You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
D
Deleted member 33
Guest
Do the BSIA CP division not do any of the above
fbg
No. The BSIA solely sets standards for the conduct of businesses. They have no remit or interest for individuals.
Rich H
Im with RTK.
Good idea in principle - raising standards etc, but no.
Creating two (or more) tiers of opperator does not benefit the industry or the customer - lets face it many tiers already exist.
With no industry wide power / teeth, to regulate and inforce I dont believe it wll be effective in its stated (true) aims; and may indead just beome an ego stoking vehicle.
Does the marketplace demand / need such a "guild"? I dont think so; market forces come down to one thing - £
We may all want to improve ourselves and our industry, but what the market needs has to be a key driver and my taking this route I thik we are in danger of falling into the trap of believing in our own self importance.
There already exists the Sy Inst, WCoSP, BSIA, NASP, BSA, BBA, IBSSA, IBA,ASIS etc etc etc etc........some do some of the tasks identified, others do not. Not the point. The point is that there are far too many such groups, far too many egos, far too much self importance, far too much confusion for the buyer - another (no mater how "pure") will not make the mess go away; why?
Because it will lack credability from the outside, based on need.
IF and its a big IF such a project was to be a runner, it might be closer to being fit for purpose and "recognised" were it managed in conjunction with say the Security Institure / WCoSP, much like the new Chartered Security Professional designation, or as a specialist certfication through them similar to the ASIS CPP model.
But I come back to, does the industry / marketplace need it, or is it a vehicle for self importance?
What happens to all those who dont join? They'll still worlk, just like now. This is an industry where who you know comes before anything else (security in general but CP especially) and I think in such a practical industry that is the best way to manage you you hire, other factor do come into play and of course from the buyer cost is always there - its the way of the (this) world and I dont see such an group changing that.
All or nothing, a large number is not enough. And without all, it has no real teeth.
Good idea in principle - raising standards etc, but no.
Creating two (or more) tiers of opperator does not benefit the industry or the customer - lets face it many tiers already exist.
With no industry wide power / teeth, to regulate and inforce I dont believe it wll be effective in its stated (true) aims; and may indead just beome an ego stoking vehicle.
Does the marketplace demand / need such a "guild"? I dont think so; market forces come down to one thing - £
We may all want to improve ourselves and our industry, but what the market needs has to be a key driver and my taking this route I thik we are in danger of falling into the trap of believing in our own self importance.
There already exists the Sy Inst, WCoSP, BSIA, NASP, BSA, BBA, IBSSA, IBA,ASIS etc etc etc etc........some do some of the tasks identified, others do not. Not the point. The point is that there are far too many such groups, far too many egos, far too much self importance, far too much confusion for the buyer - another (no mater how "pure") will not make the mess go away; why?
Because it will lack credability from the outside, based on need.
IF and its a big IF such a project was to be a runner, it might be closer to being fit for purpose and "recognised" were it managed in conjunction with say the Security Institure / WCoSP, much like the new Chartered Security Professional designation, or as a specialist certfication through them similar to the ASIS CPP model.
But I come back to, does the industry / marketplace need it, or is it a vehicle for self importance?
What happens to all those who dont join? They'll still worlk, just like now. This is an industry where who you know comes before anything else (security in general but CP especially) and I think in such a practical industry that is the best way to manage you you hire, other factor do come into play and of course from the buyer cost is always there - its the way of the (this) world and I dont see such an group changing that.
All or nothing, a large number is not enough. And without all, it has no real teeth.
Last edited:
Hi Rich and thanks for the detailed reply and accepting my apology!!
Good points, well thought out! I would like to be involved in something that made a difference, it would be difficult and many companies would have to sign up to undertakings etc. before individuals were even considered.
Yes I can see such a thing working, but there would have to be benefits for members, I shall PM you with some ideas.
On another point. I have just had a look at the WCOSP web site, I must admit that this is the first I have heard of them so a closed club?, maybe? In fact to join you must have attended some events so if you haven't heard of them or don't know anyone who is a member you cant join. I can not see anywhere that they promote standards in the industry as a whole, unless you are a member, know a member or want to be a member. I think that this is an example of what we do not want and thats why I voted no in the above pole. I may be completely wrong about the WCOSP and if I am please put me right!! I am sure that someone will!!
