Less is more when it comes to security companies

Are you a personal assistant or event organizer who only hires the most important security companies for your events based on the assumption and expectation that they guarantee the best service and the best value for money?

Or maybe you felt that you chose one of the major security companies that your employee class and attitude disappointed you?

If you answered yes to one or both questions, here's what you need to ask yourself: Is it really surprising that the big security companies with access to thousands of SIA-licensed employees may not necessarily guarantee the quality you expect, or what more importantly, what does your customer expect?

If I had to listen to SIA, then the answer is yes, it is surprising as they offer the idea that having an SIA license is a guarantee of having reached a high level of competition in the industry, but if you have the opportunity to talk to the Insider industry, or if you can access security forums, you'll find a completely different answer.

When it comes to large security companies, it is largely about quantity versus quality.

To fully understand why using the services of large security companies is not always the best option for you, you need to know why SIA was created and exactly who they are.

According to SIA information, the security industry had a public perception of being connected to the criminal element. It was decided that he was in desperate need of cleanliness and regulation.

The Industrial Security Authority or, as it is known, the SIA, is responsible for regulating the private security industry. They are an independent group that informs the Minister of the Interior in accordance with the terms of the Private Firewatch Guards Industry Act of 2001. Its task is to effectively control the private security industry to reduce crime, increase values ​​and identify quality providers.

They have two key tasks. One is the mandatory license for people who carry out designated activities in the private security industry; The second is to manage the voluntary approved contractor scheme, which measures private security firms against independently assessed criteria.

What we now have as a result of SIA penetration are personal assistants and event organizers who cannot look beyond the SIA's smoke and mirrors and believe that all SIA licensees are created equal and therefore, they do not believe that it is necessary to examine the background of the company or its employees. .

But let’s go back and discuss with the main reason SIA was created and ask; Was that really the case?

This notion of crime might have been applied to the lower end of the security spectrum, to the doorman and to the security markets on the site, but it certainly did not apply to people working in close protection.

They were self-regulating and annoying about their reputation; I only worked with those who knew before and had the same high standards.

If you've ever tried to get into the London bodyguard scene, known as The Circuit, then you'll understand what I mean, it was almost impossible. Maybe you think this practice was not fair and would not allow competition in the market?

Hard because it worked and kept customers safe and protected.

Now, a few questions can be asked, why should you hire one of the smaller security companies that is looking to offer more expensive local protection officers for a job that I believe only requires those who possess the qualifications of the Door Supervisor and therefore it will be cheaper. Also, can't a larger company provide the same type of security personnel?