Even before the first sip of my morning coffee, my mind was clear enough to see that my colleague had just made one heck of an ask.

I checked around me to make sure there were no journalists.

She had just challenged me to publicly identify reasons why a security professional would not want to use Guard Force Management Software or Security Workforce Management Software (SWMS).

At first, I thought her question was like asking the leaders of Google or Bing to provide reasons why search engines were not necessary!

After all, I was on the TrackTik Team, the leading workforce management software focused exclusively on the security industry. So you know I like my security with a side of data, or better yet — I like my security decisions to be based on data! So data, ROI, KPIs, and SLAs are what should contribute to a robust security program.

But forget me! From a survey we conducted last year, I knew that security service end-users wanted exactly what SWMS provided: tons of revealing data, better quality security metrics, and innovative ways to show a security company’s transparency, accountability, and reliability.

So my colleague was asking me — a proud security generalist with an entrepreneurial spirit — to potentially risk the ire and ridicule of my fellow security professionals and practitioners.

I said, “Bring it on!”

So here are 5 reasons you should NOT streamline or automate your security workforce management with well-designed software:

1. Real-time incident and security data are NOT important

To you, your operation and your clients.All parties are fine with information coming in whenever the fax or mail arrives, if it arrives. Moreover, your client has no need for media-rich reports that have pictures and video to support your recommendations or observations!

2. There are NO safety issues relating to a security officer working alone

There are none and never will be — not even the slightest chance of a slip and fall.

3. There is NO turnover at your site

The same security team has been working there forever and they will never leave. They, in no way, need rich reports, reminders on critical items, and tools to ensure that they handle each situation properly.

4. The peace of mind offered by modern tools has NO value for you

And by modern, I mean crazy peace-of-mind stuff like GPS, geo-fencing, body cameras, automated post orders, etc.!

5. Data, trends, business intelligence, and analytics are of NO use to you or your security program

If this is the case, I am not so sure if with this approach to security, it can be called a “program.”

Some readers may protest, “We would love to have item X, but you know how security budgets/bill rates are today.” Or, “We simply cannot afford it.”

Generally, I would agree that security investments need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. But “security programs” do need to be just that. In a “security program,” assets are identified, threat and risk assessments are made, silos are kicked down, and all angles are considered.

Tough questions for your next management meeting

5 Reasons You Should NOT Use Security Guard Management Software

So the question you should ask yourself is, “If I do not take advantage of the affordable tools out there, what is it that I do not know? What am I not seeing? What incidents have I missed?”

And if you think the answer is that your client would not appreciate the value this technology would bring to the protection of their assets, I would engage in a little internal debate with your team: “Do we want to provide service to a client that does not value our input? Services? Expertise? Resources?”

The harsh reality is that professional security providers worried about their brand and reputation should consider NOT servicing certain clients if those clients neither value their company’s offer nor line up with their business philosophy.

To quote an ASIS International Security Service Council colleague of mine, you have to ask yourself, “Is the client hiring a placement agency or a security company?”

In other words, “Is the client simply doing what their insurance provider wants, or do they truly want to protect their workplace?”