Security Training and Management

Q1. What appears to be the main emphasis on the 8-hour pre-assignment training course proposed by the Task Force on Private Security? What is the reasoning behind pre-assignment training? Three decades later are those educational goals still relevant?
Although some employers combine basic security training with pre-assignment training and only provide the minimum number of hours required by law, the overall trend within the field has been to increase the number of hours of training. This offers greater protection for employers, should they become the subject of a lawsuit (McCrie, 2016). Additional training highlights the extent to which the employer engaged in planning for every possible eventuality. Also, employees come to security positions with very diverse backgrounds. Many police officers, firefighters, and other personnel have had training through their own organizations which may not necessarily be congruent with that of a private employer. Providing training ensures that all personnel have the same homogenous background and are, in effect, on the same page regarding acceptable conduct. It also allows trainees to anticipate possible problems and think more carefully and critically beforehand how they may solve them.
Three decades later, the advice to engage in rigorous training is even more relevant. Given post 9/11-security concerns, security personnel are responsible for guarding against potential terrorist and international attacks, not merely the actions of individuals. They must also spot potentially troubling conduct that can have repercussions outside of the immediate environment. This is another important issue, as employers may be held liable for any oversights which occur regarding larger security concerns pertaining to such threats.
Q2. Define ongoing training and compare it with in-service training.
Ongoing training refers to constant observation of the quality of the services being performed by the security firm (McCrie, 2016). It is necessary to provide both positive and negative feedback, so employees can understand if they are doing a good or bad job. Feedback, whether oral or written (although preferably written, so there can be a paper trail of there are any human resource or legal concerns about performance reviews) is necessary to ensure that the promised services are being delivered to the purchaser or contractor (McCrie, 2016).
In-service training allows employees to receive feedback from peers in an isolated context. In contrast to ongoing training, which focuses on manager and employer feedback, in-service training gives employees the benefits of the insights of fellow professionals. This feedback is often more sympathetic and less judgmental, and may offer specific solutions to the problems that service personnel are grappling with that might otherwise be overlooked. Personnel may not necessarily feel comfortable sharing these issues with employers or managers, particularly if they relate to the stresses of the job.
Q3. Under what circumstances would management provide T-group in-service training?
T-group training (also called sensitivity training) is primarily designed to orient workers to a diverse workplace and to help forestall eventual problems which could result from miscommunication, inappropriate behavior and comments, or even from harassment. It is essential to set a clear, professional tone from the outset. T-group training may also be used to forestall or deal with legal issues which may arise regarding discrimination. Managers may wish to show the company is making a good faith effort to protect members of historically discriminated-against groups. It can also be useful to leverage the diversity of the workplace, and to ensure that a minimum number of problems occur, if employees have different cultural reference points and ways of relating to one another which may come into conflict.
Reference
McCrie, Robert. (2016). Security operations management (3rd ed.). Waltham, MA: Butterworth-
Heinemann.