Difference between Proprietary and Contract Security Services

Difference between Proprietary and Contract Security Services

As a company or an organization expands, so must be its security level, and must be prioritized. In deciding on the type of security to use, either contract security or propriety security, it is important for an organization to consider its value in terms of assets, employees, and customers. It is the value of the organization that needs to be protected than anything else to avoid threats like vandalism, theft, or destruction (Walby, Wilkinson, & Lippert, 2016). The main aim of all business people or business organizations is to make a profit. But for this aim to be actualized, there is a sense in which those businesses must be protected from the aforementioned risks.

For this reason, all business organizations tend to look for a security service that they deem as fit for their business after considering the type of their business, their security concerns, and above all, the advantages and disadvantages associated with each security service option. There are two main types of security service options that an organization can choose from; proprietary and contract security. Proprietary is when an organization decides to establish its own security by taking the responsibility of hiring, training, deploying, and paying the personnel. On the other hand, the contract is when an organization decides to sign a contract with a security agency which takes all the responsibility of their personnel (River Valley Security, 2010). This paper will, therefore, dig deep into each security service, identify all the advantages and disadvantages associated with each option, and assess the underlying differences between the two types of security services.

Proprietary versus Contract Security

As noted earlier in this paper, the growth or an expansion of an organization necessitates the improvement of its security system, which must also be prioritized. When an organization is considering which security option to adopt, either contract security or proprietary security comes to mind. However, before such a decision is made, it is important for the organization to take a look at its value in terms of assets, employees, stakeholders, as well as its customers. It is this value of the organization that will dictate the type and level of security required to be protected from the risks of destruction, theft, and vandalism (Dhillon, Syed, & de Sá-Soares, 2017). Before looking at the advantages and disadvantages associated with each security option, this paper will explore the difference between contract security and propriety security services in terms of hiring personnel and in terms of cost and Management.

Differences in Terms of Hiring Personnel

Hiring proprietary security: by hiring proprietary security, organizations exercise absolute control of their personnel. The security staff forms part of the organization and adopts the organizational culture of the hiring entity; there is a demonstrable consistency within the ranks of the security personnel, which means the security personnel is all aware of the issues faced by the organization, therefore, knows where to put more effort. Nevertheless, the time and costs associated with the process of hiring, training, and managing security personnel can be higher than the contract security (Montgomery, & Griffiths, 2016). These costs are incurred in the recruitment process, performance appraisal, payment of salaries and other benefits, and any other function related to the organization’s human resource department.

Some other expenses associated with proprietary security services are the purchase of uniforms and equipment, the purchase of security vehicles, continuous training of the security personnel, payment of employee liability coverage, and, most importantly, the expenses of ensuring license is duly updated as required by law. Establishing a proprietary or in-house security creates a sense of loyalty from the personnel to the organization and other employees of the organization (Enyia, & Okon, 2018). Even though this can cause wrangles, but when one of the security personnel’s duty is to prevent the company from the risks associated with theft or any other risks, the organization assumes the responsibility and may take necessary action in accordance with the law.

Hiring contracted security: when an organization decides to contract an external security agency, the organization appears to have immense flexibility over its security concerns and the related costs. Organizations can decide to add or reduce the security personnel when deemed appropriate. The security agency has the responsibility to ensure personnel screening, recruitment, training, and ensures their appearance and appropriate conduct. The security agency is responsible for all the expenses associated with the Management of security personnel, liability, and insurance (Lutter, 2016). Also, it is worth noting that not all security agencies operate the same way. For this reason, an organization that is in the look to contract personnel must do thorough research about the agencies to ensure that the agency selected satisfies its requirements such as whether they use trained and licensed security personnel, whether the insurance covers of their security personnel are up to date, whether their security personnel is well conversant with latest technological advancements in the security sector, and whether they use security personnel who perform their duties in a professional manner (McCrie, 2017).

