Bundled vs Single Service Security: A Discussion

This month we released a new report based on interviews with suppliers and procurers of security services that looks at the benefits and drawbacks of providing security as a ‘single service’ or as part of a ‘bundle’ alongside other facilities management services.

The report identifies a range of drivers that determines success or failure in outsourcing arrangements. This includes:

  • The correct identification of the types of outsourcing that is going to work best
  • The quality of the procurement process that is used to help identify the best supplier(s)
  • The experience of the buyer in providing the type of sourcing chosen
  • The experience of suppliers (and/or in-house sources) to provide the required service to a high level
  • The extent to which this can be achieved cost effectively (not least compared to alternatives)

What clients say about approaches to security procurement

Clients said they outsource their security for reasons that included:

  •  security companies are experts at security
  • it is more cost effective

Clients said they preferred to keep security in-house for reasons that included:

  • security contractors are not sufficiently competent
  • they do not have expertise in sub-contracting work

Clients liked bundling for reasons that included:

  • they felt it offered cost savings and financial flexibility
  • it offered an opportunity to standardise practices and improve management practices

Clients chose not to bundle for reasons that included:

  • they felt that bundling security with other services could lead to security being undermined
  • they felt that bundling security led to a loss of control of the security function

What suppliers say about approaches to security procurement

Suppliers thought bundling was a good option for reasons that included:

  • it reduces administration for clients, this can result in cost savings
  • it can raise the quality of work of weaker parts of a bundle and allow staff to become more engaged with the wider organisation

Suppliers thought single service security was good option for reasons that included:

  • it allows the client to choose the ‘best in class’ option
  • managing single services can be more straightforward than complicated bundles

Professor Martin Gill who led the study noted:

‘The jury is still out on whether the popularity of bundling in some places is a sign of new and better ways of working or a cyclical change brought about because in current times cost is often a priority over risk. There were strong supporters of some of the benefits of single service and some of bundling although not always on a strong evidence base. What this study has shown is that many organisations have an incomplete understanding of the benefits and drawbacks of providing security in different ways’.

You can download your free copy of the report at: www.perpetuityresearch.com/main.php

To get more information about this report or any of our other work please get in touch my emailing prci@perpetuityresearch.com or calling 0116 222 5553

One comment

  • Leon Michiel Stolp

    If we take the definition of risk as reducing the cost of business through preventing loss, then arguing how ‘cost is often a priority over risk’ is not a correct way to frame it.

Leave a Reply