|
Q. Do proprietary or contract security officers ever review the L.P.C., Ltd. security survey reports?
A. Normally not. In cases where a contract service is involved, however, it is usually a good idea for the service's account manager to review the report. Like proprietary security managers, these folks can often provide valuable input. In one case, where there was no security management per se at the facility and the professional level of the proprietary security officers was exceptionally high, the client requested a second copy of the report for the specific purpose of providing it to these officers.
Q. Have there been times when you didn't interface well with security management during a survey?
A. In one survey of a factory, initiated by the corporation's headquarters, the security manager was found to be not only incompetent, but also actively concealing problems during the survey. While he was exceptionally friendly, he was unable to answer even the most basic questions. He was unaware the lighting along a half mile stretch of the plant was completely non functional. The security officers had no specific instructions and there was no access control to speak of. The surveyor roamed the plant for a day with no one reporting the presence of an outsider. One of the security officers deplored the situation and showed the L.P.C., Ltd. surveyor a note from the security manager requesting that officers temporarily refrain from parking their personal vehicles inside the warehouse building until the survey was completed, because "it might look bad for security." Workers' spouses were found regularly visiting during evening hours, gaining access through a supposedly controlled access point of ingress egress. The security force was comprised of exceptionally overpaid unmotivated officers. The plant had adopted the obsolete and ineffective program of staffing the security force with injured laborers. This is the only time we ever recommended replacing security management or security officers. The corporation diaried a survey update for twelve months.
Q. Can a security survey result in increased, rather than decreased, exposure to litigation?
A. Absolutely. When exposure is identified and reasonable controls recommended, then ignored, and an event occurs which a suggested countermeasure would have prevented, increased exposure can exist. An example would be the facility mentioned above. In that case, had recommendations been ignored, the client could have incurred increased risk after being made aware of the situation. However, in that case, the update survey showed that the previous situation had been completely turned around. A new security manager, a petite good looking female who was tough as nails, ran the operation in a conscientious manner, demanding exceptional accountability from all and providing motivation to the security officers. Once a maintenance problem was reported by an officer, for instance a light out, she would contact maintenance. If the repair had not occurred within 24 hours, she was back on the phone. Additionally, she had inspired the entire plant to practice security awareness, the least expensive, yet most effective of all countermeasures. When the update surveyor entered the plant, he removed his visitor identification. By the time he reached the security manager's office, security had received six calls from workers reporting the presence of an intruder.
Q. Do you ever conduct penetration-type surveys without the knowledge of security management and security personnel?
A. No. Our goal is to work with these people for a common goal, not attempt to make them look bad.
|
|
