by Edward M. Roche, Ph.D., J.D., Henley-Putnam University
If you recently saw James Cameron’s new movie AVATAR, then perhaps you are thinking of having your own personal avatar living somewhere in a virtual world. Many people are doing it, so why not you?
Let’s look at the basics: A virtual world is a computer-based three-dimensional simulation intended for its users to inhabit and interact via avatars. Avatars are three-dimensional graphical representations of people, much like video game characters. They are controlled remotely by their owner. Inside a virtual world, the one’s avatar expressed the participant’s identity and personality.
Virtual worlds started out as a multi-party gaming platform. Individuals would be connected to each other over a network. They would be able to interact in a cybernetic reflection of the real world, complete with buildings, terraces, roadways, and other people. Today’s virtual worlds have libraries, universities, research institutes, facsimiles of the finest museums, and wonderful demonstrations of complex scientific phenomena.
Perhaps like many, you are skeptical about virtual worlds, but the facts point in a different direction. Although the experience at first is strange, you probably will be surprised at how quickly your mind makes the adjustment to living in a virtual reality.
Owners tend to quickly identify with their avatar. It has been reported that most users experience a sense of tele-presence, particularly when other avatars are nearby and can be engaged in some type of social communication. This “mind meld” effect is so great that some medical researchers are finding success in pain therapy for burn patients when they are plugged in.
Current technology is not as advanced as seen in James Cameron’s new movie AVATAR, but experiments are being conducted in treatment of war veterans and paraplegics who might benefit from being able to live “whole” again.
Virtual worlds are one of the most exotic and exciting technologies to come along in a long time. As measured by both the number of participants, and the scale and scope of complexity, they continue to grow rapidly. The number of participants has exceeded the population of some smaller European countries. Some argue that the virtual world platform is the richest and most complex collaborative environment ever to come into existence in cyberspace. It is the ultimate 3-D Internet social networking and social media platform.
Why are virtual worlds important? Are they merely giant online games, or something more? What, if anything, do they have to do with crime and terrorism? How do they aid the dark hand of conspiracy?
The problem is that when globalization, technology and terrorism are combined, we see the emergence of new and rather dark possibilities that must be accounted for. These “worlds” are full of pornographic sites, sex dens, recreations of slave societies, vampire societies, witchcraft, and criminal activities. Recent research has suggested a link between some activities in virtual worlds and international terrorism.
Virtual worlds, offer government and law enforcement an important source of intelligence. After all, international criminal syndicates and terrorists are using virtual worlds to coordinate their activities. But in order to leverage this new source, it will be necessary both to understand how this new form of social media technology works, and to possess the training to exploit it.
The threat of criminal conspiracy and international terrorism is enough to pay attention. Crime scenes can be virtual as well as real. A response from the government is required. Intelligence and law enforcement must locate suitable personnel and integrate monitoring of virtual worlds into their standard surveillance and intelligence-gathering activities.
The intelligence implications of virtual world platform will be governed by their underlying technological infrastructure. Consequently, an appreciation of the relationship between technology and intelligence capabilities in this environment is based on several factors: First, what may be done by actors on all sides within these virtual world platform is enabled solely through the different applications and functions on the menu; Second, how these systems are designed and provisioned gives a clue as to how they might be compromised by either criminals or terrorists; Third, the underlying technology provides also a type of landscape through which law enforcement and intelligence communities charged with monitoring and responding to emerging threats can accomplish their work.
What is the vision for the future? Virtual worlds require 24×7 monitoring. Agents must be able to work in a variety of languages. Many of the same techniques used to infiltrate criminal groups in the real world will be used in the virtual world. It will be necessary to shield the identities of those involved. For foreign-based virtual worlds, the challenges are stiffer. Besides foreign language skills and concealed identities, the analyst must be able to communicate well enough to blend in and socially interact with those they meet. New types of dossiers and record keeping systems must be integrated with social media analysis. A new art of surveillance and cultivation of contacts must be leveraged. A watch system will be set up to trigger alarms when suspicious activity is detected.
Other countries, particularly the People’s Republic of China are moving ahead. It is not too late for the United States, but the clock is ticking.
Edward M. Roche, Ph.D., J.D., is the director of scientific intelligence for Barraclough Ltd
By Ravi Acharya, associate director of B2B marketing for TeleNav
While many security managers are skilled at ensuring a watchful eye is kept on people and property to meet client needs, these same managers may be neglecting to keep a watchful eye on the efficiency of their very own operations and staff. With the emergence of new wireless technologies and mobile communications tools, security managers have access to more information regarding the daily activities of their mobile personnel and property than ever before. Security firms of all sizes must use this information to do more with fewer resources and maintain a successful business despite the current economic environment. Technology that may have once been viewed as “nice to have” has now become a key component to ensuring security firms maintain a competitive advantage and survive in this challenging marketplace.
To maintain that competitive advantage, many security firms are adopting an emerging wireless technology called Mobile Resource Management. MRM combines GPS tracking, navigation, wireless forms and timecard entry into a single product installed on security officers’ mobile phones or company property such as patrol vehicles. Using MRM products on their mobile devices, security officers can clock in and out for their shift, receive turn-by-turn directions to the patrol site, access details about the current assignment, keep management informed of any emergency situations with the push of a button and capture incident information right from the phone. Management can easily access information on the real-time locations of officers to ensure they are guarding their assigned area, dispatch the nearest officer in emergency situations, monitor company vehicle and equipment usage, ensure timecard accuracy, and improve customer communication.
MRM products allow mobile security personnel to spend less time traveling to and from the office to transfer paperwork or receive job information and more time in the field providing security for clients. Management benefits from officers that are more productive, travel more cost effectively and are more accountable to both the company and clients. These benefits, combined with the low cost of MRM products, deliver a strong ROI that security managers will see soon after implementation.
A Mobile Workforce Presents Challenges to Security Directors
Most security managers are well aware of the challenges that come with managing a workforce that operates in the field, often with limited supervision. It can be extremely difficult for management to ensure employees are completing work within company guidelines and performing their assigned duties. Currently, many security firms have limited processes in place to hold their mobile personnel accountable.
Additionally, current supervision methods in use by security firms require physical patrols by management to confirm personnel are actually at their assigned locations. This not only takes a substantial amount of time, but also drives up costs for vehicle fuel and maintenance. Eliminating the man hours and equipment costs of these supervisor patrols can drastically improve the efficiency of a security operation and reduce operating costs.
Security managers must also ensure their mobile personnel are accountable to customers. The security industry is unique in that many times the only person who may be able to confirm if a patrol was conducted is the actual officer conducting the patrol. With the exception of random supervisor patrols or video surveillance, management and customers have limited ways of knowing if the assigned security duty is being completed. This uncertainty can cause issues for security management when disputes arise with customers regarding the level of service they’re receiving.
