Are you a Personal Assistant or Events Organiser who hires only major security companies for your event, based on the supposition and expectation that they guarantee the best service and value for money?

Or just maybe you have already went the route of employing the security services of one of the major companies and you felt badly let down by their quality of employee and their overall attitude?

If you answered yes to one or both of these, what you need to be asking yourself is; is it really so surprising that large security companies with access to thousands of SIA licence holding staff cannot necessarily guarantee the quality you expect or more importantly, your client expects?

The SIA will try and convince you that holding an SIA licence is indeed an assurance that the standard of employee will be of the highest order because they have fulfilled the required SIA criteria but ask those who find themselves directly involved with the events, if they believe the quality is of a consistently high standard and you will get a resounding no.

The old maxim of quantity over quality seems almost appropriate when describing the workforce of these larger security companies.

For you to realise fully why utilising the services of a large security company may not be the most suitable option for you, then you need to know why the SIA was brought into existence and just who they are.

The SIA will tell you that prior to their formation that the whole of the security industry had the perception of being run by criminal gangs and was rife with Neanderthals working on doors who caused more fights than they stopped. The decision was made that the security industry needed regulating and an image readjustment.

The Security Industry Authority or as it is referred to, SIA, is in charge of regulating the private security industry. They are an independent group who report to the Home Secretary, under the terms of the Private Security Industry Act 2001. Their task is to control the private security industry effectively for the purpose of reducing criminality, raising values and to identify quality service providers.

They have two key duties. One is the obligatory licensing of individuals undertaking designated activities within the private security industry; the other is to handle the voluntary Approved Contractor Scheme, which measures private security companies against independently assessed criteria.

Now, as a result of SIA interference, we have Events Organisers and Personal Assistants who cannot see past the SIA propaganda and believe that all SIA licence holders are the same. Therefore they no longer believe it necessary to research the company or the staff backgrounds.

But let us go back and take issue with the main reason for the SIA coming into existence and ask; was that really the case?

Possibly this perception of criminality could have been applied to the lower end of the security spectrum, the doorman and site security markets but it certainly did not apply to the people working in Close Protection.

The people who were working in Close Protection were self-governing and were very particular about maintaining their hard earned reputations; only working with those they knew beforehand and were of the same calibre.

Ask anyone who had tried to break into the London bodyguard scene, that was not referred by another and they will tell you it was almost impossible.

On the surface this may look unfair but it kept the undesirable element out and maintained the highest of security standards.

At this stage you may be asking yourself one or two questions, such as; why would I hire from a small security company who wish to supply more expensive Close Protection Officers for a job that I am sure only needs those with an SIA door supervisor licence and will therefore be cheaper, also can a larger company not provide the same type of security person?

The answers are adaptability and superior quality. You will discover that a smaller security company has improved control over their staff as it is more intimate, plus their employees will have a different attitude to those working for a corporation.

They will be vastly experienced, they will have an greater sense of pride in their work and will attain a level of professionalism that cannot be matched.

Whilst you may flinch at the initial difference in price between Door Supervisors and Close Protection Officers but when you understand what you are getting for your money then you will realise that you are getting the best value possible.

In fact, what you are getting for your money is a far superior operator in all aspects, someone who will be able to carry out a varied amount of security related tasks over and above those that a door supervisor can and do so at a standard that is greater than the one stipulated by the SIA.

If you are still not swayed, then I wish you the very best of luck because when your cheaper option causes embarrassment to your client and their occasion by robbing the patrons or by running off when they see police drug dogs or when they start fights for their own personal pleasure and yes we have witnessed all of these first hand whilst subcontracted to these major security companies, then do not say you were not well-informed about why not to employ them.

So just how do you go about choosing the most appropriate security company for your occasion? Quite simply, you go back to the old school methods of personal recommendations, written testimonials and word of mouth.

Lest you forget, small security companies realise they can only stay in business as long as they can maintain their reputation for excellence and that they know they are only as good as their last job.