Cost and Management as the main Point of Difference

From the above discussions, it is clear that one security option provides an organization with absolute control of security personnel (proprietary security) while the other option does not permit such control (contract security). To this end, it is important to point out the Management and cost are different with respect to the security choices. For the contract security, there is a set cost that is agreed between the hiring organization and the security agency when signing the contract (Enyia, & Okon, 2018). The cost may be higher because the security agency must consider all the costs it has to incur before quoting the price. However, when comparing to the costs associated with proprietary security, it is considerably low.

Before an organization can settle on any security option, it has to define its security problem and outline possible options. This paper is, therefore, going to explore possible outcomes and the related advantages as well as disadvantages. In a nutshell, an organization must only choose what it deems fit. In addition, this paper will as well explore the differences between contract and proprietary security services on the basis of obligation, effectiveness, and consistency. Generally, the costs associated with proprietary security services is higher (Dhillon, Syed, & de Sá-Soares, 2017). The organization is also responsible for the refurbishment of the personnel’s benefits as well as salaries, especially for experienced and knowledgeable security personnel. Besides, the position of proprietary security is higher as it draws a greater class of guards.

On the contrast, salaries for the contract security are generally lower in lieu of absent leave, uniforms, drills, exercises, and all other benefits endorsed by the security agency. The Management of in-house security personnel is normally easy since there is a sense of loyalty between the security personnel and the organization. This is even made easier because there is a solidarity between employees and the fact that there is an opportunity for advancements and improvements (Makovi, 2017). Sometimes, an organization may have to improve the performance of its staff, or otherwise discharge them. Such an undertaking may as well create complications within the organization (Montgomery, & Griffiths, 2016). Despite all these, the organization can swiftly and simply deal with staffing problems. With this stability level, an organization that uses proprietary security should regularly perform security configuration by acquiring proprietary security in a regular manner; perhaps, this is the best way to go.

The most important consideration herein is to determine which security option will be capable of satisfying the security concerns of the organization and employee throughput. Depending on the location, this may prove problematic, particularly when it comes to the safety and well-being of the people in the organization (Lutter, 2016). The effectiveness of the proprietary security personnel is higher than that of the contract security officers. This is primarily because the proprietary security personnel is trained in line with the security concerns of the organization, therefore, making them more accustomed to the organizational frameworks. Normally, the organization is accountable for identifying employees who can do the job based on their track record. Also, with the higher percentage of employee throughput, contract security personnel are not always friendly with the hiring organization, thereby deterring the level of their performance.

These issues affect the devotion of contract security employees, as well as their obligation. To some extent, this has a greater impact on their performance and advancements. Personnel obligation is jeopardy because in an event a business organization chooses to work with proprietary security, it becomes responsible for all the background scrutiny of the personnel, it is accountable for certifying that all staff has undergone the required training, the authenticity of candidates’ credentials, and most importantly, it is responsible for ensuring that each security guard is assigned to a duty he/she fits best (Allen, & Peterson, 2020). When working with contracted security staff, the organization does not have to be concerned with the qualifications of the security officers, their skills, their credentials, or their behavior checks. All these issues are ensured by the security agency since they take total liability for the actions of their personnel and are also responsible for disciplining their staff if necessary.

Pros and Cons

Both contract security and proprietary security are associated with huge benefits and limitations. However, only one option will meet the security concerns of an organization. This paper, therefore, presents the pros and cons of both security options as demonstrated hereunder:

Pros and Cons of Proprietary Security

The benefits associated with working with proprietary security staff are many. The first major point is that the organization exercises absolute control over the established policies and their enforcement thereof. An organization absolutely controls the rules, guidelines, and the reporting of its security personnel. Secondly, the organization can pay its security personnel as it expands its size, therefore the organization does not incur one huge cost at once but smaller costs in doing so (Walby, Wilkinson, & Lippert, 2016). Absorbing proprietary security staff in an organization is the third advantage. In this regard, the organization can be sure of the backgrounds, attitudes, and behaviors of the people that it brings in, and to ensure this; the organization can ask relevant questions when interviewing applicants. Also, proprietary security staff is subject to good compensation, and this is a perfect way of minimizing employee turnover. Essentially, employee turnover poses a bigger problem, particularly in a situation when an organization does not pay its employees in a prompt manner and in accordance with the required standards.