MRM Offers Managers a Solution
While the challenges facing security managers are not easy to tackle, MRM products help them address these challenges in efficient, affordable ways and often lead to large operational cost savings. MRM products combine the latest in GPS, wireless and Web technologies to allow security officers to do more from the field and give management an unprecedented look into the daily operations of their business and staff. By implementing MRM products into their operations, security managers can improve efficiency throughout their business.
Improve Employee Accountability
MRM products provide location data that enables management to monitor the location of remote personnel using a simple Web-based interface. In real-time, managers can locate all deployed security officers and verify that they are securing their assigned location. This eliminates the need for physical supervisor patrols, significantly decreasing man hours and equipment costs associated with these patrols. A California-based security firm reported annual savings of $120,000 after introducing MRM and reducing supervisor patrols.
Managers can also use MRM products to be alerted when an officer enters or exits a pre-determined area, instantly letting them know when a specific geographical area is or is not secure. Other alerts include speeding alerts for officers using company vehicles and notification if an employee forgets to clock in or turns the application off during their work shift.
Improve Customer Service and Dispute Resolution
With exact employee locations provided by MRM products, security managers can provide customers with detailed reports of current and past locations of security personnel. This is not only helpful to provide an accurate ETA when a customer asks when an officer will arrive at the patrol site, but also when a customer disputes the service they received. With an easy to produce report, management can provide customers with an historical “breadcrumb” tracking view that will demonstrate the exact location of the officer during the disputed time frame.
Intelligent Dispatching Improves Response
With MRM products, dispatchers can locate security personnel through tracking their handheld devices, eliminating time wasted searching for employee locations. This enables dispatchers to easily send the closest employee to emergency situations or dispatch employees to new jobs based on their present location.
Fuel Conservation Saves Money
No matter what the cost per gallon, fuel will always be a significant expense for security companies that depend on vehicles to conduct patrols. A December 2007 study by the Aberdeen Group noted that MRM products offered the following benefits related to fuel consumption:
• 13.2% reduction in fuel costs
• 19.2% decrease in miles traveled
• 27.4% improvement in fleet utilization
Security companies can conserve fuel by efficiently dispatching employees in the field and eliminating unnecessary trips to and from the office. In addition, mobile personnel can reduce excess mileage using voice-guided, turn-by-turn GPS navigation provided by some MRM products.
Wireless Timecards Reduce Payroll Expenses
Wireless timecards eliminate paper-based processes and reduce error-prone, time-consuming data entry. Security companies using wireless timecard capabilities have indicated the process has improved time and attendance, and reduced payroll costs. MRM solutions provide detailed wireless timecard functionality that includes labor codes, tracking of overtime and double time, and can seamlessly integrate with existing payroll systems.
Conclusion
Security managers are faced with a number of challenges when it comes to managing a mobile workforce. With the integration of MRM, managers can outfit staff with wireless devices that have a broad range of features and uses that drive improvements in efficiency and productivity throughout the business, both in the field and in the back office. MRM solutions help security companies better manage their mobile workforce and stay ahead of the competition even in challenging economic times.
Ravi Acharya is associate director of B2B marketing for TeleNav. He oversees product marketing for TeleNav’s Mobile Resource Management solutions developed for the enterprise. For more information, visit www.telenav.com.
How New Analysis Methods Can Enable CSOs and Directors to
Reduce Costs While Raising Security Efficiency and Effectiveness
By Ty Richmond, Chief Operating Officer, Andrews International
From corporate enterprises to government agencies, chief security officers and directors are being asked to protect more with fewer resources. In contrast, industry vendors are interested in selling products and services that increase a security manager’s budget. It’s a contradiction that existed before the current recession, though there’s no denying today’s business climate has placed far greater pressure on those tasked with attaining the highest levels of cost-efficiency…without sacrificing security quality.
Yet, this seemingly insurmountable challenge can be overcome through new analysis techniques that comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of security operations with a simultaneous goal of reducing costs and improving efficiency and effectiveness. At Andrews International, we have developed a new methodology that matches security resources to risk profiles, maximizes the integration of uniformed guards and electronic security assets, and accurately projects return on investments (ROI) through industry-specific financial models.
Already, the analysis has been used to evaluate enterprise security programs across several key industries, including high-tech and manufacturing. According to one Fortune 500 global manufacturer, the methodology identified actionable improvements that will enable it to reduce uniformed guard costs by 20 percent across its U.S. headquarters and manufacturing site, all while enhancing the strength of its security operations.
In its simplest form, when evaluating the total cost of ownership (TCO) of an organization’s security budget, the process allows for a reduction of operating costs associated with the convergence of security human resources and electronic technologies.
The Traditional View
Traditionally, organizations periodically review their uniform security officer costs. Efforts to reduce costs vary depending upon if security personnel are in-house staff or outsourced. Most organizations utilize contracted services and are faced with the challenge of continually reducing the cost of the contract itself. This includes negotiating with the current supplier, obtaining discounts for term commitments, competitively bidding the contract, aggregating multiple facilities into a corporate agreement for volume discounts, and utilizing a “reverse auction.”
Unfortunately, when faced with creating value beyond the basics, and doing this in a progressive manner, very few security professionals challenge themselves or their suppliers to assess efficiencies in an integrated TCO approach. Uniformed security service providers, technology manufacturers and integrators typically have different agendas and see “their world” only, which doesn’t usually include the integration of their respective areas or making sacrifices in the best interest of the client. In other words, “enterprise or total solution” analysis tends to be more silo oriented around their service area only.
The fact that there is a subjective element to providing “good security” makes the challenge of determining cost effectiveness even more difficult. The security industry’s general practice is to determine the overall security risk by evaluating the value of the asset being protected, its potential threat and vulnerability, with mitigation measures then applied to reduce the overall risk.
Factors such as the replacement cost to an organization of an asset, and the operational cost of being without it, can help determine the measures necessary for effective security. Management or consultants then figure appropriate staff levels for locations, security equipment required, as well as the architectural elements and correct processes and procedures needed for efficiency. With new construction or remodeling, security measures can remain the same for years with no changes in staffing levels, procedures or equipment. Even if there are eventually changes, these may occur as unrelated elements where one facet is changed without considering its impact on another.
Unfortunately, security organizations do not always know where they stand relative to industry peers. Sometimes, a steady state-of-operations settles in where the same uniform hours are purchased every year under contract with cost reductions obtained through a reduction in billing rates. Then again, security officer and staff assignments put in place to address temporary needs often turn into standing long-term assignments and add to the total hours of security staffing.
Neither is security technology immune to waste. Budgets dictate investments and recurring costs, yet, the initial price of a technology may not include an analysis of ROI over the life of the equipment. In some cases, technology may have been deployed with the idea that an upgrade would follow at a later date as funds became available. Often, those funds fail to appear and a less-than-effective solution remains in place. This can also lead to redundancy in staffing and technology. Over-implementation is also fairly common with technology, and, equipment may be purchased without thought to recurring maintenance and support costs, placing a further burden on a budget.
