THE long anticipated security legislation is now law, and requires that many activities in the local security industry be conducted differently. The legislation will affect the way the industry operates in general, but will have a particular effect upon the way security companies are managed and the way in which security personnel are trained. To this end, The Guyana Association for Private Security Organizations (GAPSO) is busy trying to meet the stipulated requirements to ensure that its members’ houses are in order.
Any field is molded and constrained by its paradigms. A ‘paradigm’ can be defined as:
(1) A pattern, example, or model;
(2) A mode of thought or practice;
(3) A conceptual framework or an overall concept or strategy accepted by most people in a given field, for example its ethos, guiding principles and sustaining cultures. The field of security relies on a number of paradigms, both stated and unstated. Many of these are in the process of changing- or at least should change – in order to adapt to the rapidly changing world and to improve security effectiveness.
A way of understanding any subject is to know its definition, the history behind the concept, its nature, purpose and scope. To understand industrial security, we must define what it is, and the definition should be in such a way as to make its meaning clear to all.  In short, Industrial security management is regarded as deliberate activities for securing installations and to prevent loss and danger to corporate assets (both tangible and intangible).
When a client hires a security provider, they do so because they are not interested or capable of managing their own security for a number of reasons. Thus, three fundamental components should be embodied in this arrangement:
1. The supply of competent security personnel
2. The availability of technical and managerial competencies
3. The provision of emergency support services
The problems facing our current crop of security supervisors and managers are grounded in the fact that they are often unable to identify or define the various, types or forms of security arrangements practised in the private sector. What security philosophy is one following? Is it asset protection, safety management, risk management, fortification, loss prevention or loss control?  Concentric security or concentric redundancy? Is the security convergent or divergent? The lack of industry knowledge often results in management reducing the security budget at will, without the security manager’s involvement.
One example of a unique security arrangement is the hybrid concentric model (HCM); you could see it in operation at most large companies, GPL, GT&T, Banks DIH, commercial banks and the like. It is characterised by the utilization of both contract and proprietary security personnel, and a combination of security hardware and software. A cursory check would often identify several security threats and vulnerabilities which have been ignored for years. These threats emerge from the poor combination, coordination, deployment and management of security resources, and often result in the wastage of inordinate sums of money annually. Further observation would reveal that safety management is the philosophy which guides the security effort at the Cheddi Jagan International Airport, Guysuco and the GPL power stations.
Any programme or system designed to combat security threats will prove ineffective unless it is supported by a comprehensive security education component. Security personnel cannot effectively accomplish their mission without the active interest and support of everyone in the establishment; such interest and support can be secured only through a continuous security education programme.
A security system does not exist in isolation. It operates within a larger environment, which has physical, economic, political, social, legal, cultural, demographic, moral, technological and global dimensions. The security manager has to operate within the framework established by the environment. Environmental factors can and do affect security operations, which can only be solved through the application of scientific principles. The objective of security governance then, is to bring about greater accountability in the provision of security services.

During 2009, two large international security companies out of Sweden and Israel had commissioned studies on the security industries in Trinidad Jamaica, Guyana and The Dominican Republic. These studies paid special attention to the business practices of the security companies in these countries, but also took particular note of their training methodologies and the capacities of their respective trade associations. Special mention was made in both studies of the fact, that while the Caribbean region has a high crime rate, security training in the region remains rudimentary.
Most multinational security companies make their entry into developing countries ostensibly under the guise of providing services of a higher calibre. However, once in the jurisdiction, they often find it difficult to compete with indigenous companies and soon abandon the quality aspect of their marketing strategy. GAPSO will need to respond swiftly to deal with the new social realities which will emerge from these new developments.    
According to the literature on private security governance, the formula for professionalising the security industry is as follows: the presence and enforcement of relevant security legislation; the establishment of trade and professional bodies, voluntary compliance, and the availability of industry specific security training by specialised entities. Since Guyana now has all of these elements in place, and is ahead of the rest of the Caribbean in certain respects, Guyana could very well emerge the regional security lynchpin in a few years.