SIR – The Security Institute applauds and supports initiatives aimed at enhancing professional standards in all areas of the security business, including consultancy, and would like to see in place a regime designed to engender the very highest standards of professionalism, probity and performance in the practice of security consultancy right across the UK.

What is most alarming about BS 8549 (‘TSI raises concerns over BSI Code of Practice’, News Update, SMT, December 2006, p8) are its statements on the competence of security consultants, in respect of which it lists 15 “competencies” representing some but not all consultancy activities.

It breaks them down into those that are “minimum” standards for consultants (in other words they must be demonstrable, with the British Standard stating that consultants be “able to demonstrate that they have undergone basic training in...”) and those that are simply desirable.

Reference to Section 5.4.3 offers detailed information on this, but the outcome can be demonstrated by the fact that, under the British Standard, a consultant whose speciality lies in advising on the hardening of vaults, safes and secure areas must have qualifications in business continuity planning and security guarding. Likewise, a consultant who specialises in advising on crisis management training should hold qualifications in construction design and management regulations.

BS 8549 poses a number of dangers to the security profession and its clients. It purports to prescribe the qualities and attributes of a security consultant (or consultancy) when it does not. It is a confused and misleading series of statements that will offer little practical help to a client seeking effective consultancy services, while at the same time potentially disqualifying in the client’s mind, at least many competent and reputable consultants who currently practise.

Moreover, if and when the Security Industry Authority once more turns its attention to the licensing of security consultants (‘Too close for comfort’, SMT, December 2006,), the pre-existence of a British Standard for this group is likely to lead towards a powerful tendency simply to use that Standard as the very basis for licensing. Indeed, the Foreword to the British Standard bears the note: “Attention is drawn to the statutory requirements of the Private Security Industry Act 2001”.

Regrettably, even the draft versions of the Standard had to be purchased from the British Standards Institution (BSI), a fact that prevented widespread review and comment. The Security Institute was strongly opposed to this. Due to that fact, we are not able to make even the draft of the proposals available on our web site.

Those with concerns over this matter may wish to contact The Security Institute at: info@security-institute.org

Comments directed towards the British Standards Institution can be sent to: cservices@bsi-global.com

Bill Wyllie Chairman The Security Institute

Source

SMT