Architecture can play a role in evaluating security costs, too. For instance, a security plan may have been implemented at the time of a building’s design. However, needs change over time, and when an organization can participate in the design process — enabling security and architects to work together — significant savings can result. Unfortunately, security management often deals with existing limitations on access, perimeter, lighting, parking, and other dimensions of a building. Remodeling and changes in construction during occupancy can raise additional challenges, especially if security managers are not a participant in the process. Disparate systems add to the dilemma of reducing costs.
The Big Picture
The methodology we’ve developed follows a planned approach designed to provide the “big picture;” an evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiencies of enterprise security operations used in the deployment and integration of uniformed security officers and electronic/technical security.
The goal of the process and the methodologies are as follows:
• Provide a protective solution commensurate with the identified risk profile and risk tolerance;
• Ensure enterprise security services are integrated, converged and operating effectively and efficiently; and
• Identify supporting financial models to show ROI, payback and other economic metrics that enable organizations to gain efficiencies and effectiveness in their use of these assets.
This process lays a roadmap and migration strategy designed to execute the desired benefits. It entails a comprehensive study of the enterprise security operating model to include a review of global, regional and local asset utilization based on the following methodology:
• Identification and evaluation of reasonably foreseeable internal or external threats for locations/site(s) and business operations.
• Study and assessment of location/site(s) vulnerability based on neighborhood and area crime environment.
• Assessment of uniformed security personnel deployment and utilization to further ensure the operation’s state of readiness.
• Assessment of uniformed security force policies, procedures, post orders, functional responsibilities and training programs to ensure the state of readiness for security events or emergency situations.
• Assessment of utilization and functionality of existing local and global command center operations.
• Assessment of existing electronic security measures for effectiveness in addressing location/site(s) and business exposure to identified threats/vulnerabilities.
• Evaluation of architectural elements such as landscaping, fencing, lighting, doors, windows and other access points.
• Identification of inadequate or obsolete equipment and systems in need of updating, replacement or re-deployment.
• Identification of opportunities to converge total security resources more effectively by blending and leveraging the benefits of technology and security personnel.
• Integration with other business functions (payroll, HR systems, etc.)
• Review of work processes using LEAN business practices to reduce, integrate and generally improve work flow throughout the operations.
• Presentation of financial models and scenarios to reduce security officer operating costs with technology in a more effective and efficient converged model.
The methodology inherently ties staffing, technology and their associated cost impact together with the effectiveness of each security measure. This allows organizations to arrive at an optimum model that improves the level of security while controlling costs, supported by an ability to accurately project resulting outcomes.
A New View
In addition to determining effectiveness and cost efficiency, our methodology process also has a toolbox of software programs deployed “post study” that can be used in creating a “security information fusion center.”
The result is a software platform that features an integrated view of the security operations and business program with numerous modules that allow an operations center to proactively monitor various aspects of a security program and gather information that supports risk mitigation. These modules encompass task areas involved in daily operations, incident tracking, data distribution, analysis and resource optimization.
Front-end process software is designed to screen, test and qualify personnel to work in a complex dispatch and security operations center environment. It uses customizable testing modules for evaluating personnel on key skills essential to each unique security scenario. To effectively manage a security operations center, and then take the next step to handle processes and systems for “strategy altering” intelligence, the entire team must operate with key communication, analysis and decision-making skill sets.
The back-end features risk-analysis software that integrates all components to allow the information and intelligence to reveal specific threats, vulnerabilities and mitigating solutions. This tool is the basis for the perpetual assessment process, aimed at continually improving risk mitigation strategy and resource optimization.
Living the Dream
Developments in enterprise risk management, and converged physical and logical security assets and value-driven software tools, have provided a significant platform for increased productivity and/or cost reduction opportunities. After all, success in security should not be measured by volume of staff hours or the newest trick technology, but by the overall effectiveness and value of the security solution.
The goal of our methodology is to integrate resources in a manner that enhances the security environment and allows personnel to function on a more professional, effective level. To that end, the analysis often results in recommendations for fewer hours provided by more qualified personnel, combined with technical resources. The outcome is overall cost savings and an improved level of security efficiency and effectiveness, enabling CSOs to live what has long seemed the illusive dream.
And that’s the ability to “protect more with less.”
Ty Richmond is the COO of Andrews International and co-creator of the company’s Security Asset Effectiveness and Efficiency Analysis. Previously, he held executive security posts for a number of Fortune 200 companies, including Agilent Technologies, where he was Senior Director of Security, overseeing operations in sixteen countries throughout Asia Pacific, and Hewlett-Packard, where he was Manager of Corporate Worldwide Security and Americas Security Manager. He also has worked as a security executive in several sectors including energy, consumer products, high-tech and now as the COO of a service provider.
by Mark Johnson, vice president & national practice leader, fraud and compliance and Elaine Carey, senior vice president & national director of investigations, Control Risks
You don’t have to be a fraud professional to know that the Madoff fraud cost billions. The media headlines scream about losses of $65 billion in the Madoff case and $8 billion in the Stanford case. Then there are the record Foreign Corrupt Practice Act fines levied by the Department of Justice that take one’s breath away – notably the Siemens fine of $1.6 billion last year. But none of these figures are remotely close to the true cost of any one of those frauds.
Fraud costs far, far more than just actual dollars lost, whether it is Enron or the corner family business where the bookkeeper has been skimming money for years.
The actual dollar loss of any single fraud suffered by an organization is just one part of the true cost. What the headlines don’t capture are the many other hard and soft costs of fraud. Just a few of these are management time and distraction from running the business, lawyers’ fees, reputation, lost market share, impaired ability to hire talent and retain talent. When it comes to violations of the FCPA, individual officers go to jail. And often stock price decline. At times the very viability of the organization is jeopardized. No fidelity bond can ever cover all these losses. Moreover, the chances of recovery of the actual stolen dollars are slim to none in most cases. Fraudsters spend their ill-gotten loot too quickly, and often the fraud schemes are discovered too late for the victim to have a chance to get meaningful restitution. In most cases the victim gets nothing or mere pennies on the dollar. And many times they don’t even get the satisfaction of someone being sent to jail for the crime.
Take your company’s annual revenues and figure out what 7% of that is. That is what fraud experts estimate your organization loses to fraud each year, according to the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE). The fraud may be as large as cooking the books or as small as employees calling friends around the globe and inflating travel expenses. In the United States alone fraud losses annually run $994 billion, which is 7% of U.S. gross domestic product according to the ACFE. But again these figures are based on known frauds and don’t include the very expensive “other” costs of fraud.
Fraud is a major corporate crisis and yet very few corporations treat it that way – until it is too late (think Enron, Arthur Andersen, Long Term Capital Management, Broadcom, Worldcom etc.). Frauds happen because something or many things are wrong in the corporation that allowed fraud to take root. Too often corporations ignore the small signs that a fraud cancer is growing until it has metastasized. Management should interpret fraud as a big flashing red light indicating that the business is in trouble, and react accordingly.
