In the second part of his article, IFPO UK Member, Orlando Mardner MSc CMAS CFIP CSM Dpi CPO, continues his examination of how the security professional is perceived.

Evolution of private security service.

The concept of private security has been in existence for centuries. The sector has undergone an array of changes from the ancient civilization to contemporary society as people attempt to protect their properties as well as families (Button and Stiernstedt, 2017). The private security sector has evolved significantly; it provides a spectrum of security solutions for various clients who operate in a complex environment. The private security companies have emerged globally as they serve clients such as NGOs, global companies, and governments, among other sectors (Button, 2003).

Initially, wealthy people hired security agencies or persons to protect their lives and properties. In ancient times, security was mainly a private matter, handled primarily by private security firms. Button and Stiernsted (2017) notes that the moment our ancestors figured the difference between ‘ours’ and ‘mine’ in the context of wealth, was the genesis of the establishment of the private security sector. The ancient people used physical security such as weapons, walls, cliff dwellings, and gates, among others to protect themselves.  Besides, the old rulers appointed security enforcement people to protect them. The ancient private security system defined the evolution of early police and fire protection services as well as the private security service that has been existence for centuries.

Button and Stiernsted (2017) opines that the concept of private security can be traced to the 13^th century B.C. in ancient Egypt, ancient Rome, and Ancient Greece. These ancient civilizations developed a system for guarding the monarchy, as well as highways, which were vital for trading between economic cities. The concept of watchpersons began in ancient Greece and the ancient Egypt civilization (Button and Stiernsted, 2017). The role of security guards transformed into modern-day security service professionals. The continual warfare in Europe in the middle Ages defined the establishment of private security services in Europe; the wealthy families required protection during the war. The feudalism held sway and defined the concept of private security by drawbridges and moats to protect the Castles (Button and Stiernsted, 2017). The development of mutual responsibility between the civilian protection units, and the militaries defined a collective purpose of protection of property and lives. The 18^th century formed the basis of modern-day security services. The revolution of crimes brought by the mechanization of economic systems such as the cottage industry led to the setup factories that required protection. The industrial revolution period was an essential duration for the private security sector. The security policy during the industrialization period was premised on the involvement of the citizens in the criminal justice system.

In 1748, Henry Fielding proposed the creation of professional security guards, which was soon followed by the establishment of the Pinkerton Agency in the United States of America (Button and Stiernsted, 2017). The private security services were deployed to protect factories and coal mining regions. The 19^th century was a necessary period for the public policing as inadequate policies forced businesses to turn to the private security sector for policing services. The private security sector grew in the 19^th century as it gained popularity among the elite in the society and the citizens. The advancement of infrastructure and political developments formed the basis of the progress of the private security sector. In the mid-19^th century to World War I, businesses hired private security entities due to the prevalence of labour disputes, especially in the USA (Button and Stiernsted, 2017). Invention of technology such as electric doorbells revolutionized the concept of private security as experienced in contemporary society

Additionally, after the World Wars and Cold War, private military security was developed to drive the interests of governments around the globe. The technological and business advancements in the private security sector led to the involvement of private security firms in investigative purposes in firms and government departments.

In England, the pre-modern policing systems were unable to combat the upsurge of crime; therefore, the private security guarding strategies were involved in fighting crime. The modern-day private security sector encompasses technological, legal, and personnel training into the professionalism that takes years to achieve (Van Steden and Sarre, 2007). The private security service has revolutionized to the point at which private security has become part of the policing strategy of various governments around the globe. Many government facilities and business facilities are under the protection of private security officers as well as systems. These facilities include airports, government buildings, and energy facilities, among others. Furthermore, contemporary private security services are offered to the residential premises, leisure venues, shopping malls, entertainment venues and retail facilities, among others.  The management and installation of CCTV systems, as well as patrol of, neighborhoods have been solely the role of private security firms around the world.

Status of private security as an essential service.

Essential services are defined under various jurisdictions as mandatory or vital services that the citizens require for social and economic growth in a country (Gernigon, Odero & Guido, 2000). Essential services range from health care service, education services, critical public services, and security services, among others.  The place of private security in the context of essential services is theoretically debatable but necessary. The contemporary security policies incorporate interlink between the private security sector and other essential services. Professionalism in the private security sector is a critical aspect in need for its incorporation as a critical service. The services offered by the private security in the U.K. such as protection of government facilities, individual security protection; protection of business premises and public institutions make the sector crucial in the country.

The link between various essential services such as security management systems and emergency responders makes private security a necessary part of the U.K. society. Multiple businesses in the U.K. are fitted with fire detection systems and CCTV systems by private security, which in the event of an incident become the first responders. The coordination between firefighters, the police, and the private security services sector is premised on professionalism; hence, an essential services. McDonald (2016) argues that government policies strategies cannot cover the whole of the U.K.; therefore, private security plays a vital role in offering essential services to the public.

Various companies sort for the services of the private security firms in management such as technological systems and financial systems especially the banking sector. The private security sector plays a fundamental economic role through employment of many people and paying of taxes to the government. The private security providers of guard forces perform police-like duties such as staffing cordons sites in times of emergencies (Kessler and Alexander, 2004). The role of private security is essential in cases of pandemic such as the COVID-19 pandemic in the world. The support and specialists in the health sector require contraction of private security services.  The role of private security in surveillance of risks is an essential role of the private sector to the public. The essentiality of private security service in the U.K. in premised on the corporation with other professions that offer necessary services.

Relationship between private security and other essential services.