Good points, well thought out! I would like to be involved in something that made a difference, it would be difficult and many companies would have to sign up to undertakings etc. before individuals were even considered.
Yes I can see such a thing working, but there would have to be benefits for members, I shall PM you with some ideas.
On another point. I have just had a look at the WCOSP web site, I must admit that this is the first I have heard of them so a closed club?, maybe? In fact to join you must have attended some events so if you haven't heard of them or don't know anyone who is a member you cant join. I can not see anywhere that they promote standards in the industry as a whole, unless you are a member, know a member or want to be a member. I think that this is an example of what we do not want and thats why I voted no in the above pole. I may be completely wrong about the WCOSP and if I am please put me right!! I am sure that someone will!!
To answer the question, No I dont think a guild is needed.
This question can not really be fully answered unless it is posed to the Principals that use the service of Close Protection personnel. Would a Principal care about any of the things mentioned?
Food for thought
12345
This question can not really be fully answered unless it is posed to the Principals that use the service of Close Protection personnel. Would a Principal care about any of the things mentioned?
Food for thought
12345
D
Deleted member 33
Guest
To answer the question, No I dont think a guild is needed.
This question can not really be fully answered unless it is posed to the Principals that use the service of Close Protection personnel. Would a Principal care about any of the things mentioned?
Food for thought
12345
Disagree. It has no relation with the Principal but remains a method to increase standards across the board through proof and association.
I'm not entirely sure that a Guild is needed either but if such an organisation is created then it needs to be done in the correct manner.
Rich H
sorry but have seen this talked about and discussed SO many times before it actually really is boring now, and that is no offence to you at all Rich, but people say 'oh yeah i agree lets change things i am really up for that and oh guess what when it comes down to it...... they aren't. They talk the talk and that is it. I seriously salute you for trying i do but just saying, it never seems to happen is all
Disagree. It has no relation with the Principal but remains a method to increase standards across the board through proof and association.
I'm not entirely sure that a Guild is needed either but if such an organisation is created then it needs to be done in the correct manner.
Rich H
Hi Rich H,
Can you expand on why it has no relation with the Principal, it would be interesting to hear your thoughts.
I thought thats what Close Protection is about, Securing a Principal, after all without a Principal the Close Protection Industry would not exist. So without their input, you are not getting a full view of the Clospe Protection Industry, just an Operators view.
I've touched on this before, people are constantly saying that the CP industry is a shambles and a wash with mediocrity, I disagree, I do not see that. I see alot of proffessional people in this industry. Yes there are less experienced people coming into the industry nowadays but that is to be expected when they are new. I do not see where a Guild will change that. If the standards are raised and someone wants to enter the Close Protection Industry, they will just save the money and get the relevant training needed to reach the new perceived entry level. Its a bit like nowadays people need degrees to get certain jobs, where years ago they possibly didnt need one. It doesnt mean that person is any good at their job, it just means they reached the required entry level.
So with that in mind im not sure what a guild will do.
All the best
12345
D
Deleted member 33
Guest
Hi Rich H,
Can you expand on why it has no relation with the Principal, it would be interesting to hear your thoughts.
The Guild would be there to enhance standards through the manner in which CP is provided from both the contract supplier and the operator on the ground. Both would recognise that being part of the 'elitist' process ensures that the service provided by both is recognised as being industry leaders. That being, through this certain 'standard' that industry recognises that this company, this individual has reached a higher standard than what is set by the regulator. The standards would be based on time served and recognised courses, background and experience. The 'Principal' per se has nothing to do with it as the Guild is an industry led venture. As a result, the Client may be drawn to this recognised standard and in turn, and after much time, business recognises this standard as the best standard to approach for such services.
I thought thats what Close Protection is about, Securing a Principal, after all without a Principal the Close Protection Industry would not exist. So without their input, you are not getting a full view of the Clospe Protection Industry, just an Operators view.
