From available data, it is evident that most organizations relying on contract security officers—both private and governmental—are pleased with the direction in quality. Research shows that a majority sees improvement in the approach of contract security firms to entice clients on quality and service; to sell expertise, and not simply rent out bodies.

But improvement in the contract security industry does not diminish the need for clients to be deliberate in selecting a security firm.  The contract security marketplace is not homogeneous. The level of excellence that some firms offer has risen substantially, but it is not assured—and substandard providers persist.

Global regulation of the contract security industry remains weak, with requirements often set too low to guarantee the satisfactory performance of private security personnel. Fly-by-night contract security firms may be increasingly rare, but they have not disappeared. If anything, careful selection and close monitoring has become more important as performance has improved: (a) because it has exacerbated differences in level of service one can receive; and (b) so that end-users can take full advantage of the gains that the industry has made.    

Because the contract security industry has improved, the stakes are higher when selecting a private security guard partner. If problems arise, one can no longer say, “it happens to everybody.” It is no longer possible to blame the security industry as a whole when a contract goes poorly, because excellent providers are available. Instead, a failed contract will suggest a flawed tending process.

Public agencies need to employ a comprehensive approach to tender evaluation that puts focus on quality, experience, and expertise — not price.

The International Security Ligue offers resources that, together, act as a roadmap for organizations as they evolve to rely on private security partners, helping to:

• minimize reputational risks through due diligence investigations of prospective security partners;
• assess a security firm’s personnel and training programs for insight into the level of officer engagement that can be expected;
• strategically deploy security officers to extract maximum value and raise performance;
• create detailed service level agreements to drive excellence in security contracts; and
• work together with security partners to create relevant, important, and measurable Key Performance Indicators.