-based firm has just gained Approved Contractor Status from the SIA, he ponders what the status means and can mean, and what else his firm does to prosper in what he calls a ‘tornado of legislative change’.
Why did you go for approved status (it is, officially at least, only voluntary and not compulsory)?
AA Security Ltd opted to apply for SIA ACS recognising the impact such an accreditation will have on a market that has become significantly aware of the increasing regulations imposed within our sector. The tarnished reputation of the industry created a need for substantial reform to beget the return of consumer faith. By espousing the ethical culture detailed within the framework of the ACS scheme, the SIA have developed a system that in time will improve and enhance not only the service provision of security sector firms, but their interaction with the community and the environment by adopting a sustainable development paradigm corresponding with the European Foundation of Quality Management. Many of our existing clients were aware of our progress towards the SIA ACS.
However, if this scheme is to be succesful the SIA must endeavour to promulgate the concept amongst the clients’ sector to imbue a necessity within the sector to comply with this model. If the SIA fail to adopt a policy of explicit knowledge many firms will revert to their habit of unprofessional provision of minimal requirements.
How did you find it, doing the necessary to get the status – how much work?
As a company we have been driven by our commitment to professional development of our company and its employees. This placed us at a distinct advantage when applying for Approved Contractor Status. In fact within three months of our application we had developed our existing BS EN ISO 9001:2000 procedures to allow for UKAS accreditation. During the two- day audit with the National Security Inspectorate our assessor
indicated to us that he had noted pertinent factors within our operational practices that would be regarded as best practice and as such above and beyond the SIA minimum criteria. An example of this is our subscription to an external customer satisfaction survey and report on a quarterly basis. The feedback from this is coupled with our own internal quality assurance process from which data is interpolated every quarter and a report is produced for discussion at our quarterly review meetings or AGM. Attendance at the QRM includes all senior and lower level management and a random selection of five security operatives invited to participate. Each attendant at the meeting is empowered with one vote to determine new precedents or alterations to current procedure; this enables an holistic practical approach to our decision making process. How many other security sector companies can indicate such bold client/employee centred management processes? Very few I believe! Our SIA application passed first time of asking, for which I cannot say I am surprised as we were very expectant.
What do you hope to get out of it – practically, and in terms of reputation?
Practically the process of adopting the standard has encouraged our employees of the viability of our business to adapt to the current legislative and economic climate within the industry. Furthermore, we have earmarked ourselves as pioneers in the industry passing within the first phase of the introduction of this nascent scheme, and I emphatically believe this will impact significantly in respect to our reputation and marketing potential. If the SIA market the ACS scheme effectively large organisations will soon ensure that such accrediation is requisite prior to acceptance on tendering lists. Considering the very stringent and ethical assessment criteria this scheme encapsulates this could only be of benefit to our industry. Another obvious advantage of this scheme is the ability, through the scheme to deploy a 50 per cent ratio of fully licensed staff and those with licenses impending. This sets approved firms in an envious position when compared to less meticulous firms that now find themselves without the capability to expand their workforce to meet the need of growing client portfolios.
Is there any view of what customers are making of these changes in guarding – happy, sad or indifferent?
We have always provided an exemplary security service with security officers trained to NVQ level 2 at our own City and Guilds Training and Examinations Centre. We introduced this process well before the SIA took any particular interest in the security sector. Our client feedback has always been positive and we boast a 100pc ratio of client retention since the year 2000, and a staff retention of 10pc which is well below the industry average. Our local press is well awre of our company as we have a significant level of community interaction, all local media have promoted our achievement.
Lastly, in the July issue of Professional Security (page 80) there’s an interview with Stuart Lowden of Wilson James who sees two sorts of change happening in the guarding sector – passive change, what’s happening to guarding whether you like it or not, and active change, change you can make for your company with things like approved contractor status. Does that sound about right from where you’re sitting?
For us as a firm we encourage all "passive change" and "active change" excited by the opportunity to achieve excellence. My advice to smaller firms hoping to survive in this tornado of legislative change, is for them to recognise that there will soon be no recourse but to except that the concept of active change is just a short lived delusion. Without a doubt, to compete in the progressively regulated industry with its severe penalties for non-compliance it will be difficult to survive, however, when you take into context the newly introduced client savvy (promulgated by the SIA) able to source preffered contractors via the SIA website, it may soon be nigh on impossible to continue without attaining appropriate standards (whether acredited or not), for operational practices.
