Eliminate Mismanagement To Raise Bottomline: Security Gurus
New Delhi, Sep 10 (UNI) Posting guards at gates is no longer sufficient security-- businesses must be protected from within, two award-winning Indian security professionals say.
Wrong managers, wrong human resource policies and neglect of fire, pilferage and other risks were among factors cited by Kunwar Vikram Singh and Ravinder Kishore Sinha as causes of losses companies incur.
Singh and fellow security professionals assembled this week to felicitate Sinha, who was honoured last month by Security Association of Singapore for having promoted ''globally'' the concept of 'Total Loss Control'.
A few days ago, Singh was reported to have been honoured by the World Association of Detectives at Tokyo, Japan for having caught in New Delhi a man wanted by Interpol for a multi-million dollar fraud in Singapore. He is president of a Central Association of Private Security Industry.
Sinha, the executive chairman of an International Institute of Security and Safety Management, acknowledged that the TLC concept drew on an old wisdom: A penny saved is a penny earned.
He recalled how the Steel Authority of India once turned down a Rupees five crore security package proposed by an executive because it did not want to reduce the bottom line.
But SAIL changed its mind once it was explained how the expense would pay for itself many times over and add to the bottom line through savings.
In India, security affairs are still largely identified with the notion of 'chowkidari,' Sinha said, adding that it involved in fact a lot more.
Sinha remarked that managements have hitherto been skeptical about such measures, but new laws in the air are changing that.
They include Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act 2005 and a Bill in the works to regulate private investigation industry.
He said securitymen were traditionally hired to guard businesses against outsider threats-- whereas threats lurk within. ''Sources of losses are sitting well within an organisation.'' He pointed to the enormous risks that companies run, for instance, not taking care of fire hazards -- as three per cent of India's Gross Domestic Product goes up in smoke every year.
He said businesses-- even the best of business schools-- often define profit as total revenue minus total expenditure, but overlook ''unnecessary costs, elimination of which adds to the bottom line or profit.'' Singh cited a multinational he did not name, some of whose senior officials hired unqualified kin and engaged in other questionable practices. ''Once we made our report, the needful was done.'' Sinha and Singh said besides mismanagement and corrupt practices, such costs arise from inadequate security and safety, workplace waste, drug abuse, and can be cut down by taking preventive and reactive steps involving investigation and intelligence work.
In reply to questions, Sinha said corruption at various levels was a growing threat, but it could only be countered when the top management took interest.
Asked if employees seeking to legally oppose such goings-on could hire their services, Sinha replied: ''We assist anyone with a legitimate stake, and employees are stakeholders.'' Sinha said the idea was to identify all kinds of sources of losses and ''develop an integrated counter-measure.'' Sinha said every organisation had essentially two kinds of energies or forces at work-- positive and negative. The latter must be checked to turn things around.
UNI MJ AB KP1109