«

»

Where military and law enforcement structure is best served

I have been pondering this topic for awhile now. As I have mentioned in the past, there was a time in this industry, that you had to have a law enforcement or military background in order to get hired and to succeed. As those lines faded they prominently came back during the push for high threat/PSD protection details traveled to te sandbox. I still believe that there are areas in this industry that are best served under the premise of a law enforcement or military institution.

I strongly believe that the operational structure or command and control of protective services should be run under this style of management. Theoretical perspectives like chain of command, rank and file instill a discipline within the overall structure of the company. The order of business from the ground up or the specialist to the management level is streamlined and more effective. One of the most volatile diseases in any organization is micro-management. There is still a possibility of this under the model I am talking about but it is less than in a corporate style run business.

In most corporate style organizations there is a lot of crossing of the lines with responsibilities. There are portions of our companies that cannot escape the corporate structure. Areas such as payroll, marketing, and other budgeting aspects cannot escape the corporate influence. The way Google handles their company from a corporation aspect is a perfect example, however their approach to personnel, dress code and overall office persona could not work for our industry. There must be a constant and over riding perspective of a para-military military tone throughout. If the main office is run like a playground it will eventually trickle down to the operations on the ground.

The office personnel that are hired to handle non-operational matters should be forewarned on the organizational structure because it can be a shock to them. When I was with the Maryland State Police, the civilian personnel populated the department equally, if not more than sworn personnel. YET, they knew how the chain of command worked. They knew that issues had to be brought to their first line supervisor and not the division commander. He/She was off limits and there was no open door policy in the department. The open door policy is better served in the corporate structure and less beneficial where structure is necessary.

Most EP companies run their details under a command and control structure. The whole idea of a detail leader, shift leader, lead advance and advance specialist is a hierarchical structure that emulates a para-military feel. Having that on the ground level yet having a playground as an office structure is a recipe for disaster.

Leave a Reply

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