When a country manager for an American corporation in Russia can take a 40% kickback from each supplier, that business is not profitable. When the payroll run includes paychecks to ghost employees and is 50% higher than it should be, that business is hemorrhaging money. When a corporation fails to conduct enhanced due diligence on a senior hire and discovers years later that he has been funneling intellectual property to a competitor, it is too late – the company’s market share has already been badly eroded. When a shop floor supervisor for a government contractor ignores obvious drug use on the shop floor because “everyone does it,” is it really a surprise when the contract is lost due to defective manufacturing? It also raises another question - isn’t the fraud incident an indicator of much deeper rooted organizational problems? If the country manager in Russia can take 40% kickbacks from suppliers, what other criminal behavior is possible in the organization?
Fraud should be high on the list of triggers that convene a corporation’s crisis management team. Knowing that a fraud has the potential of major to extreme impact on the organization’s people, assets and reputation, strategic crisis management is the magic formula for coming through a crisis with the business intact along with share price, market share and reputation. The key goal to crisis management is to reduce the impact of the negative event, whether it is fraud or another major threat. Effective crisis management controls escalation of an event, initial response and ensures management of the issue with the right players at the appropriate level within the organization both strategically and tactically. It provides crisis communications to the media, clients, regulators, employees, suppliers, shareholders and pressure groups.
The other vital function of an effective crisis management response that corporations frequently miss is the ability to continue doing business. What do you do when law enforcement performs a dawn raid and confiscates critical IT infrastructure? For law enforcement, that IT infrastructure holds evidence. For you, it is a vital tool in being able to do business. How do you continue running the Russian business when the country manager sits in jail? Without a prioritized, tested and coordinated business continuity plan that addresses the ability to work around the loss of such critical tools and processes, the best of efforts to resolve the crisis will still leave a wounded organization.
Empirical research indicates that good crisis management can give a company a healthy and consistent jump in stock price (around 7%) in 250 days after an incident, such as a fraud, hits the headlines. Conversely, a poor reaction can send the stock price down by as much as 15% in that same timeframe.
The other nasty “hangover” that a fraud usually leaves a corporation is trouble with regulators and governments that takes years to settle and requires hordes of lawyers and buckets of money. An FCPA violation can result in prosecution by the Department of Justice, Securities and Exchange Commission and the government of any other country where the bribe may have occurred. Moreover, most companies that have FCPA problems also have fraud, money laundering issues, and incorrectly stated accounts. Remediation of all those facets again costs far more than the actual fraud itself.
There is one thing that is cheap by comparison in all of this – prevention. What can you do to minimize the likelihood of a fraud incident occurring? Due diligence, pre-employment screening, proper risk assessments up front and periodically, establishment of anti-fraud governance through explicit policies and procedures, a whistle-blowing program and policy and education of staff, over and over again. These measures will take investment up front but will always cost the corporation a fraction of what a material fraud will cost in both hard and soft costs that can drag on for years.
To whom do you point your finger if you are not happy with your security force? If they are contracted, your provider is a natural target. If they are in-house, there has to be a manager or supervisor to blame. But remember, when you point your finger at someone else, you have three other fingers pointing back at you. Professionalizing your security force can benefit everyone in your organization. The cost in dollars is minimal compared to other investments and when combined with active leadership you can gain productivity in all areas across the board.
As Director of Security for a large hospital system that encompasses five campuses totaling 1,110 beds and nearly 10,000 employees, I work diligently to increase the professionalism of the security force for which I am responsible. It is my feeling we are on the right track.
Private security has come a long way, and yet has a long way to go. In today’s business world, there exists great potential for business owners to have a competent security force working with them and adding value to their organization. There are many reasons businesses with a security presence do not get the best security product they can. The two most common reasons are a lack of funding and a lack of leadership.
The first rationalization is always funding. Businesses tend to look at reducing costs by paying little for a security presence whether it is a contracted security person or an employee. Some businesses may not see the need to even employ security at their business, but by force of law or fear of lawsuit, a security officer is present. As a result, business owners decide to pay as little as possible; many times the result is a worse outcome than if no security was present. You can tell if you have hired a low paid security officer. For example, you will be asking questions like: ‘Where are they, what are they doing, and who hired that person?’ Employers and contractors are both afraid of spending money on a transitory group like security guards. Do you know why they are transitory? Because you treat them like they are transitory. Low pay and no sense of belonging will send people to another company. Sure, some officers will always come and go, but you do not have to be inflicted with an 80 percent turnover. What do you get when you have long-term people working at your company? You get people that know your organization and what to do in almost every emergency situation. What happens when you start to move the pay scale up? Not only do you increase the selection opportunities from the pool of applicants, you can also increase every other employment aspect such as reliability, honesty, work ethic, etc. Still you may not get the quality service you desire and that may be part of the fear of hiring and paying more for security. What guarantees do you have? None really, but if you add some leadership to your security presence there is a great chance of success.
That brings us to the second reason you may be failing to produce a professional security force—leadership. If you are not paying attention to the needs of the security officer you are growing a liability issue. Finding a leader in your organization who can oversee the security department will take that little bit of money and make it some of the most valuable dollars your company has ever invested.
Leadership applied to your security force (one or a hundred) is the critical success factor you need. Across the 50 states there is a huge disparity between security officer requirements. One state requirement may have you sign on the dotted line and miraculously you are a security officer, and in other states, you may be required to go through record checks and hours of training. It is up to you to know what the contractor is doing to prepare his people to secure your employees and property. The point is that the security officer sitting downstairs from you right now is more than likely doing exactly that, just sitting there. Is that what you want or expect? If you pay them $5, $10, or $15 an hour it won’t make a difference if you don’t do what you would do with your other employees, which is train, educate and motivate them.
Focused training and motivation is at the heart of good security leadership. When was the last time your security officer received any training? For that matter, were they ever trained? Do you regularly test your security officers with key drills and exercises? Did you require the officer to pass a physical fitness test prior to hiring? What training do your security supervisors have in leading and or training people? In short, do you treat your security force the same as you treat your other valued employees? They need a plan for professional growth like everyone else.
If you feel there are no worries because you have a contracted security force and you are not responsible for training them, you are mistaken. These contracted people work in your organization providing safety and security for your employees. Who wants your employees better protected you or the contractor? Hold your contractor or yourself accountable for the security officers’ professional growth and write it into a plan or the contract.
I require all our security officers to get International Association of Healthcare Security and Safety (IAHSS) certification. We promote from within, and require advanced certification if they want to advance in pay and position. See how I said “we” yet my security force, all 130, are contracted. If you are saying “they” you might be overlooking an opportunity to increase the professionalism of the security force by no more than a change in attitude.
The dearth of female security directors, under age 40, represents a generational issue that affects public safety, too. Thanks to proactive efforts by many in the industry we can now remove the historical barriers to gender equity in the corporate environment.
GENDER PARITY – THE 5-YEAR EXPERIMENT
Gender parity in the United States was successfully demonstrated in what was arguably its largest “pilot test” in American history. Thousands of under-40 women joined America’s factories and military forces during World War II. Whether managing a flock of hospital nurses, a fleet of cargo aircraft, or even a flotilla of supply ships, women leaders capably managed corporate-sized workforces during this five-year national emergency from 1941-1946. Wartime urgencies led to abbreviated training, accelerated responsibility, and rapid promotions for women and men alike. With one major exception . . . segregated by gender, similar to ancient cultures in the Middle East countries today. Genders co-existed, although side-by-side in their own dual worlds such as barracks, factories, classrooms and offices.
GENDER RARITY – THE 20-YEAR ABSENCE
Postwar American society quickly resumed centuries of cultural divisions, abolishing this proven experiment. A whole generation of new workers grew up in a gender segregated society, wherein corporate boards rarely included women, regardless of age, from 1946 to 1964.
GENDER INTEGRATION – THE 30-YEAR CONFLICT
America’s Civil Rights upheaval during the 1960s eventually led to gender integration throughout American workforces. From 1970 to 2000, waves of women joined public safety departments and military forces as boot camp recruits. All had to work their way up the ranks to corporate leadership positions. No lateral entry permitted, except for the agency heads (police chiefs, sheriffs, etc.). Organizationally ingrained rationale is that public safety and military leaders need to experience the front-line experience, then the supervisory tasks, to understand how to manage “military mindset” workforces. No credit allowed for equal or similar experience elsewhere.
Being schooled and working during the newly integrated and co-educational 1970s, I witnessed the huge ostracism which female peers faced from the “Good Old Boy” supervisors and managers in police, sheriff, fire and rescue departments. Back then, women entering public safety tended to be the daughters of crusty old police and fire captains, wanting to carry on their longstanding family traditions, just like their brothers. Tenacity persevered them through rigorous and unwelcoming rookie years.
GENDER EQUITY – THE NEW ERA
Corporate security, unlike public safety agencies or the military, is a private industry “hire at will” operation. As such, fully free to immediately hire under-40 leaders, be they managers or trainees, just like hotels, insurers, and other businesses. Pragmatically, corporate security should not be expecting under-40 security managers for a few more years. Realistically, female corporate security managers most likely will first come from the over-40 retired public safety or military officers. Why? Retired military or public safety officials come already trained in management and budget – No learning curve nor mentoring needed. Retirement salary already covers their basic living expenses, which is substantially more cost-effective for bottom-line industries.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Chief Donald E. White, CHSP, CHCM, CHEP, is the 17-year Director of Safety & Security at the Northern Virginia Mental Health Institute in Falls Church, Virginia. Chief White is a board-certified healthcare safety professional (CHSP), hazard control manager (CHCM), and healthcare emergency professional (CHEP). Chief White is also a Senior Member of the International Association for Healthcare Security and Safety (IAHSS), and a Public Sector member of the Virginia Police and Private Security Alliance (VAPPSA). Chief White’s award-winning security management articles have been published in several editions of the Journal of Healthcare Protection Management. Chief White’s 37-year public safety service spanned from private industry to government. Chief White’s law enforcement service included USDOT Special Agent, Deputy Sheriff, Maryland-licensed Private Investigator, and Virginia-commissioned Peace Officer. Chief White’s fire-rescue service includes Firefighter/EMT-B, Public Fire & Life Safety Educator-III, Fire Instructor-III, and award-winning American Red Cross Disaster Instructor.
With so many service men and women returning home from active duty, it is a time of transition and decision-making for young heroes in this country. Throughout my 25-year USAF career, I’ve seen thousands of airmen go through this transition and face the unique challenge of re-entering the civilian workforce. When I retired, I made this transition myself and witnessed first-hand the uncertainty and anxiety inherent in leaving behind the comfort and security of a military career. Whether you are retiring with 20+ years of service, or leaving after your first hitch, this transition can be daunting.
Arguably, the top three challenges military members face when they hang up the uniform one last time are: understanding the private-sector culture, translating military experiences into civilian terms, and possessing the right education to land that perfect job. The various installation Transition Assistance Program offices do a great job in preparing troops for the first two challenges, but oftentimes education is overlooked in the process.
With the recent passage of the Post-9/11 GI Bill, there are now more education benefits available for service members than ever before. Eligibility begins for veterans with as few as 90 days of service after September 10, 2001, and quickly “maxes out” with 36 months of service. Tuition, books, and fees are covered within certain program caps, and in many situations vets are entitled to a monthly housing stipend and a relocation allowance. For military members willing to extend their service a little longer, these benefits may now be transferable to dependent spouses and children.
While the unfortunate events of 9/11 brought about this new GI Bill, they also ushered in a new focus on strategic security. The United States restructured major components of the intelligence and law enforcement communities (IC & LE), resulting in significant job growth in these arenas. Along with these new jobs has come a greater demand for a more professional, better-trained workforce.
This is an exceptional moment for former service members interested in careers in strategic security. If the new GI Bill provides the financial means, institutions across the country have delivered with accessible and exemplary degree programs in the field. Further, online degree programs – completely unavailable when I left active duty – offer an important alternative for military members with challenging schedules and deployments. Financial resources, greater demand for security professionals, and reputable online degree options have coalesced to provide unprecedented opportunity.
About Col. Michael Angley
Currently serving as a public relations officer for Henley-Putnam University, an online university focused on strategic security. Colonel Angley is the author of the Child Finder Trilogy (http://www.childfinder.us). He retired from the Air Force in 2007 following a 25-year career as a Special Agent with the Office of Special Investigations. Col. Angley has an M.A. in National Security Affairs from the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA, and a B.A. in Criminal Justice and Psychology from King’s College, Wilkes-Barre, PA. He is a former National Defense Fellow and Adjunct Professor of International Relations at Florida International University, Miami, FL, and is an honor graduate of the Defense Language Institute’s Korean language program.
By James R. Black
Security managers throughout the country are rightfully considering and deploying more advanced security technology as important components of their security program. It makes perfect sense that planning and implementing modern security systems requires special attention be paid to every detail ensuring that the totality of equipment and systems function as intended, does not over burden administration, operations or maintenance staff and maximizes their intended benefits. Individual technologies must also integrate to provide greater situational awareness, thereby amplifying any “force multiplier” potentials to quicken return on investment.
The old axiom of “Good news travels fast and bad news is waiting when it gets there” does not seem to apply as much to security technology mistakes made by critical infrastructures. Many users are uncomfortable sharing details from their technology implementation failures and political pressure is sometimes applied to lower the profile and embarrassment of dollars wasted on technology missteps. The benefits of sharing these lessons learned however far outweigh any short term perceptions. To help you get maximum benefit from your security technology systems let’s review five of the most common security technology deployment mistakes made by critical infrastructure protectors accompanied by tips for how to avoid them.
Mistake #1: Believing what you read and hear. The security industry in the United States does not oversee or regulate what manufacturer’s print or say about their products. In today’s market, finding unbiased information about products is annoyingly difficult. Trying to learn a company’s strategic vision for their products and a particular product line is harder. Forecasting which companies may purchase, absorb and otherwise eliminate products is impossible. The flood of proprietary specialty products amplifies the problems faced by decision makers. Users are generally challenged for time and resources and usually need to make effective decisions, quickly. For critical infrastructures especially, there can be pressure applied to hurry along technology deployments and expedite implementations. How do you address these challenges? First, be skeptical of everything you read and hear. Focus less on technical data like pixel counts and laboratory controlled error rates and more on head to head evaluations in real-world conditions like yours. Seek unbiased and experienced evaluations and advice. If you belong to an industry group or other peer network, use its membership to solicit feedback on what works and what doesn’t. If you’re relying on a peer with an identical system, visit them directly rather than take anyone’s word for the effectiveness of their systems as they may not be using the products full functionality or features you intend to. Before you commit to implementing any particular technology conduct “proof of concept” testing at your facility to replicate how proposed technologies will perform and more importantly whether the technology meets your real needs. This is different from “Beta” testing that let’s others use you as a guinea pig for their product development while learning how their products perform at your expense. Too many users accept these test systems to cheaply augment their existing security to the detriment of the overall program.
Mistake #2: Thinking technology will solve all your security problems. Every security technology is only as good as the complete security program that supports them. History has demonstrated time and again that the simplest breakdowns can render the most sophisticated security systems useless. This is especially true with critical infrastructures where an abundance of territorial stakeholders increases the odds of operational and procedural breakdowns. Protectors of our nations’ assets should remain constantly mindful that security technology is only one aspect of your security program and in fact, depends on the success of the other parts in order to be effective. For example, some technology proponents automatically believe that video surveillance cameras outfitted with analytics can replace the need for roving guards. In reality however, depending on the particulars of the situation, more monitoring staff might be needed to receive, assess and respond to increased alerts that might be generated by today’s advanced video systems offsetting the fewer field personnel. It is important to keep expectations reasonable about technologies role in your overall security program and thoroughly understand exactly what the impacts will be from implementing each proposed system. Ultimately, your security programs success may hinge on the perception of how effectively and appropriately security technologies are understood and have been deployed at your facility. In addition, technology’s role in the overall program should be well thought out and clearly communicated to everyone involved.
Mistake #3: Insufficient planning. Security breaches can be a stressful time for everyone. Natural instinct dictates that the sooner something is done to address an incident the less likely something like it will occur again. Security technology such as cameras, access control, and intrusion detection can seem like obviously good tools to deploy or upgrade. However, rushed incident response driven deployments without appropriate planning are not always best for the overall security program and in some cases can create unnecessary liability. A thorough understanding of the real vs. perceived needs for security technology is necessary prior to deploying any equipment. Planning for any critical infrastructure enhancement involves knowing the real security needs and which technologies are most appropriate to deploy where. This process must also addresses “low tech” and “no tech” supporting features essential to program success. For example, wherever cameras are deployed, a lighting plan should support their use. When IP based security systems are considered, the IT infrastructure plans should be updated to account for current and future bandwidth and resources demands. When facilities are designed or renovated minimum security technology standards should be in place before hand. Before product standards decisions are made, a thorough competitive evaluation should be performed including identifying a pool of competent, factory certified installing companies to provide options and ongoing support. When security systems costs are estimated, understand product lifespan and 5 year service needs are anticipated in addition to the ongoing personnel and operational costs of maintaining these systems.
Mistake #4: Leaving out lynchpin stakeholders. Critical infrastructures, like many organizations can be politically charged environments with competing interests, agendas and legacy attitudes. We have seen a trend among some organizations that in order to obtain consensus on issues and complete the project, the pool of stakeholders must be as small as possible. Security projects that kick-off without involvement from important stakeholders invites second-guessing, criticism and can create hurdles and project road blocks that could be avoided. Ultimately, the security program may suffer from less credibility and support due to what’s viewed by some as a program forced upon them by an elite group out of touch with the real needs of the organization. Commonly overlooked stakeholders include service staff who will be charged with maintaining systems, field personnel who respond to system alarms, operators who will be manning the equipment on a regular basis and information technology personnel whose network may be supporting the systems. Other departments appropriate for process inclusion are legal, local law enforcement, human resources and procurement. Not every stakeholder needs to be integral to every security technology discussion however, inviting these stakeholders to the table from the outset and keeping them informed in some manner throughout the process can smooth the implementation and acceptance path down the road and remove much of the potential resistance to your security technology program.
Mistake #5: Deploying more technology than you need. Just because it can be done, doesn’t mean it should be done. In recent years, security mandates and grant funding opportunities have driven facilities to acquire significant amounts of security equipment. I’ve had critical infrastructure clients call me and say they need to come up with some proposed security projects quickly so they can stake their claim to funds and get “their share” of a grant award. Unfortunately, we have repeatedly seen that funding processes and rushes to deploy technology at critical infrastructures sometimes do not consider the real vs. perceived needs for this equipment nor the impacts these deployments will have on the overall security program. Whether incident driven or not, many well meaning facilities have deployed more technology than they need. Ultimately, shortsighted technology deployments often become expensive boat anchors dragging down the security program without adequate operating or maintenance funding. How much of which technology is enough then? Try to match every technology deployment to a specific documented priority need. Make sure that these needs cannot be addressed by simpler and easier to implement and manage “low tech” or “no tech” solutions. One test to evaluate whether you’ve deployed too much technology is to find the person within your organization who is most familiar with the proposed work. Ask that person to explain to a small group of non-security employees (representing various skill and authority levels), what need the proposed equipment will address, how it will accomplish this and how using this technology is appropriate when compared to other alternatives. Then interview these employees and ask them these simple questions. Did the technology advocate’s explanations make sense? Is it clear from the session that we need this equipment? Do you think our security program will be better with this equipment? You might be surprised what insights into your security program outsiders can provide. If the explanations are not clear, concise and incorporate more than one narrow aspect of your security program, other improvements might serve you better.
Advanced security technologies and the great potential they bring to solving today’s most difficult security challenges can be intoxicating . Experience shows us however, that security technology planning and deployment mistakes can not only be costly in the short term to your organization but they also can adversely affect the perception and effectiveness your security program long after problems have been corrected or the offending equipment has been removed. Proactively avoiding repeats of these common pitfalls will benefit everyone in critical infrastructure protection.
James R. Black, CPP, PSP, CSC, CET serves as senior security consultant and operations manager for TRC out of their Irvine, CA office. Over the past 13 years, Mr. Black has assessed threats and designed security systems for many of the nation’s critical infrastructures including municipalities, transportation centers, and utilities. Mr. Black is a member of ASIS and is a member of their architecture and engineering committee. He holds numerous security licenses and regularly writes and lectures about current and emerging security technologies. James can be reached at jblack@trcsolutions.com
By Steve Surfaro, business development manager for Axis Communications
Video surveillance is a cost center that can deliver a return on investment well beyond physical security. But to assure that happens, security directors need to think outside the standard bounds of protecting people and property. The most successful and cost-efficient surveillance systems encompass three key elements: compliance, best practices and diversification.
