Security Officer Network

Listen to Content From This Article.

So it seems that the CEO of the world's seventh biggest company, Steve Jones, CEO of Allied Security, has taken it upon himself to declare the end of the era of the 'big, burly, 'often male', security guard.'

Is he right? Is this the end of the road for the big, burly, male security guard? And does Allied still have room for the big, burly, FEMALE security guard?

And, if Allied truly is Omni Corp, what implications does this have for robocop?

So, is Steve Jones right? Is this the end of the road for the big, burly, male security guard?

First, I am going to want to know your opinion on this, and I will share mine, but first for some context.

Allied's CEO Steve Jones dropped this attention-getting declaration into his update on the State of the Private Security Labor Market. With this update, Jones teased the upcoming release of Allied's 2023 World Security Report, a survey of chief security officers, with the following statement:

'Long gone are the days of the big, burly, often male, security guard. A resounding percentage of chief security officers believe people skills are more important than physical attributes of strength. '

Now, that the report has been issued, we are finally able to get inside and see what he was talking about.

Of note, the only one time the word 'male' was inserted into the report, was a single recast of Jones' statement from his earlier update. In other words, it's not easy to find any evidence of chief security officers telling Allied that they were not going to be hiring big, burly, male security officers.

It starting to appear as if this was simply a provocative expression of Jones' opinion, and maybe isn't actually fact-based or data-driven.

So, was he right? And, is physicality out, and no longer the preferred requirement for security?

Before answering this question, ask this one.

It's a poll that would be much more interesting than Allied's survey: If you were to poll the potential victim of an imminently impending attack on their security, what do you think they would prefer? A big, burly, oftentimes male security officer? Or an officer who meets another demographic per the opinion of Steve Jones, CEO of Allied Security?

Of course, we know how that poll would turn out: being a big burly, oftentimes male officer isn't problematic, in fact, common sense and thousands of years of learned human experience clearly suggest that physical prowess it's a great benefit in the security industry.

Not having physicality, disqualifies the officer from some of the most important, high-profile and necessary security positions.

Speaking frankly, this statement has really opened my eyes about the problems with Allied Universal's culture. I have never particularly trusted big corporate security providers, as long time viewers will know, but this statement, is absolutely shocking to me.

Of course there are plenty of security assignments that don't require physicality, but these tend to be the "job hack" assignments where the officer doesn't work the frontline security in some of the areas that need it the most.

And, this raises the concern: there's plenty of anecdotal evidence that Allied's local offices are already stretched thin as the company likely attempts to meet the likely surge in demand for security services.

Do we really believe that those local offices, when making their assignments, are going to assign officers based on those officers' physicality and ability? Or are they going to be so desperate to making assignments that they will send non-physical officers to dangerous post assignments where a strong officer is needed? Thus, putting those officers, their fellow officers, and those they guard in harms way? In essence, Jones' could be establishing a company culture, that by seeming to minimize physicality, actually gets people hurt.

Also, very concerning, Jones' statement, if read quickly, might, almost seem to suggest that being physically fit and having people skills are mutually exclusive.

They aren't.

The best security companies will prioritize the hiring and promotion of the officer who realizes the importance of his physical fitness and who also trains and constantly works to improve his people skills; his ability to engage in the art of strategic empathy; and defuse a situation without using the physical strength that he has cultivated for the purpose of deterring the situation from developing in the first place;

Without this strength, people skills aren't nearly as effective. An officer who has both strength and people skills, is an amazing asset, but both play a role and it's a mistake to suggest anything that might hint at them being mutually exclusive; Jones should know this, and he should know the great danger in suggesting otherwise.

It's true, that you can get hired to work security if you are not physically fit, but, if you are to become a professional officer, the type of officer that is badly needed right now, you must also be willing to get into shape and should be willing to learn a self-defense art. Unfortunately, Jones' statement seems to hit at a company culture and a mindset that is dismissive of the need for physical fitness. If I were competing against Allied for contracts, I think i would keep this statement in my back pocket, and at the right time, it would be a great tool for differentiating my agency's culture, from Allied's.

Perhaps this mindset helps explain why Allied's recent actions almost seem designed to never allow their officers to intervene to stop an incident.

What do you think? Does Allied need to remove the word security from their name? It's starting to feel like false advertising to me.

Maybe they should go with Allied Corp, in recognition of the agency's similarity with Omni Corp of Robocop fame, a perhaps too accurate, chilling prognostication of the future, with one, obvious, notable error: if Jones; has his way, it seems rather unlikely that robocop will be a big, burly male.

And, remember, if you are or desire to become a true security officer, then join us at securityofficernetwork.com. It's the professional security officer's status symbol of choice.