Post on 26-May-2020
2
Review of Security Agencies Grading Exercise
What do we want to achieve
• Sharpen the measurements to distinguish outstanding
SAs from the rest
• Measure security outcomes whenever possible
• Transparent scoring system with clear objective criteria
wherever possible
What the new assessment categories are
• Assessment criteria reframed under 3 categories:
• Process
• People
• System
3
Review of Security Agencies Grading Exercise
How the review was done
• Assessment criteria and scoring system were co-created
with industry representatives over 4 sessions
• Attended by representatives from the 2 Associations, the
bigger SAs, and the Union
Topic of Discussion Date
Overview of what needs to change 21 Apr 2017
Process category 6 Jul 2017
People category 27 Jul 2017
System category 21 Aug 2017
4
Review of Security Agencies Grading Exercise
What has been done
• Draft criteria were published on PLRD’s website in Sep
2017
• All SAs were informed in writing and given 2 weeks to
provide comments / feedback
• All comments and feedback were carefully evaluated
• Based on the inputs received, PLRD made refinements
to the criteria
• Final set of assessment criteria was published on
PLRD’s website on 17 Nov 2017
• All SAs were informed in writing to study the final
assessment criteria
5
Review of Security Agencies Grading Exercise
Score Weightage for Each Category
Process
50%
System
20%
People
30%
25 criteria
190 points
9 criteria
160 points
9 criteria
53 points
6
Review of Security Agencies Grading Exercise
When will the new assessment criteria take effect
• PLRD will adopt the new assessment criteria from SAGE
2018
• Assessment period: 1 Jun 2017 – 31 May 2018
• The number of A, B, C and D grades will be determined
by a grading curve
8
Criteria Feedback / Question Clarification
2. Is there a systematic process
to ensure that Security Officers
are aware of the functional duty
they are employed for (pre-
promotion)?
Promotees are given expanded
job description together with
promotion letter. Will these
suffice?
Evidence must include
documentation of briefing on
expanded job descriptions and
additional responsibilities.
Merely surfacing the JDs will not
be sufficient.
May result in undesirable
outcome where SA artificially
inflate the number of promotions
to meet the criteria.
The progression guidelines
under the PWM model are well
known by now. There are clear
objective requirements for PWM
grade promotion. It would thus
be difficult to inflate the
numbers.
8. Did the SA conduct AAR for
the deployed sites during the
period of assessment?
Criteria appeared to focus more
on quantity than on quality.
Numbers are important in this
aspect. Smaller SAs may have
a few deployment sites whilst
the larger SAs have hundreds. It
cannot be that we accept the
same number of AAR
regardless of the number of
deployment sites.
Process
9
Criteria Feedback / Question Clarification
4. Is the Security Officer aware
of the provisions in the Code of
Conduct under the Private
Security Industry Act?
Can SOs refer to charts at site
or other staff aids?
Yes, SOs may refer to staff aids
they carry with them.
6. Is the Security Officer able to
articulate the key procedures
without relying on any SOP
given any specific scenario?
People
10
Criteria Feedback / Question Clarification
3. Does the SA have a wireless
voice communications system to
support its ground operations?
Criteria appeared onerous for
the private security industry,
given the nature of job functions
and the costs involved.
To consider other internet-
enabled software solutions with
redundant capabilities.
Criterion has been tweaked to
include mobile phones.
6. Does the SA have an
electronic Incident Management
System to report, manage and
document incidents?
Can handwritten incident report
electronically transmitted satisfy
the criteria?
Would transmission over email
or messaging apps satisfy this
criteria?
What is expected is a fully
electronic system which is
capable of reporting, managing,
and tracking all reported
incidents. Thus, merely taking a
picture of a handwritten report
and transmitting it by a
messaging app from a mobile
phone to another mobile phone
would not meet this criterion.
What constitutes as an
“electronic” Incident
Management System?
There must be proper IT
software which tracks the start
of the incident to its conclusion.
The respective fields of the
incident (the ‘when’, ‘who’,
‘what’, ‘where’, ‘how’) must be
searchable.
System
11
Criteria Feedback / Question Clarification
7. Does the SA have a secured
IT system to facilitate training
through e-learning?
I load PowerPoint slides or PDF
files into our mobile devices
(e.g. smartphones, tablets) so
that our SOs can do self
learning. Can this be considered
as a e-learning system?
Will I get the additional points
for this sub-criterion: “the above
system also allows e-learning
anytime and anywhere through
mobile devices”?
What is expected is a system
which allows authorized
individuals to log in and choose
the training modules desired.
The training delivery can be
done through slides, video, or a
combination of both. PLRD Is
open to accept other innovative
modes of delivery.
Additional 20 points will be
awarded if the system allows
remote log in at any time using
mobile devices.
8. Does the SA have a secured
IT system to administer e-
testing?
What are the key features that
PLRD is looking for in a e-
testing IT system?
We are looking for a secured IT
system that requires user
authentication for log in. The
system must be able to
administer the test and capture
the test result of each
participating individual.
System
12
Criteria Feedback / Question Clarification
9. Does the SA have an
electronic system to track the
developmental training of its
Security Officers for progression
under PWM?
What kind of IT system /
software / platform do I need to
use to track all these
information?
It is up to the individual SA to
decide what IT system or
software should be used.
What is expected is an
electronic system which
captures the following
information of all Security
Officers employed by the SA:
• Particulars
• Training records
• Effective date of current
PWM grade
• Projected date when the
Security Officer is eligible for
progression to the next
higher PWM grade
System
13
Feedback / Question Response
Most criteria, e.g. remote surveillance system, 24
hours command centre, wireless voice
communication system, are too costly to
implement for smaller SAs.
As stated earlier, PLRD’s objective is to sharpen
the measurements to distinguish outstanding
SAs from the rest.
It follows that SAs which have invested heavily in
technology to be more effective and/or cut
reliance on manpower should be appropriately
recognized.
This is a deliberate move by PLRD to steer the
industry towards higher standards and better
security outcomes.
Can the technology adopted come from a third
party vendor? Or must it be our own proprietary?
PLRD’s objective is outcome oriented. It does
not matter whether SAs have the organic IT
capabilities or buy IT services from 3rd party
vendors.
Other Feedback / Questions