Security Management & Marketing - Research Paper Example

Security Management & Marketing Security is of paramount significance for any organization in the time and age of today yet the security managers arenot accorded the same importance as they richly deserve. There could be a host of reasons for such an understanding on the part of any organization that has basically lacked the confidence to make it big within the security managers’ domains. However what is pivotal here is to understand that security managers are doing the best job within the organizational realms yet they receive very less when it comes to their compensations and recognition of services. Anomalies do exist but what is most necessary within the same is the fact that security managers are not even appreciated for the courage that they exhibit time and time again. It is important that proper emphasis is laid on the fact that they are indeed the cornerstone of success and achievement at any given time within the organization. The security managers therefore are in a state of denial as far as recognizing their services towards the organization is concerned. They are not given the room to enjoy how important they have become over the course of time (Lefkowith 2001). They are most often reprimanded for the lack of initiative yet they are never appreciated for what they bring to the proverbial table – a sense of serenity to the organization that they work for, day in day out. This paper will establish the basis of security managers and how they need to be glorified from a literal sense in order to win back their trust and confidence for the sake of the organizational harmony. The need for security has risen with the passage of time. What was considered just as an exercise to fulfill the formality bit within the organizations, has now been replaced by state of the art security systems. These have encompassed within them the security surveillance cameras, the close circuit television systems, the watch guards and so on and so forth. The whole phenomenon has changed in essence and credit for this must rest on the shoulders of the security managers who are doing their respective jobs tirelessly. However, the organizational top management hierarchies have long failed to understand that they need to give proper credit where it is due. This is because they have not risen up to the challenge presented by the competitors, the security concerns and others. The fact of the matter is that security managers are not being recognized globally and this belief has tarnished the role and responsibility of the security managers worldwide. There is solid evidence in the wake of the security managers being at the forefront of differential and discriminatory treatment by the organizational top heads. These security managers are not being included in the top level management meetings and are thus not given the importance which they richly deserve (Dobson 1999). Part of the blame must rest on the shoulders of these security managers themselves, because they have not stood up for their rights as well. Hence it would be adequately sound to suggest that it always takes couple of hands to clap – in this case both management and the security managers need to take the blame upon their own selves. What must suffice for the sake of the security managers is that they can explain their respective ideological basis. They might suggest that they cannot overrule their bosses and hence cannot ask for being a part of the top level meetings as their peers on the same levels. This is an ideology that needs to change and that too for the better. The stakeholders are not merely the security managers alone; the top management also has to bear the brunt for the massive missing link that crops up as a result. The security managers therefore need to put the best foot forward and for that there needs to be proper action on the part of the authorities who are indeed running the organizations. The business world has evolved and so have the different positions and working capacities that employees have been hired upon. It is important to ascertain the extent of authority that a position within a business entity has had over a given period of time. The security managers are no exception to this rule as they have largely been left neglected at the hands of the people who should actually recognized them by proper measures of understanding and rewards. The opposite has been happening of late and this is one glaring aspect that needs to be taken proper care of. In the present times, not much significance is accorded to the role of the security managers. They have usually been left at the mercy of their peers who decide what is good for these security managers and what they should not delve deep into, as far as the organizational realms are concerned. This is a discriminatory exercise right from the outset of the treatment of security managers and it demands an explanation on the part of the top management domains within the organization (Hermanson 1994). Nobody has given the security managers’ peers the right to make decisions on the part of the security managers and hence these security managers should always be the first ones to decide what they can do for the sake of the organization and how they would be able to achieve what is deemed as right and appropriate from the organizational stance. However this surely means that the organizations make available the resources which are required for these security managers and assist them in proper working realms as well. More than anything else, it is the will and desire of the top management concerns within the organization to bring about a serious difference in the professional domains of the security managers. If these security managers are not given the room to showcase what they actually have within their folds, it would be an exercise in futility to expect strengths coming out to the fore consistently. Hence it would be pretty accurate to state here that the security managers need space of their own in order to bring to light the valid concerns that they have perceived of late. Moving further on, it is important to realize that the security managers are not a breed that needs to be taken in such a trivial way. They are the most significant cog in the wheel as far as the organization’s smooth working mechanisms and day to day operative regimes are concerned. Perhaps this thinking seems missing within the dynamics of organizations, more so in the modern times. What needed to be a totally different case in the practical form has come about as a disaster and the blame needs to rest heavily on the shoulders of the people who make all this possible in entirety – the top management, decision-making concerns (Bamfield 2006). The decision-making entities have a role to play and this role must stem from the fact that the organizations lack a basic decorum of including the relevant people within the meetings that are of immense significance. This is not just limited to the meetings alone, as these might take into consideration the compensatory mechanisms and systems in place. There is a definitive link that seems missing from the security managers’ domains and in order to reach a successful base, it is quintessential to take these security managers along with them, on the part of the organizational top heads, who indeed are the decision-makers (Barnes 2001). This will help solve the varied problems which exist within the folds of the organization as well as take care of the understanding regimes of the security managers from the long term standpoint. It will also embody a change of sorts for the security managers who believe that they are being hard done by, on a constant basis. It will help remedy the grief that has remained within their realms that they are being treated differently than their peers – a commonality that has long existed within the security managers’ work ethos. Proper comprehension of the missing link would help remove the glitches that have come