Skip To Content

Blake & Associates

A full service firm specializing in security consulting and
investigative support to business management and the legal profession.

CONTACT US

William F. Blake, CPP, CFE
P.O. Box 489
Littleton, Colorado 80160-0489
(303) 683-3327 Phone
(303) 683-3328 Fax
bill@blakeassociates.com

Home » Articles » Outsourcing: More For Your Security Dollar

Outsourcing: More For Your Security Dollar

David E. Forbes
CEO, Quo Vadis International, Inc.
William F. Blake, CPP, CFE
President, Blake and Associates, Inc.

"Outsourcing isn’t just for the big guys anymore. Thanks to Internet technology–and the companies that it’s spawned–mid-market corporations are finding new ways to save money, win the war for talent, keep investors happy, and find their own strategic focus."1

Outsourcing is not a new concept but one that is growing by leaps and bounds across all corporate environments. Originally, only large corporations engaged in the outsourcing of business units and tasks. Now the concept is invading the mid-sized market as a viable business strategy.

According to the Outsourcing Institute, in 1996 outsourcing was viewed as a viable means to achieve cost control or economies of scale. Today outsourcing is an essential management tool for success in business innovation, global expansion and competitive advantage.

Many companies, regardless of size or product, have found that outsourcing non-core competencies has allowed them to achieve greater financial success while gaining additional and previously unavailable resources.

As an example, how does this affect the trucking industry? The core competencies of the trucking industry surround the timely movement of freight. The security of this freight and the potential for loss, a non-core competency, is a significant candidate for outsourcing. The management of transit and other liability claims is one example of outsourcing already familiar to many trucking operators.

In today’s environment, freight loss poses a significant threat to profitability. The maintenance of a centralized security or loss prevention unit can so easily become a costly overhead with less than satisfactory return on investment. Frequently, overinflated management with layers of administration reduces productivity. At the other extreme, forcing a security department to become too lean to be a real value is also pointless. Real effectiveness comes from the ability to call upon additional expertise and resources when they are needed. An efficient security director is in a position to recognize and justify such needs.

In some situations, the security function has been perverted by unnecessary and unproductive demands from senior managers. When the security department is viewed as a SNOW Department–”stuff no one else wants”, they are tasked with requirements that are contradictory to, and interfere with, their primary responsibility for security of corporate assets. Actual examples of such requirements being placed on the security department include:

Reliance on law enforcement is no longer part of the protection plan. Law enforcement agencies, for a variety of reasons, respond to public demands to the frequent exclusion of your business interests. Business losses are frequently considered nothing more than “the cost of doing business”, even to the extent that investigators and prosecutors take the view that the business owner can afford it.

Therefore, loss prevention and recovery rests almost entirely on your business strategies. A department store Vice President for distribution complained bitterly that his company was unable to persuade a district attorney to prosecute in a case involving high volume product theft in their distribution chain. Weaknesses in the company’s own security planning and resources were in part responsible. How to best meet your needs is utilization of all available security and loss prevention related resources.

What Are the Advantages of Outsourcing Your Loss Prevention Function?

Consider This

« Return