Corporate Security Challenges Critically discuss the assertion by Briggs and Edwards (2006, p.21) that corporate security departments face the same challenges as any other business function: "they must keep pace with their company's changing business environment and ensure that how they work, what they do and how they behave reflect these realities

The world has become a global village through globalization. Business undertakings have come to be more and more intricate. This in turn has altered and transformed the structure and the strides being taken in the corporate realm (Tipton and Krause, 2003). This is owing to a number of aspects. To start with, the inundation of traditional markets is causing organizations to move towards risky directions. For instance, in the contemporary, the advancement of business strategies, such as having offshore companies, enable the management of organizations from afar (McGee, 2006). In addition, the rise of accountability of organizations through corporate social responsibility and corporate governance have forced companies to make sure their proclamations and actions are in tandem, irrespective of their business operation locations. At the present moment, there is the interrelation between the manner in which a business operates and its risk portfolio. Other kinds of organizational behavior can undercut the license of operation. For this reason, security has grown to become a significant element in the corporate realm in the contemporary. Companies are seeking new strategies for risk management and the security management division has protracted its scope to include: information assurance, repute, corporate social responsibility and corporate governance and regulation (Briggs and Edwards, 2006).

To begin with, corporate security departments have to comprehend that security in overall is attained through the actions undertaken by personnel everyday across the company. This is not an aspect that can be wholly partaken by the corporate security department on behalf of the company. As a result, its success and effectiveness as a business function is reliant on its capacity to persuade and influence others to function differently. In turn, this lays emphasis on communication and necessitates the corporate security department to appreciate and see the importance of the perspective of non-security professionals as much as the views of the specialists. Secondly, corporate security departments have to be aware of the restrictions of command and control methods to change management (Purser, 2004). Organizational behavior is transformed and altered simply by influencing, coaxing, convincing, and elucidating why this new manner of operation works in the interest of every individual. This necessitates departments to function through principal social networks, which places concentration and focus on individuals, management and social talents than security understanding. The supremacy of the corporate security function in this day and age is directly proportional to the quality of its associations, not the profundity of its content knowledge (Whitman and Mattord, 2010).

One other aspect is that corporate security departments have to fully comprehend that they play a significant role for the corporation as a whole. In particular, they have to understand that they help the corporation to undertake risks rather than doing away with them, and having emergencies in place to decrease harm and damage at the time when incidents go wrong. Being a risk taker is a vital characteristic to successful and prosperous companies. Taking this into account, corporate security departments ought not to act as security conformists and traditionalists whose undertakings take away from, rather than add towards, the goals and objectives of the company (Raggard, 2010). In addition, corporate security departments have to clinch and make a contribution towards the core business concerns of the corporations, and for that reason, have to increase the security portfolio in a significant manner. In the contemporary, these corporate security departments have accountabilities in different areas, for instance, business continuity, brand management, and corporate governance. These responsibilities bring about several parties to inquire the significance of the term, security, to outline what they undertake. According to Briggs and Edwards (2006), the word resilience offers a more precise and comprehensive reflection of the variation of the responsibilities of the corporate security departments.

It is imperative for a corporate security department to make a clear and vivid distinction between the operational and strategic elements of security management. This will enable the corporate security department to take a central lean with respect to strategy and this lets the other business units within the corporation to undertake operational work. This allows all units to have a clear viewpoint to direct and guide their attitude towards security. This provides a bearing...

Another important aspect is that in order for corporate security departments to be trailblazers, they have to do away with old and obsolete suppositions, regarding where their supremacy and rightfulness emanate from. It is imperative to ensure that their stance does not hinge on or depend on that which makes them dissimilar, which is their content knowledge, but rather on business insight, people skills, and management capacity and communication proficiency (Brooks, 2013). To make it more simple, corporate security departments have to compete and operate on similar aspects as every other function within the corporation. This is causing several organization to concentrate and focus more on these skills in comparison to the context of security and a number of people have been operating on security, who actually do not have any expertise in security at all (Cavanagh, 2005).
Critically discuss the main ingredients of an effective procurement strategy with reference to the contracting of manned guarding services

In definition, procurement is referred to as the acquisition of supplies, material as well as services that an organization or project needs so as to effectively function and operate. A procurement strategy basically refers to the strategic and intended approach of cost-effectively buying a corporation's needed supplies, taking into account numerous aspects and factors, for instance, the time period for procurement, the capital and budget, the anticipated risks and prospects and more (Procurement Academy, 2015). The following section will discuss the key elements for an affective procurement strategy with regard to the contracting of manned guarding services. The procurement strategy defines a plan, which makes the most of the external expenditure, procurement processes and other value contributions in a way that backs up the general agenda of the corporation.

One of the key ingredients is the development of the goals and objectives of the project. In this case, the main objective is to attain manned guarding services at a cost-effective rate. This is taking into account the accessible and prevailing resources and supplies, the budget available for the organization and the timeline predetermined for the procurement. In this case, it is imperative to ensure that the strategy for procurement or the manned guarding services is in tandem with the established goals and objectives of the company (Albano et al., 2006). Another important element is the relationship analysis. To begin with, the supplier has to be identified and ascertain whether they have the capacity of contributing to the business strategy of the organization. More so, in the contracting of manned guarding services, it is imperative for the corporation to ensure that a partnership has been created with the supplier. Having a healthy relationship with the supplier of the services will in fact be beneficial to the procurement process in the future (Procurement Academy, 2015).

Briggs and Edwards (2006, p.38-39) assert that "corporate security departments can learn a lot from the ways in which nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) manage their security, based on 'the security triangle' which has three elements: acceptance, protection and deterrence." Critically discuss this assertion taking into account the relationship between corporate security and the wider community in which their organizations operate

The corporate security departments can learn a lot from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and the manner in which they manage their security. This is for the reason that when an organization is effectively incorporated into the communities and societies within which they operate, then they cease becoming a target and become a partner (Briggs and Edwards, 2006). The security triangle mentioned continues to be relevant for companies and can be employed successfully. However, this can only be attained if the corporate security department has a proper comprehension of the local settings and the influence they can have on such an environment. Attaining this sort of method in practice depends on a longstanding, sustainable business strategy reinforced by changed business practices and a number of all-encompassing operative values (Briggs and Edwards, 2006).

More so, corporate security departments have to learn from NGOs that in order to realize this vision, it is imperative for them to transform the manner in which they perceive threats and challenges and adjust from an approach of immense cautiousness to security that is centered on incorporation and candidness. This is for the reason that, the security of a corporation faces threat at the time when communities do not perceive any sort of individual or mutual constructivism from their presence. More so, this can be…