Seeking approval
Published: 25 May, 2010
Since its introduction in 2006, the Approved Contractor Scheme has had a wide ranging impact. More than 127,100 licensed operatives now work for an approved contractor. But what does this mean for the private security industry and for its end users in retail?
British law requires security guards and surveillance officers – any individual working in the private security industry – to be fully licensed by the Security Industry Authority (SIA). But for a long time, no governmental stamp of approval existed for the companies providing these services.
The introduction of the Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS) by the SIA in 2006 changed all that. Private security companies were able to demonstrate through an independent assessor that they had met quality standards in all aspects of business operations, from management and customer service to how well they treat employees and protect the public at large.
The SIA is required by the Private Security Industry Act 2001 to establish a “system of inspection for providers of security services, under which those organisations who satisfactorily meet the agreed standards may be registered as approved, and may advertise themselves as such”. The ACS works to fulfil these requirements, being based on a wide range of business improvement models including the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM).
“During the development stages, we considered which forms and standards were most appropriate to the private security industry,” says Andrew Shephard, assistant director of the ACS. “There were existing standards already in use, but they only dealt with small corners of the industry. The SIA needed something very broad.”
The EFQM asked all the right questions so was used as a framework for the criteria set out in the ACS. “It focuses on results and outcomes as well as the process and best intent,” continues Shephard. “There’s a big difference between the intentions of an initiative and the measured outcome, which other standards don’t always distinguish between.”
Unlike SIA licensing, the ACS is not compulsory. Security providers can apply for a ‘self- assessment workbook’, which details the 89 requirements that contractors must meet, before opting to pay for an independent assessment. This way, companies won’t have to pay for a test they might fail – another way of encouraging involvement in the scheme.
So why not make it compulsory? “A voluntary scheme was always Parliament’s intention when they drafted it,” begins Shephard, “but it’s my view that by having a combination of compulsory and voluntary regulation, we can establish a higher standard among companies. ACS is a higher standard.”
It’s certainly easier for the SIA to develop a broader and more complex regulatory tool when the scheme itself is voluntary. “The ACS covers a lot of ground that compulsory standards can’t because they have to be simpler. Monitoring includes meetings, forums, and approved assessing bodies visiting every company at least once a year. We work through regulatory bodies in other fields, which covers a wider range of criteria and gives the scheme a high level of professionalism,” Shephard explains.
Another bonus to a voluntary scheme is willing participation from the security providers themselves. As with any regulatory system, companies are relied on to provide a certain amount of information on management and operations. This can leave room for misinformation. But providers that submit to being assessed want their stamp of approval to mean something to clients – in other words, it’s in their own interest to keep up the level of the standard and the ACS’s reputation as a reliable and accurate yardstick.
And the assessors are a key part of this reputation. After a re-tender process at the end of 2009, the SIA appointed five assessing bodies ranging from well known certification companies like the global BSI, to smaller organisations specialising in one or two areas of the security industry. “It’s a useful choice for approved contractors – they can select an assessor who’s most in line with their type of service.”
With 655 UK companies recognised under the ACS, around 65 per cent of SIA-licensed operatives now work for an approved contractor. The scheme is clearly becoming popular despite – or perhaps because of – its voluntary status. The Shield Guarding Company, which provides security services to shopping centres with over 7m sq ft of retail, signed up to the ACS believing that an industry-wide regulatory system would improve overall standards. “The Shield Guarding Company has always felt that proper regulation is of benefit to ourselves, our clients and the image of the industry as a whole,” asserts Lance Stanbury, operations director at the company.
According to Stanbury, increasing transparency and promoting good quality and value can only be a good thing. “For the first time, clients in the retail industry had a minimum standard by which to judge companies,” he continues, and with only 10 per cent of companies in the ACS scoring above 70, Shield’s score of 131 certainly gives it extra leverage.
The criteria didn’t waver much from Shield’s own goals and standards: “The ACS looks for appropriate HR policies and assesses the treatment of staff. Shield already had an established tradition of providing additional benefits and staff welfare initiatives, and maintained a management structure almost entirely composed of ex-security officers promoted through our ranks.”