I've touched on this before, people are constantly saying that the CP industry is a shambles and a wash with mediocrity, I disagree, I do not see that.
No disrespect but you will only recognise it based on two affecting aspects; that of level of exposure to CP operations and that of whether you recognise good practise - or not. There are ways of doing things and there are ways of doing things. We can all recognise the obvious mistakes but specific operational aspects where the same typical textbook format is employed is another matter.
I see alot of proffessional people in this industry. Yes there are less experienced people coming into the industry nowadays but that is to be expected when they are new. I do not see where a Guild will change that. If the standards are raised and someone wants to enter the Close Protection Industry, they will just save the money and get the relevant training needed to reach the new perceived entry level.
Wouldn't happen. It's not down to money. It's down to time served and experience. A newbie will remain a newbie until the required above is met.
Its a bit like nowadays people need degrees to get certain jobs, where years ago they possibly didnt need one. It doesnt mean that person is any good at their job, it just means they reached the required entry level.
So with that in mind im not sure what a guild will do.
The same could be said of many industry 'Guild's'. Just research them and look at the benefits they provide. With the exception of the usual 'discount's in insurance, blah, blah, blah, the main reason is to be recognised as an experienced professional within that industry sector as a result of meeting that specific standard or set of standards.
All the best
12345
Cheers,
Rich H
deleted member 3
New Member
People often use the word "professionals" or someone is "professional", and it seems the term can be used quite loosely. So just out of interest, what are people's definition of professionalism in the CP industry?
Thanks Rich H for taking the time to respond to my post.
Im still not convinced that another layer of bureaucracy is what is needed in the CP Industry.
If a client wants a certain standard of person to protect them, they will source what is needed, as clients have done for years.
All the best
12345
Im still not convinced that another layer of bureaucracy is what is needed in the CP Industry.
If a client wants a certain standard of person to protect them, they will source what is needed, as clients have done for years.
All the best
12345
D
Deleted member 33
Guest
Thanks Rich H for taking the time to respond to my post.
Im still not convinced that another layer of bureaucracy is what is needed in the CP Industry.
If a client wants a certain standard of person to protect them, they will source what is needed, as clients have done for years.
All the best
12345
Agreed, I'm not entirely convinced either. Just throwing a poll for feedback.
Many clients however do not know the industry. They are not 'educated' as to standards especially those foreign and the very rep of the UK brand as a whole, in comparison to other countries, remains to satisfy their mind.
(Little for they know that the SIA are in on the joke...)
Rich H
In response to the "professional" comment.
CPO's are not and never will be professionals.
We \ they may act in a professional manner and conduct themselves and their development in such a way - and many of us do. But as far as the social science definition of the term "professional" the role of a Close Protection Officer does not and will not fall into this categiry.
Again we are back to what the industry wants v's what the market needs.
There has been a shed load of research on how or why security professionals should be vewed as professionals; in they main it all agrees that they are / will not be. That does not detract from what they / we are, but does highlight a level of self imposed importance.
CPO's are not and never will be professionals.
We \ they may act in a professional manner and conduct themselves and their development in such a way - and many of us do. But as far as the social science definition of the term "professional" the role of a Close Protection Officer does not and will not fall into this categiry.
Again we are back to what the industry wants v's what the market needs.
There has been a shed load of research on how or why security professionals should be vewed as professionals; in they main it all agrees that they are / will not be. That does not detract from what they / we are, but does highlight a level of self imposed importance.
D
Deleted member 33
Guest
In response to the "professional" comment.
CPO's are not and never will be professionals.
We \ they may act in a professional manner and conduct themselves and their development in such a way - and many of us do. But as far as the social science definition of the term "professional" the role of a Close Protection Officer does not and will not fall into this categiry.
Again we are back to what the industry wants v's what the market needs.
There has been a shed load of research on how or why security professionals should be vewed as professionals; in they main it all agrees that they are / will not be. That does not detract from what they / we are, but does highlight a level of self imposed importance.
Tomartoes tomaytoes, potartoes potaytoes.
I deem myself an 'experienced professional' as I deem myself a 'subject matter expert'. It depends on views and opinions that are subsequently based on exposure and experience.