On the other hand, there are varying disadvantages when it comes to proprietary security services. The first main point here is the fact that the organization must incur additional expenses such as those for training the recruits. Basically, there are rules, guidelines, and laws governing the type of training necessary in accordance with the underlying responsibility (Lang, 2019). Secondly, the organization must suffer the expense of paying its security personnel additional benefits as well as insurance cover, particularly for the officers who carry weapons. Most importantly, in a case where the organization downsizes, there is a high likelihood of cutting security.

Pros and Cons of Contract Security

The most important advantage of contracted security is that they come at a fixed price, which was agreed during the signing of the contract. Upon conclusion of the bidding process, the hiring organization only pays the contracted security agency the same amount, and everything is done. There are absolutely no additional expenses for the hiring organization since everything is catered for by the contracted firm. Another advantage associated with contract security is that the hiring organization can highlight the nature of work and the necessary training required. Here, the fundamental factor is that the contracted security agency is in charge of everything, including making sure that someone is on duty and that its officers work to meet the expectation of the client (Enyia, & Okon, 2018). With contract security, employee turnover is not a concern to the hiring organization since the contracted firm must ensure that there is an officer(s) trained and ready to work for the client. The last advantage associated with contract security is about the benefits of overhead costs. The hiring organization ought not to be worried about any additional expenses such as transport, insurance, or uniforms.

Regardless of the above-mentioned advantages, it is also worth noting that contract security is associated with various disadvantages. First, the hiring organization does not have full control of the working policies and performance appraisals. Secondly, the hiring organization may not know whether the contracted security personnel have met the standards set by law and whether they are of a commendable character to work in the organization. All this information is only known by the contracted firm (Simshauser, 2019). Another important point is that the contracted personnel may not work best for the hiring organization since they are not aware of the major security concerns of the hiring organization and the fact that they are only loyal to the employer security agency rather than the hiring organization. Finally, the lack of proper control and understanding between the hiring organization and the contracted employees may be dangerous because they are normally confused about whom they work for.

Conclusion

In summation, the most important question the organizations ought to ask before making a choice on the type of security to use is; which one is the best for us? Such a question triggers no right or wrong answers, but all depend on the security concerns of an organization (Allen, & Peterson, 2020). As a matter of fact, the shortest answer always works best. In the making of such a decision, the organization must take a proper assessment of its value, its security concerns, as well as the pros and cons associated with each option. Making a choice can be a very complicated exercise because whenever something goes contrary to the expectation of the organization, the decision-makers bare all the blame.

References

Allen, M., & Peterson, K. E. (2020). Information Security and Counterintelligence. The Professional Protection Officer (pp. 451-461). Butterworth-Heinemann.

Dhillon, G., Syed, R., & de Sá-Soares, F. (2017). Information security concerns in IT outsourcing: Identifying (in) congruence between clients and vendors. Information & Management, 54(4), 452-464.

Enyia, J. O., & Okon, E. U. (2018). Classification of Credit Security in Nigeria: Resolving the Perceived Dichotomy. Journal of Economics and Business, 1(2), 190-197.

Lang, J. T. (2019). Is There Really a Difference between Conventional, Organic, and GMO2. Organic Food, Farming, and Culture: An Introduction, 281.

Lutter, M. (2016). Three essays on proprietary cities (Doctoral dissertation, George Mason University).

Makovi, M. (2017). The Anarcho-Calculus of Consent: Proprietary Communities as Substitutes for the State. Available at SSRN 2944516.

McCrie, R. (2017). Private security services regulations in the United States today. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 41(4), 287-304.

Montgomery, R., & Griffiths, C. T. (2016). The Use of Private Security Services for Policing. Public Safety Canada.

River Valley Security. (2010). Proprietary and Contract Security. Retrieved from http://www.rivervalleysecurity.com/docs/PropVrsCont.doc

Simshauser, P. (2019). On the Stability of Energy-Only Markets with Government-Initiated Contracts-for-Differences. Energies, 12(13), 2566.

Walby, K., Wilkinson, B., & Lippert, R. K. (2016). Legitimacy, professionalization, and expertise in public sector corporate security. Policing and Society, 26(1), 38-54.