The foundation of the system rests on its ability to comply with the regulations governing the business in which it is running. In casino operations, for instance, the state may require a specific frame rate and resolution for camera operation. In the credit card industry, financial regulations require that video be retained for a specified period of time. So the starting point for system design begins with the basic requirements dictated by those authorities (federal, state and local regulatory bodies) that have jurisdiction over your industry.
But the real payback comes from extending surveillance usage into other areas of operation – helping the business employ best practices and providing business intelligence to further other agendas such as operational safety or increased sales.
How you balance these three elements in designing and operating your video surveillance system depends on the industry in which it is being deployed. Here are a few examples:
The World of Retail
Compliance issues
IT facilities housing systems that store, process or transmit cardholder data must use video cameras or other access control mechanisms to monitor physical access to sensitive areas. The data needs to be collected, reviewed and correlated with the information from other entries, such as access control logs. Video cameras need to be protected from tampering or disabling and their operation needs to be monitored. In-house IT facilities in the payment card industry must meet PCI DSS physical security requirements, including 90-day retention of video in data centers or data processing areas.
Best practices guidelines
Stores that combine network cameras with monitors at the entrance tend to experience lower incidents of shoplifting because patrons are made aware that their movements are under surveillance the moment they approach the threshold.
Diversifying into other areas
Network video is also a great tool that allows other departments to remotely evaluate shopping patterns in different stores, track the success of different promotional strategies and link point-of-sale data with video to correlate demographics with certain purchases. When the network cameras are combined with video analytics, retail operations reap the benefits of real-time business intelligence. Managers can track shopping patterns by time of day and even specific merchandise aisles and displays to fine-tune staffing schedules and product placement.
Transit and Transportation Arena
Compliance issues
The infrastructure security section of the APTA Security Standards Program specifies security for rail station analytical video, bus stop security design, placement of video surveillance cameras within a transit facility, video surveillance of passenger facilities, monitoring of non-passenger areas as well as transit vehicle identification (such as rail cars in a tunnel).
Best practices guideline
When designing public transportation surveillance, it’s critical to strategically place the network video equipment and set the resolution to produce an image suitable for identification or forensic review. One guideline shows how to set the pixel count to extract a clear, recognizable enlargement of an individual’s face from a video image when it occupies 10-20 percent of the original frame.
Diversifying into other areas
With the addition of video analytics, network cameras can be used to promote transit safety – sending real-time alerts to officials and law enforcement if someone falls on the tracks or steps over the safety line as a train enters the tunnel.
Educational Institutions
Compliance issues
Many urban campuses must make the video surveillance cameras remotely accessible both to school officials and local law enforcement. Some universities under state and federal funding guidelines are required to link mass notification and emergency communications systems to their network video surveillance system.
Best practices guidelines
Using network cameras to keep eyes on public areas provides a tool for proactive crowd control. When tied to access control systems, the video cameras serve as a deterrent for unauthorized access to dormitories, laboratories, administrative offices and other sensitive areas.
Diversifying into other areas
Video cameras in the classroom can be used as a mentoring tool to boost academic achievements. Recordings of classroom lectures and activities led by teachers whose students excel in standardized testing can be shared among staff to improve curriculum performance.
Healthcare Environments
Compliance issues
While HIPAA, the industry’s primary compliance regulation, generally focuses on medical records security and patient privacy, there are requirements regarding surveillance and physical security measures to control access to departmental protected health information (PHI). Video surveillance systems provide environmental safeguards to protect PHI, such as transmitting visual confirmation of a fire or sending an intrusion detection alarm.
Best practices guidelines
Strategic placement of network cameras gives caregivers, patients and visitors a heightened sense of security and premise safety. But justification for surveillance tends to come as a reaction to a negative event – a newborn abduction, medical malpractice in an operating theater, or firearms discharged in the emergency room.
Diversifying into other areas
Network cameras can provide revenue opportunities for healthcare facilities, such as setting up fee-based access for families to watch their newborns in the neonatal care unit from their home computers. With the addition of license plate recognition and biometric processing, the cameras can help expedite the screening of visitors and contractors entering and leaving the premises, improving safety and reducing workplace violence by restricting unauthorized individuals from gaining access to the building.
Funding security initiatives
Combining compliance with best practices in your video surveillance deployment improves your situational awareness, enabling you to better manage and mitigate risk. But it’s the application of the technology to improve other areas of your business that provides the persuasive argument for other departments to help underwrite your security initiative.
Chris Hedenskog, a candidate for a Master’s Degree in Organizational Security Management at the University of Denver, sent this paper that examines the positive impact an ongoing security training program has on an organizations culture. Addressing how the information age has changed the world of security, this paper will explain why this training is necessary for the security industry to keep pace with the increasing level of threats to an organizations assets. Using the latest research, an explanation of how to design an effective training program is discussed. An explanation of how a training program can be used to motivate employees, and develop successful teams will be discussed. The benefits of which will clearly demonstrate how an ongoing and effective training program positively impacts and organizations culture.
Chris has been employed with the Federal Bureau of Prisons in the Inmate Systems Management field for 11 years. While working with the Bureau of Prisons, he served as a training officer. And previous to the Bureau, he was a training supervisor at UPS for five years, and prior to that, served in the Army in combat operations.
“How effective security training positively impacts organizational cultureâ€
As organizations strive to find ways to positively impact their culture, investing in an effective security training program is one of the best ways to accomplish this task. The benefits associated with an ongoing and effective training program are numerous. In discussing the benefits a training program offers an organization, Author Elaine Biech in an article, Four Reasons to Invest in Training states, “ it attracts talent, it keeps you competitive, saves you money, and foster’s buy-in. (Biech 1). All significant contributions to an organization striving to compete in a global marketplace. An ongoing training program is of particular importance to the security industry. As Johnson states, “All human beings and their organizations have a fundamental need and goal: security.†(Johnson, 4). Without a safe and secure work environment, “ productivity decreases, and stress levels increase. (Johnson, 5). This basic function security provides an organization has been challenged dramatically with the rise of the information age. As global competitiveness increases, “more aggressive competitive intelligence gathering developed.†(Kovacich, Halibozek, 59). This is a difficult issue to manage since, “the connectivity of the internet has made the concept of borders and jurisdictions and incredible challenge in combating this problem.†(Nasheri, 1). Technological advances have increased the threats to an organizations assets in four ways, “ anonymity, security (or insecurity), privacy (or the lack of it), and globalization.“ (Nasheri 32). As technology advances, organizations must commit to an ongoing and effective security training program to protect their assets against these increasing threats.
