Articulating T
he implications of the annual salary survey from SSR Personnel and ASIS International, where data is collated from more than 12,000 security professionals across 40 business sectors.
Employment, salaries and inflation statistics
The UK Office of National Statistics (ONS) reports that in Q1 2019 UK wage inflation was 3.4%, whilst Consumer Price Index annual inflation (CPI) averaged 1.8 %. In general, mid-management salaries and bonuses increased by 5.4%.
According to Eurostat, the average mid- management salary in the UK was £84,500, the fourth highest in Europe, with Swiss workers at No 1, followed by Germany and Luxembourg. The numbers in employment in the UK, 32.7 million, increased by 300,000 over the past 12 months. Those classified as inactive (people who chose not to work) was just under 7 million. The official UK jobless rate reduced to 3.8 % (1.3 million, the lowest percentage since 1974, whilst UK population has grown by 10 million between 1974 and 2019.
From January to March 2019, there were an estimated 852,000 vacancies in the UK, 32,000 more than a year earlier. These are primarily in the health care sector, 15.6 %, followed by the hospitality and food sector. In the security technology sector, SSR estimates there is a vacancy rate of 1.2 jobs per 100 workers. Many of these are being created in value enhanced roles, implementing and connecting technology, mirroring the surging telecommunications sector.
Skills Shortages
The monthly SSR/Pertemps sponsored CBI Report on Jobs has highlighted skills shortages across the UK which are affecting corporations. The UK is still attracting talented Europeans, but the pool of talent has diminished in the past two years. Home-grown graduates are entering the UK jobs market and being attracted to sectors such as “FinTech”, the application of technology to
your worth to the boardroom
improve financial activities. FinTechs in general are disrupters, changing process to introduce new applications, processes and products. Anti-money laundering and fraud prevention are typically areas that benefit from this technology.
Convergence has benefits and perils
Convergence has immediate effects: reduced costs across almost all industries; merging mechanical engineering and wet services, physical security and IT. The logic is sound until the CEO’s greatest nightmare – losing data to a hacktivist; the Board non-executive being associated with an organisation in which the preventable death of an employee results in a corporate manslaughter charge; or the COO paying a ransom demand when the firm’s driver booking platform was hacked pre their initial stock exchange listing.
The elements of those corporate crises need a rehearsed solution, and for some firms that experience is not available, as the person at the top does not have the mental agility to keep all the plates spinning or depth of experience within the lean corporation.
We have seen within the Boards of the 1,000 largest corporations in Europe over the past twelve months, an understanding that they cannot be passive in regards to resilience. Shareholder and regulatory authorities will not forgive mistakes, and fines will be levied for persistent miscreants.
Being fined 4% of your global revenues under GDPR has increased the salaries for those that work in the security risk function in the UK who have embraced GDPR, becoming the ‘go- to’ experts. As looks likely, Facebook may be fined €50bn in the EU for data sharing in Mexico to a third party.
Non-compliant anti-regulatory behaviour can be deep rooted into everyday business practice, only exposed by whistleblowers or hackers. It also highlights the three major differences in data management: China, where they seek to control data; the EU, which seeks to protect personal data; and the Americas, where data has traditionally been there to be commercialised.
We are seeing these concepts clashing by way of fines which will dwarf the banking regulator fines and compensation levied
28 © CI TY S ECUR I TY MAGAZ INE – SUMME R 2 0 1 9 www. c i t y s e c u r i t yma g a z i n e . c om
collectively at the twenty largest banks since 2008 of €321bn, the top four UK banks paying €50bn in fines and compensation. Since 2008 the same large banks have made €1 trillion in profit.
Getting a salary increase
This year’s salary survey reveals that 44% of participants increased their salary through annual review, 20% by changing their jobs (down from 22% in 2018),18% though increased responsibility and 7.9% through formal job revaluation. On the whole, applicants seeking to change jobs was less than 45%, whilst in 2010-2012 that figure was over 59% of those in the job market. In general, physical security remains cost controlled for many end-user clients. Empathetic gapping is emerging: this occurs where the business wants to devolve non- essential activities, usually to traditional outsourcers, but compliance risks have to be managed by a corporate person.
The risk management function is increasingly attractive as a profession, as there is a high level of qualifications that can be achieved which attracts the Millennial workforce who seek a greater diversity of work experience. Investments in global security operations centres (GSOC) in 2018-19 led to ten major investment programmes.
The diversity of monitoring undertaken (people, assets, regulatory requirements) requires a different skill-set when recruiting project teams where a diversity of experience is in short supply. India and Asia have seen significant investment, but senior management are having to be deployed from other countries to train and mentor local, highly educated applicants. Total packages for a twelve-month deployment are in the region of £200,000 p.a.
Diversity
Diversity is a major factor that companies wish to address in their security teams. With a dominant male presence, many security departments do not reflect their corporation’s broader diversity make-up. Across Europe this is very noticeable, with global corporations undertaking detailed attraction projects to understand how they can address this imbalance, which can have a demonstrable effect on performance.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40