The relationship between private security and other essential services is a critical discourse in the U.K. It is ideal for the U.K. to classify private security professionals as individuals’ offering essential services (Krahmann, 2009). Majority of people depend on private security firms for normal life services. The private security work together with the health sector through management of emergency response systems in residential areas and they also poses fire-detection services or alarm systems, which are connected to the national emergency responses. The private security guards are employed in learning institutions to police the institutions and protect their properties. Additionally, private security services are contracted by the government to protect buildings that offer essential services such as power plants as well as other necessary facilities. The technological and managerial services by private security sector are essential in various government facilities.

The case of declaration of private security service as an essential service provider is evident in U.K. Security officers play a critical role in matters of pandemic nature.  The private security firms work closely with stakeholders that provide essentials. The reach of police is limited; therefore, the private security fills the policing role as well as those of emergency service providers. McDonald (2016) opines that the case of giving the security service providers an essential worker status enable the firms to offer essential services during times of pandemics or any government emergency scenarios. The private security officers if given the essential worker status would not allow critical facilities vulnerable in case of any restriction or lockdown. The management systems, intruder detections, and alarm systems are crucial in the protection of various facilities during any emergency in the U.K.

The case of COVID-19 pandemic in the world spell the better case for designating the private security providers as an essential service provider status. Krahmann (2009) pen that identification of critical worker entails a careful examination of the service they offer Vis a Vie crucial needs of the citizens in times of emergency. The private security providers play an essential role in coordination with other primary service providers since they offer specialized services to the citizens and reach areas where other public policing apparatus cannot cover.  The private security sector employs people who specialize in an array of fields, which are essential to the public.

Privatization paradox.

However, there exists a paradox in the privatization of essential services in any country. Kessler and Alexander (2004) argue that the government must provide essential services to the citizens. The involvement of private security service providers in the provision of essential services raises explicit discourse on risks, costs, and tradeoffs during the transaction.  The definition of critical services that require privatization remains a dilemma. The private security service providers are capitalists in nature and need profits since they are established businesses.

The dimensions of the private security service entail service delivery performance; fiscal impact and balance payment impact Kessler and Alexander (2004) opine that privatization paradox underlies a critical precaution principle in the designation of private security providers as essential workers. The discourse encompasses the role of government and citizens. Ideally, there exists a consensus on the part of the government in the protection of the lives of its citizens. However. It is imperative of the citizens to participate in efforts that promote the public good. The boundary between private and public security raises a dilemma in the U.K.

The private security firms continue to expand as myriads of challenges such as understaffing as well as policies that increase the public policing sector. The assumption in roles of the private security providers and the public policing sectors raises issues in the designation of private security providers as essential service providers. Cost remains a vital impediment of categorizing private security providers as an essential service provider in the U.K. (Button, 2003). The services provided by the private security sector are expensive and require policy strategies to make them affordable to the citizens. The private company firms are profit-making institutions whose functions depend on the surety of payment. The issue of cost undercuts the role of public interest pegged to any service provider designated as an essential provides. The need for private security services is viewed as a necessity in cases where the government is not able to respond or deliver essential service on time, especially in cases of a pandemic or emergency. Furthermore, designation or security services as an essential service provider require government policies that involve intrigues of interest parties. The monetization of the private security services makes it a provider of service whose consumers are those who can afford rather than all citizens.

Conclusion.

In summary, despite the cons of the need to recognize private security services as an essential service, there exists a fundamental basis to consider designating it as a critical service. The paper highlights crucial reasons in the roles of private security in the ordinary lives of the citizens. The relationship between the private security sector and other essential service providers is critical in the United Kingdom. The evolution of the private security sector from the protection of life and property physical to the involvement of technology as well as management techniques makes the services by the security firms essential in contemporary society. The dependency of private services by the governments, private businesses, and the citizens makes a crucial case for recognizing the security service sector as a vital service provider.

References.

Alexandre,, M. (1997). A customer service survival story. Security Management, 41(11), 65-67.

Anderson, T. (2001). The hostile customer and other grim tales. Security Management, 45(8), 64-75.

Button, M. (2003). Private security and the policing of quasi-public space. International journal of the sociology of law, 31(3), 227-237.

Button, M., & Stiernstedt, P. (2017). The evolution of security industry regulation in the European Union. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 41(4), 245-257.

Cabinet Office. (2010). A strong Britain in an age of uncertainty: the national security strategy (Vol. 7953). The Stationery Office.

Cabinet Office & Great Britain. Parliament. (2010). Securing Britain in an age of uncertainty: the strategic defence and security review (Vol. 7948). The Stationery Office.

Durch, W., & Ker, M. (2013). Police in UN Peacekeeping: Improving Selection, Recruitment, and Deployment. Providing for Peacekeeping, 6, 1-42.

Garbaye, R., & Latour, V. (2016). Community and citizenship in the age of security: British policy discourse on diversity and counter-terrorism since 9/11. Revue Française de Civilisation Britannique. French Journal of British Studies, 21(XXI-1).

Gernigon, B., Odero, A., & Guido, H. (2000). ILO principles concerning the right to strike. International Labour Organization.

Kessler, T. P., & Alexander, N. C. (2004). Assessing the risks in the private provision of essential services. U.N.

Krahmann, E. (2009). Private security companies and the state monopoly on violence: a case of norm change? (Vol. 88, p. 34). DEU.

McDonald, D. A. (Ed.). (2016). Making public in a privatized world: the struggle for essential services. Zed Books Ltd.

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

Muuss, J. P. (1995). Security and the Surrogate Shopper. Security Management, 39, 55-57.

Rice, R. J., & CSSM, C. (2007). Customer Service and the Protection Officer: Guidelines to Achieving Excellence. Security Supervision and Management, 411.

Van Steden, R., & Sarre, R. (2007). The growth of privatized policing: some cross‐national data and comparisons. International Journal of comparative and applied criminal justice, 31(1), 51-71.

Walker, D. (2006). The Role of Security in Providing Customer Service.