Training for Security Personnel: Emerging Needs

Capt. SB Tyagi, Chief Councillor of ICISSM

Security duties are often compared with defence duties – former guard the nation and later guard the society! This is unfair and far from truth. Even when most of the security personnel are from armed or police forces, they are nowhere near the level of comparison with soldiers. However, it is appropriate that security guard should imbibe qualities of a soldier because his role is to prevent or reduce losses to people, property and proprietary information.

Satendra Kumar, CPO, CPO (I), an independent security consultant of high acclaim says, “There is a vast difference in both. Civilian undergoes 9 months of rigorous training before becoming a soldier. Security Guard (SG) undergoes 30 min to 160 hours of training in India before becoming a SG. Soldier is governed by military law, SG has no such fear. Indiscipline is considered as an offence and severely dealt with. There are no such provisions for the SG. Soldiering is a respected profession and soldier gets good salary and is covered under various social security schemes. SG gets only minimum/ living wages and is not suitably covered under compensatory benefits in case of injury or death. Soldier is highly motivated and is prepared to sacrifice his life for the country. Very few security guards will be willing to sacrifice their life or withstand adverse situation for a sustained period.”

Training – The Inevitable Factor

For the reasons highlighted above, there needs to be a developed methodology to the training of any security forces. There needs to be equal emphasis on all levels, from the lowest guard to supervisors. There is a need to develop tailored plans to not only train, but develop mentoring programs for guards and supervisors etc. We need to set up training and progressive advanced methods. If there is no upward mobility in an organization, then it becomes stagnant and there is no incentive to work harder and improve. If training is linked to incentives such as increased pay and responsibility etc. then there is more reason to work harder, in turn a much better product can be put into place, thus training becoming driving force behind providing the best.

Gurinder Rana, Director/ Senior Consultant at Freelance Business Consultancy Services, Gurgaon very succinctly states, “security training and development is necessary; however, the manner in which security is employed makes the difference. Most institutes training on security provide basics and are surface-scratching in order to artificially project a trained force. Security is a process and, not just guarding or electronics.”

Extensive interactions with the leading lights of industrial security management have brought out interesting facts as mentioned above. These emerging needs are driven by various factors such as:

• Evolving threat landscapes (terrorism, cyber-attacks, etc).
• Advancements in technology.
• Changing societal needs and expectations.
• Growing importance of soft skills.
• Increasing focus on diversity and inclusion.
• Need for continuous learning and professional development.

Manan Batra, Founding Member and Head – Intelligence and Corporate Finance, Founding Member and Head – Intelligence and Corporate Finance of Tango Six O Clock LLP has recently written an article which is based on primary research (a survey of PSAs’ end clients) conducted by the International Council For Industrial Security, Safety & Management (ICISSM), and here is what he feels the end clients are thinking and some of this is from looking beyond the numbers. So for a Private Security Agency (PSA), this is important for you:

• End clients are looking to ease their process of vendor selection and management for security – Evident from Graph 1 (G1), the most important factor for PSA selection is a valid PSARA license followed by manpower deployment capability. In most organizations, changing vendors is a tedious process. Hence, end clients want to partner with PSAs who are top-notch in compliance and can scale up their operations as and when the end client requires them to.
• While end clients focus on the above overtly, their latent need is for a security provider who can customize their services and ops as per the end client’s requirements. In short, end clients are not looking for generic security solutions, they are looking for PSAs with industry knowledge.
• This is visible when G2 and G4 are viewed together – most end clients want PSAs to deliver on specific security functions (G2) as well as focus on on-the-jobtraining (G4). G3 presents a challenge for PSAs. Of the 4 attributes ranked, most end clients want the guards to have security awareness and process knowledge.
• The other 3 attributes are tangible and measurable. However, security awareness and process knowledge are fluid and intangible. So, it becomes the responsibility of the PSA to make the end client visualize their personnel’s skill level on this attribute, which is the challenge.
• G5 highlight the tinge of hypocrisy in the end client’s ways of working. And this is where I go beyond the numbers. As per the graphs, most end clients view PSAs as first responders and want PSAs to take charge of the situation end to end in case of a security breach (G5).

Based on above indicators few key areas for training needs are identified. The International Council for Security, Safety & Management has made interpretations of obtained data and resultantly the emerging needs for training of security personnel include:

1. Counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency training.
2. Cybersecurity training.
3. Disaster response and management training.
4. Soft skills training (communication, customer service etc).
5. Diversity and inclusion training.
6. Technology-based training (drone usage, AI-powered surveillance systems etc).
7. Crisis management and negotiation training. 8. Physical fitness and self-defence training.
8. Mental health and wellness training.
9. Leadership and management training.
10. Legal and regulatory compliance training.
11. Community policing and engagement training.
12. Intelligence gathering and analysis training.
13. Protective services training (executive protection etc).
14. Emergency medical response training.

Security personnel and security service providers must adapt to these changing needs to effectively perform their duties and ensure public safety.

To serve the growing demand of quality training, numerous overseas overtures are being made. Obviously in India the current training philosophy, delivery mechanism and the syllabus is faulty, system is broken; otherwise overseas training agencies could not think of setting business in India. No doubt indigenous instructors with experience and skills are available; perhaps we just need a new methodology.

Partnerships are being formed between local providers and those located in Israel, Europe, and the United States. This is one positive development. APS Group of India, for example, recently formed a joint venture with ARES Group of Israel; the Israeli firm will provide advanced security training and consultancy services to its local partner. OSSIM has accreditation with London Metropolitan University. Capt. Pawanjit S Ahluwalia, Chairman & Managing Director of ‘Premiershield Risk Management Enterprise’ has informed that they have highly proficient training academy and have accreditation with ‘Industry Qualifications,’ UK. His organisation is also member of ‘Ligue Internationale des Societes de Surveillance,’ Switzerland. Similar collaboration is established by Lancer Consulting with Perpetuity Academy/ ARC Training, UK. They now offer range of online and offline trainings in the field of technical surveillance counter measures for security managers, managing security risks in oil and gas sector etc.

Similarly, American consulting companies like AFI International are responding to the changed environment by offering to provide training to the third-party private security forces of its clients. AFI starts by conducting an audit. It then works with the company to address areas of weakness in terms of officer training and protocols. However one drawback is observed about overseas training agencies is that these multinational companies try to maintain the culture of the area they originally belong, but that hasn’t worked in “areas that have a very lax or untrained security force or view of security like in India.” A case in point here is that ASIS has been conducting CPP training in India since long but it is advisable to change the syllabus suiting to the Indian social and industrial environment. They continue to train on the subjects which might be relevant to American or European context.

There is always resistance to change in the beginning but surely hurdles can be tackled if there is a will to do it. The law also requires that owners and major shareholders of private security companies in the country be citizens of India. But it does not prevent outside firms from entering into business relationships with local firms.

Satendra Kumar, CPO, CPO (I), an independent security consultant of high acclaim is confident that, “There is no dearth of security trainers in India and are waiting training to be accepted by all and sundries. Be rest assured training as per International Standards can be provided by indigenous trainers.”