Motivating Employees
There are many ways to motivate employees, but “perhaps the most important thing is recognizing that positive motivation does not just happen.†(Forsyth 22). Creating motivated people, “ requires continuous consideration and action.†(Forsyth 22). The foundation needs to be based on positive attributes.
In an interview, author Steven Covey discusses five essential elements to achieve this goal. First, employers must create an environment where employees are empowered to advance their skills to be equal with their opportunities. Next, it is essential to encourage informal and formal training inside and outside of the organization. Coaching and mentoring programs must be established to encourage employees and show the organization cares about their development. Leaders are crucial as role models, they must foster a learning environment and create opportunities that encourages employees to constantly learn and improve. The last step deals with rewards, achievement must be celebrated in the organization, this leads to encouragement for the employees. (Covey 1). Adding to the value of the last step, Forsyth states, “ perhaps nothing is more important than a feeling of achievement: nothing except that achievement being recognized.†(22). An effective training program provides employees the motivation to learn, the coaching and mentoring programs needed to promote their achievement, and the means to recognize employees achievements. Ultimately leading to a positive impact on the organizations culture.
Developing successful teams
Organizations are always looking for ways to increase output. Which is why developing successful teams has become increasingly important as, “ teams are being introduced worldwide as a means to increase productivity, quality, and employee job satisfaction.†(Robbins 305). The development of successful teams requires an effective and ongoing training program to develop the common characteristics necessary to achieve success. To develop these successful characteristics, an ongoing training program relies on decades of research in areas such as: roles, norms, cohesiveness, size and composition. (Robbins 306-11).
It is necessary to understand the dynamics associated with these characteristics for teams to be successful. For example, does the size of a group make a difference? The answer is yes. Research indicates, “smaller groups are faster at completing tasks then larger ones.†(Robbins 309). However, if the goal of the group is related to problem solving, “larger groups consistently get better marks than their smaller counterparts.†(Robbins 310). Understanding the complexities associates with team achievement requires a dedication from the organization to an ongoing training program. The research in this area is vast, however, failing to understand the complexities involved in team oriented work are doomed to failure. The necessity of this ongoing training program is increasingly important in today’s world of mergers and acquisitions across the globe.
Kovacich and Halibozek state, “security needs to be an active member of the merger and acquisition team.. from the start of due diligence effort right through the integration of the newly acquired or merged business, security has a role.†(111). The complex issues surrounding teams separated by geography, culture, and language barriers establishes the need for an effective training program.
Research indicates, “although teams that are large, virtual, diverse, and composed of highly educated specialists are increasingly crucial with challenging projects, those same four characteristics make it hard to get anything done.…… the models for teams need to be realigned with the demands of the current business environment.†(Gratten, Erickson 1). Understanding the complexities associated with integrating teams in this changing environment is essential for security to provide the services required by the organization. The training program must effectively address the barriers associated with these complex teams. Gratten and Erickson state in, 8 Ways to Build Collaborative Teams, the following elements necessary for success:
1: Investing in signature relationship practices
2: Modeling collaborative behavior: executives set the tone.
3: Creating a gift culture: mentoring and coaching.
4: Ensuring the requisite skills
5: Supporting a strong sense of community
6: Assigning team leaders that are both task-and relationship-oriented
7: Building on heritage relationships: meaning place at least a few people who know each other on teams.
8: Understanding role clarity and task ambiguity. (Gratten, Erickson 1).
Team building exercises
For organizations, implementing a team concept is not without challenges a “substantial barrier is individual resistance.†(Robbins 328). For teams to succeed, “individuals must be able to communicate openly and honestly, to confront differences and resolve conflicts, and to sublimate personal goals for the good of the team.†(Robbins 328). Robbins suggests, “selection, training, and rewards†as the primary options managers have when reshaping individuals into team player. Organizations must rework their training programs to focusing on team aspects to be successful. (Robbins 328). When conducting team building exercises, Miller suggests in, Quick Activities to Improve your Team, seven steps team trainers must follow to be successful:
1: Select a good activity for your team
2: Prepare for your team building activity
3: Explain the team building activity to your team
4: Check for understanding before beginning
5: Run the activity
6: Debrief the activity
7: Reinforce the learning back on the job.( Miller 28-32).
An organization will face it’s most difficult challenges in creating team players when, “ the national culture is highly individualistic, and the teams are being introduced into an established organization that has historically valued individual achievement. “ (Robbins 328). To overcome these barriers, executives must commit the organization to the team concept, and lead by example.
Summary
When organizations establish an effective training program, that program will motivate employees and build successful teams. The success generated from increased moral, and teamwork will positively impact the organizations culture, and by extension, increase its competitive advantage. On the flip-side, without an effective training program, organizations will be unsuccessful in their attempts to turn individuals into team players, and the opposite will occur. Employees will become less motivated, teams will be unsuccessful in accomplishing their goals and the impact on the organizations culture will be negative, the consequences of which could be drastic.
The role of the executive team, in this process, cannot be understated. Leading by example and fully committing the organization to this approach is paramount to the success of this, and all programs the organization undertakes. With teams being introduced worldwide, the importance of sustaining this team environment is crucial to success. Without training being an ongoing process this approach will fail. A successful and effective security training program is designed to achieve high performing results and make the transition from individual performers to team players successful.
One of the primary goals in developing any training program is to ensure that the training and the desired results are linked.†(Johnson 187). In the global marketplace, “ mergers and acquisitions are a fact of life.†(Kovacich and Halibozek 109). Security is a major player in determining the success of that process. Providing the training necessary to work with diverse people, cultures, and environments is crucial to their success.
In addition, as technological advances continue, “ training is necessary to fill in the skill-gap.†(Johnson, 172). An effective and ongoing training program is essential for security to keep pace with the changing world. Through proper design, based on the latest research, this training program will motivate employees, develop successful teams, and positively impact the organizations culture.
References
Biech, E. 2007. Four Reasons to Invest in Training. Nonprofit World. Vol. 25, Iss. 6, p30-30.
Covey, S. R. 2007. The Power of One, Training, Vol. 44, Iss. 9, p72-72.
Forsyth, P. 2006. Motivating Your Staff [positive staff motivation]. Engineering Management, Vol. 16, Iss. 1, p22-23.
Gratton, L. Erickson. T. J., 2007. 8 Ways to Build Collaborative Teams. Harvard Business Review. Vol. 85, Iss. 11.
Johnson, B., R. 2005. Principles of Security Management. New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Kovacich, G. L., Halibozek, E. P., 2003. The Manager’s Handbook For Corporate Security: Establishing And Managing A Successful Assets Protection Program. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Miller, B. C. 2007. Quick Activities to Improve Your Team. Journal for Quality & Participation. Vol. 30, Iss. 3, p28-32.
Nasheri, H. 2005. Economic Espionage And Industrial Spying. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Robbins, S. P. 2000. Managing Today! 2.0 Edition. New Jersey: Prentice- Hall.