about within the system. It will also take care of the underlying problems which might forbid the top management to give the due to these security managers. In order to have a better and more proper working relationship, one should believe that it is important to have a one on one discussion scenario with these security managers so that success could be achieved not just in relative terms but for the long term stability of the organization. However one should again believe that this is indeed easier said than done, as the realities on ground are pretty different to what the actual relationships have existed for so long now. The security managers have felt the discrimination all along and one such act of their role being understood adequately would not help solve the problem. What is needed in essence is to have a paradigm shift within the working modules of the security managers’ systems and mechanisms, of which they are the direct recipients. Coming to the marketing dynamics of a security manager selling his own self from the organizational standpoint, one must understand that marketing is indeed necessary in the present times. This is because just like each and every employee out there being a selling entity, the security manager is no exception to this rule. The security manager therefore finds it hard in the long term scheme of things to sell what he considers his peculiar strength. This has happened because the security managers have not been given any room to showcase their strengths in the first place and hence the reason that they find themselves in all sorts of troubles as far as marketing of their abilities and talents is concerned. Essentially it is important to note that these security managers have more or less the same qualities that other professionals have. The question then that arises here is that why are not these security managers given the room to exhibit what they really possess within their folds? The answer to this question lies in the fact that the business world has not woken up to the fact that this job position has brought to the fore of late. The security managers are not considered real by any stretch of imagination and there is solid proof in this fact nonetheless (Elrom 2005). It is pretty ironic to understand that the security managers who do so much for the sake of safety and security of the organization are left on the mercy of the people who actually hired them. They need recognition for what they have done and who they actually are, but perhaps this aspect seems to be a bone of contention within their work areas and their motivation to make it big in the long run. The marketing aspect however rests solely on the shoulders of the security managers as they are the people who actually realize where the missing links have existed of late. They can fill the void and target the areas where they believe they can make it big within the industry. They can play upon their strengths and suggest to all and sundry how they have been able to make the much needed difference within the reigns of their organization and what they promise to bring to the table, as far as the industry of security is concerned. They might not be good marketers to begin with, but an effort is all that they need. This effort might just come from different angles, not least from their desire to make it to the top echelons of the organizational hierarchy. Seldom has a security manager been promoted to as the Chief Executive Office or Managing Director. Perhaps this is the right time to showcase what these security managers have got within their entirety. Hence what is needed now is an effort and an understanding that they have solid know-how of their peers’ working conditions and the job responsibilities. If at all they know best how to sell their strengths, they can make their progression happen quite smoothly (Kovacich 2003). The marketing strategies that might be used for the betterment of these security managers include the fact that they must understand who they really are. This will set the ball rolling as far as realizing the exact tangents where they have gone wrong and what corrective steps they need to undertake in order to make it big within the selling regimes of their position. More than anything else, it is their resilience which will come out as the winner as they expect to truly sell their strengths for the betterment of the organization that they are actually trying for. Character development is one such aspect which will bank heavily on the shoulders of the security managers because personality grooming and having clear cut know-how of how things will work within the organizational domains is indeed the buzzword for making it really big within the world of business at the present (Grau 1989). The marketing aspects of a personality and that too which is geared for the long term success in the business ranks is a pretty tricky situation as this could have long-lasting effects on the personality within the business domains and it can also mean success coming about in full circle. It is therefore advisable to enact only those strategies within the field of personality marketing that have long-lasting effects and consequences. The ones which would mean incremental changes here and there must surely be avoided as these could mean taking a different stance in the beginning and resorting to a new one at the end. This could also hamper the personality growth and development mechanisms of the individual as well as make him look like an unsettled person, which is appalling to say the least. All said and done, it is important that security managers are given their due as they deserve the importance which must come their way from the organizational top heads. The decision-makers have a huge role to play in order to set things right as far as working dynamics of security and the related departments within a business concern are related. It is necessary that the security managers have peace of mind as they are indeed safeguarding the entire organization in the most literal sense. They must receive perks and privileges commensurate with their peers as well as earn recognition and rewards which are applicable for their respective job positions (Cogan 1998). This is really important in order to bring about a pragmatic change within the organizational hierarchies, all of whom are governed by the security managers in one way or the other. Lastly, the security managers must also make some solid efforts to let their side of the story be known to all and sundry within the organization (Kangas 1996). They should be convincing as their point must get to the relevant people without any hiccup whatsoever. The missing link needs to have the word ‘missing’ removed forever – as this will mean success happening way before than it was envisaged in the beginning. Bibliography BARNES, Peter. (2001). The Definitive Handbook of Business Continuity Management. John Wiley & Sons BAMFIELD, J. (2006). Management in Gill, M. (Ed.) The Handbook of Security. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke COGAN, Dan. (1998). When Security Means Business. Security Management, Vol. 42, September DOBSON, John. (1999). The Art of Management and the Aesthetic Manager: The Coming Way of Business. Quorum Books ELROM, Sam. (2005). Is Intelligence in the Wrong Hands? Relying on Computers to Analyze Business Intelligence Is Tempting, but the Human Element Is Critical to Analysis. Security Management, Vol. 49, February GRAU, Joseph. (1989). Selling Security. Security Management, Vol. 33, November HERMANSON, Heather. (1994). The Internal Control Paradox: What Every Manager Should Know. Review of Business, Vol. 16 KANGAS, Scott. (1996). Lighting the Way to Better Business. Security Management, Vol. 40, September KOVACICH, G. (2003). Information Systems Security. Butterworth Heinemann, London LEFKOWITH, Dave. (2001). What Gets Rewarded Gets Pursued! Creating a Performance- Driven Organization. Management Quarterly, Vol. 42 Word Count: 2,533 Read More