It's also down to priorities - whether they are aimed for the commercial gain or whether they are geared for best practise. In this industry, it becomes a sad state then that the few are for the latter.
Rich H
I too concider myself to be an SME and professional. I am not however "a professional"
I am all for raising standards and best practice; I have not invested in my career thus far to nbe mediocre; but the two things are not mutually exclusive.
I support wholeheartedly the idea but not the method. We are now a regulated and legislated industry, as I see it best practice can only be established by people with the skills and experience, such as you Rich and others, setting the benchmark BUT by being driven in line with what is now recognised legislation and regulation set out in law. I don't see a guild or any such body coming close to doing that.
The closest model that MIGHT work, and I'm not advocating it as perfect is the CySP model as launched by the Sy Inst.
I am all for raising standards and best practice; I have not invested in my career thus far to nbe mediocre; but the two things are not mutually exclusive.
I support wholeheartedly the idea but not the method. We are now a regulated and legislated industry, as I see it best practice can only be established by people with the skills and experience, such as you Rich and others, setting the benchmark BUT by being driven in line with what is now recognised legislation and regulation set out in law. I don't see a guild or any such body coming close to doing that.
The closest model that MIGHT work, and I'm not advocating it as perfect is the CySP model as launched by the Sy Inst.
Last edited:
People often use the word "professionals" or someone is "professional", and it seems the term can be used quite loosely. So just out of interest, what are people's definition of professionalism in the CP industry?
Behaving in a professional manner is anyone doing their job properly and actually acting in a manner thats befitting the expections placed upon them.
Being a 'profesional' on the other hand is something entirely different. Professional occupations are normally ones with some form of accreditation and enforced standards such as pilots, medical professionals (case in point) and other qualified individuals that ply their trade.
I stand by points I've made before: a four day DS course does not make a professional. A fourteen day CP course does not make a professional.
Outside of the higher standards and education a professional is one who does not rest on their laurels, one who takes time to better themselves and remains chronically aware of what they are doing and how they do it. This casts out the overwhelming majority of the security industry then.
More on point: the more I think of this idea of an organisation or guild the more I think it will fail or be of limited effect; wholly because of rampant commercialism. It is a very small number of end users who think past the purse strings and those that do are probably already employing those we would consider fit into that professional bracket.
I think all countries of the European Union should have the same guiding principles of professional training courses for the activity of bodyguard.
Work permits to be recognized by all countries of the union.
Because today the profession of bodyguard in the private sector is more outlawed legal profession in the world.
This thing of associations with graduate courses totally illegal in the eyes of the law is a great scheme.
Unless courses are recognized by the authorities usually not.
But I understand the your idea H.
Work permits to be recognized by all countries of the union.
Because today the profession of bodyguard in the private sector is more outlawed legal profession in the world.
This thing of associations with graduate courses totally illegal in the eyes of the law is a great scheme.
Unless courses are recognized by the authorities usually not.
But I understand the your idea H.
D
Deleted member 33
Guest
Scab & Kellemansa,
I agree with both of your comments. The commercial forces of quick and easy course churning out dross is simply too overwhelming for any such minority and even if it was conducted perfectly I imagine it would take many years in filtering down.
I see the next step as waiting to see what happens to standards with this new regime. If no progress is experienced or efforts to progress are not witnessed then the creation of an EU license with increased standards to be sought.
Rich H
I agree with both of your comments. The commercial forces of quick and easy course churning out dross is simply too overwhelming for any such minority and even if it was conducted perfectly I imagine it would take many years in filtering down.
I see the next step as waiting to see what happens to standards with this new regime. If no progress is experienced or efforts to progress are not witnessed then the creation of an EU license with increased standards to be sought.
Rich H
Do you believe Close Protection, whether UK based or international has a need or requirement for an organisation to be created in the form of a Guild?
It will be interesting to watch the french experience, where a real badass bunch of guys has just launched such a project.
These guys have the passion, the brains and good support. Let's see what they achieve.
NB : France also has an official CP licencing system, with a lot of incompetent Walts too, and a lot of useless greedy TPs.