As a large company with sizeable profit margins, Shield has little problem putting such initiatives in place. So the real benefit of ACS comes from a higher level of visibility: Shield can prove its standing in the industry, and other companies must either fight to catch up or step out of the running.
“The auditing process provided us with a framework within which we could constantly improve and incorporate best practice. The effect this had was to force other firms to catch up and place the inevitable expenditure which comes from maintaining high service levels within their own margins.”
And why does Shield want its competitors to come under harsher scrutiny? Because quality and not lowest price should be at the forefront of the industry, explains Stanbury. “As a company attempting to provide a premium service, there’s a need to demonstrate this differentiation during the procurement process – especially if your prices are being severely undercut.
“The temptation was for clients to go with a cheaper contractor making unverifiable claims about back office support and infrastructure. But it has become far harder for companies to avoid proper investment in their processes and models without being exposed.
“In the balance of quality and price in the judgement of value, the ACS has made it easier for clients to focus on quality,” he adds.
Where the scheme falls down is, in Stanbury’s opinion, in failing to properly “differentiate between security companies actively seeking constant improvement and those satisfied to merely retain an ACS registration”. Point-collecting is not the be all and end all: retail clients can’t necessarily pinpoint innovation and forward-thinking from a list of scores.
To overcome this flaw, The Shield Guarding Company publishes a detailed explanation of its ACS scoring, from the benchmarks achieved to how it went about meeting the standards in each area of business. “The scoring, as it is, at least gives some independent indication to the stakeholders as to the performance capabilities of your company,” begins Stanbury, “but the numbers alone aren’t quite enough. Providing trustworthy information to clients regarding the scope and quality of their contractors will only result in increased standards.”
He goes on to suggest that part of the ACS’s external auditing process should include making reports publicly available online, referring to each company’s “ethos and culture, strengths and the possible areas of improvement. The result would leave end users, staff, shareholders, clients and prospective clients better informed.”
Publicly displaying the finer details of a company’s audit would allow quality to better compete with pricing as motivation for award of contract. This is something every security company both large and small could advocate, because competitive pricing overshadows a reputation based on quality of service, particularly in tough economic conditions.
“In the current financial climate, the increased pressure to reduce costs is felt across all industries and at all levels. By making full use of the ACS and increasing its value as a tangible measure, it will act as a counterforce against the drive to cut price which if unchecked will inevitably lead to a drop in standards across many companies,” argues Stanbury. “This would surely help improve standards across the industry and also provide a stronger incentive-based tool with which the SIA gets to regulate the industry.”
But Stanbury applauds the SIA for what it has set out to do, and Shield’s participation in the scheme alongside many other companies shows a commitment to long-term, industry-wide improvement. “The introduction of the scheme into the industry has been a fluid process. So far it has had a positive effect and there is no reason to suspect this trend won’t continue as it develops.
“The ACS raises standards across the industry and consequently raises the standing of security as a service worthy of expenditure and an occupation worth pursuing. Obviously these factors can assist in increasing revenue, but raising standards in the security industry has positive implications for the communities and organisations that utilise or experience it.”
In the retail sector – shopping centres in particular – the quality of a security system has a serious impact on every member of the community. Having a structured regulatory system in place, therefore, is crucial to the safety of thousands who would otherwise be vulnerable to the various crimes that take place in malls, from muggings and theft to even greater threats such as terrorism.
At the SIA, Shephard recognises the value of having retailers on board. “We’re well aware that many national chains only use approved contractors, and that these retailers were the first to recognise the benefits,” he says. “We welcome this and want to see it continue into other chains and independents.”
And there are additional benefits for retail developments. The SIA run events for approved contractors, where experts are drafted in to talk about relevant issues. “Last year we had the Metropolitan Police talking about Operation Fairway,” adds Shephard, referring to a key intelligence-gathering operation to detect and prevent terrorist activity in potentially vulnerable buildings, like shopping centres.
It might have some way to go, but the intentions behind the Approved Contractor Scheme – to emphasize quality and police bad practice – is already building confidence in the industry, from both the retailer and the provider’s point of view.
