National Certification enters the Facebook dialogue

Yesterdays VLOG on the national certification for dignitary and executive protection finally landed in a conversation on Derrick Collin’s Facebook page.  For once the conversation was not on bullets and blades.  I plan to continue pushing this certification to the masses in order to prepare everyone for what’s coming down the pipeline.  I was not surprised by the comment on whether this certification was another way to pad the pockets of a few.  Let me cut through the chase here because we are all adults.  Nothing associated in this industry is without a cost even if it the cost of time.  But it is unrealistic to think that the cost of the certification does not go somewhere.  From my limited understanding, the work that is done thus far was VOLUNTARY.  These board members have invested their personal and business time to cleaning up this industry and come to a standard.  For me that is a level of commitment.  Especially in an industry where you have specialists that have a price on the name and won’t entertain coming to a briefing unless they are paid to attend.  “Are we getting paid for travel?”  “Is it a 4 hour minimum?” Everything we do has a cost associated with it, yet specialists will go to the bank and put 200 lbs of coins in their bank coin sorter to see how much money they have towards the next shooting course.  Specialists are funny to me at times and never seem to give me a reason to write.  I love it.

In my post this morning on Facebook, I equated the national certification with that of the WPPS certification program.  I did not hear of any push back about that standardization to the levels that I hear about this, yet the standard was set and operators and the few that slid in had to be WPPS certified.  This certification will not sought after by everyone.  In fact, one of the questions I have for Dave Johnson is this; if there is a measurement of tenure that has to be met [which I fully support] the pool of qualified persons that meet the assessment measurement will deplete very quickly.  How do the specialists that don’t have tenure work to meet the criteria.  Is the board ok with the fact that the majority of the industry specialists will have to continue plugging away at the “time on station” requirement.  That is my only area of concern.  There will be a glass ceiling when insurance companies and clients come on board. This may encourage the usage of uncertified persons due to available resources.  On the other hand, those with the certifications will be a sought after commodity.

There will have to be a full blown campaign to get everyone on board and unless there are some radical curve balls thrown along the way, The American Board for the Certification in Dignitary and Executive Protection has my support.


  1. Raffaele


    Sorry brother but I am a little hesitant, not that the industry doesn’t need absolutely everything you say. I also always have liked the fact that you are straight forward. So here are my concerns.

    This is the same organization under the auspices of the American College of Forensic Examiners International Inc, through their The American Board for Certification in Homeland Security that I was a member of in the mid 90’s. This is the same organization that as recently as April of this year was ousted for “selling certifications” by PBS Frontline. http://www.propublica.org/article/no-forensic-background-no-problem

    Now let me be absolutely clear, I know some of the guys listed on the board and the rest by reputation, this is in no way an attack on them or indicative of their achievements and their credentials.

    But maybe because I don’t have the inside track that you do I just don’t know enough to take the chance just yet. I know that the American Society for Industrial Security (ASIS) is looking at doing something similar as well. I guess I’ll see who comes out with what first?

    Unfortunately, it leaves me for now in the same spot I think all of us have been in for years. We have to take the time to properly execute our due diligence and have a proper vetting process.

    To your point on tenure, I whole heartily agree. There is no reason not to have a apprentice, journeyman and master level. It is done quite successfully in a lot of other professions. At the end of the day we are looking to be recognized as the professionals that we are.

    I do believe WPPS/WPS is a bad example to pattern this after since it is a program that was developed by one client to serve a particular and peculiar need. I would like to see something that would appeal to the wide client base that I serve. There are a hundreds of guys coming off that program that will never adjust to the board room, affluent, C-class executives in the states.

    In closing I have a lot of respect for your opinion and maybe I am just missing the links here. We absolutely need the changes and the standards, but I need it to be with an organization with a reputation beyond reproach. Without our reputations which one of us would still be working today?

    1. Eric Konohia

      Thanks for voicing your opinion and I appreciate you backing it up with some facts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *