Feature Opinion Read more online at www.securitymattersmagazine.com
The Institute’s View
As COVID-19 continues to impact the way in which we work
and the Black Lives Matter campaign shines a spotlight on
perceived injustices, innovation is going to be essential if
we’re to thrive rather than just survive. Here, Lisa Reilly
provides an overview of The Security Institute’s all-new
Inclusive Security Special Interest Group
16
Innovation is driven by
diversity. In a world that’s very different
today to what it looked like 12 months
ago, we clearly need disruptive thinkers.
When we first talked about the
Inclusive Security Special Interest Group
(ISSIG), we referred to it as the Diversity
Special Interest Group, but as the launch
grew closer and the aims and objectives
became clearer, we realised this wasn’t
right. We don’t want to highlight
differences. We wish to celebrate them.
We want to recognise that, as a sector,
we’re stronger when there’s a greater
variety of perspectives involved in the
design and implementation of security
and risk management practices. Within
the ISSIG, our aim – as spelled out by
The Security Institute’s chair Professor
Alison Wakefield PhD CSyP FSyI, is:
“To change the face... of security and
risk management by fostering more
opportunities for all groups... to access
and thrive within the industry.”
The collective commitment of
members of this new Special Interest
Group to tackle the lack of diversity in
the security sector presents a great
opportunity for the Institute and,
indeed, the wider security profession.
Dismantling the barriers that prevent
the sector from harnessing the talents of
so many will widen its scope and
enhance innovation. Potentially, this is
the fastest route towards further
enhancing the standing of the security
profession and fundamental to the
continuing growth of the Institute itself.
My work is in the humanitarian
sector, looking at safety and security for
staff working overseas. We recently
published a paper on ‘Gender and
Security’, the aim of which was to
highlight that, while different genders
may be impacted by threats in differing
ways, this doesn’t mean one gender is
‘weaker’ or in some way more ‘at risk’
than the other. Both provide
opportunities as well as challenges for
improving overall safety and security.
Duty of Care
Gender is only one of many personal
characteristics that impact the way we
need to manage security. In 2017, we
undertook a research project looking at
how organisations can meet their legal
Duty of Care obligations while not
compromising anti-discrimination law.
This culminated in the publication of
‘Security Risk Management for Staff
with Diverse Profiles’ just a year later.
There are two key findings from the
research, the first being how much
discrimination there is in a sector
purporting to have humanity at its core.
Misogyny, homophobia, racism and
sexism are the common ones, along with
ageism and an almost total blindness to
those issues impacting disabled staff.
The second is that equality has
become synonymous with the idea of us
all being the same. Often driven by the
very best of reasons, this approach isn’t
effective either for the management of
security risks or for achieving our
programme objectives. In South Sudan,
for example, security plans often ignore
the issues related to different ethnicities
working and travelling in different areas,
while the applicants for jobs in Uganda
may not be informed that
homosexuality is actually illegal there.
Security protocols often inhibit
people from applying for jobs, such as
the directive that ‘all applicants must be
able to drive in case of an emergency’,
effectively excluding anyone with visual
impairment from applying for work in
any country, even when the probability
of that need to drive is negligible.
As one security manager commenting
on the study rightly pointed out, we
cannot write a security plan that
considers every possible individual
profile. That being so, what do we
determine to do instead?
Challenging mindsets
The security sector is often one that
relies on the development and
implementation of rules, and is certainly
perceived in this way, but we need to
challenge such mindsets.
We need to look at our processes to
make them flexible and people rather
than system-focused. We cannot do this
unless we adopt an inclusive approach
that actively encourages innovation
through diversity and inclusion.
A starting point for the ISSIG will be
to undertake a research project that
provides us with baseline metrics as
opposed to just anecdotal information.
Anna-Liisa Tampu ASyl (head of
intelligence and analysis at Northcott
Global Solutions and co-chair of the
ISSIG) is leading on this project.
Anna-Liisa has stated: “This research
project will help us to understand our
sector better by starting at the beginning
and asking who forms part of it. We aim
to map out who works for organisations
and departments and understand what,
if any, barriers to entry exist for certain
groups and individuals across the
industry. This research will help us to
collate vital data to assess what we can
do on a collective basis in order to break
down the barriers.”
While we’re still feeling our way with
the ISSIG, we would love for interested
professionals to be involved with this
initiative. If you would like more
information, please contact me via e-mail
at gisf-director@gisf.ngo or Anna-
Liisa at anna-liisa.tampuu@my.
westminster.ac.uk
Lisa Reilly is Executive Director of the
Global Interagency Security Forum
and Co-Chair of The Security
Institute’s Inclusive Security Special
Interest Group
(www.security-institute.org)
/(www.security-institute.org)
/westminster.ac.uk
/www.securitymattersmagazine.com
link
link
