Convergence in Security Management (Essay Sample)

Convergence in Security Management Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Author Note Convergence in Security Management 1 Assess the impact of the convergence of public and private sector security in the post-9/11 world. How is it being accomplished? The term "convergence" means bridging the difference between functions of two or more components and getting them to work as one (Woo, 2015). For instance, watches, television, telephones, and computers began as unrelated technologies, but these components have since been converged in many ways into interrelated parts of telecommunication and media. Public and private sector security convergence, on the other hand, means bringing or bridging the difference between private security functions and public security functions; it means getting both the private security sector and law enforcement agencies to work together for the common good (Bures, 2013). In other words, this means the complete integration of public and private security functions and activities in the struggle against terrorism and other national security threats. The impacts of getting these two security elements to work as one have been significant. More importantly, the relationship between private and public security has been advancing over the years; this relationship greatly improved after the 9/11 attacks. It is believed that insufficient cooperation amid public and private security operators led or allowed the attack (Avant & Sigelman, 2010). The coordinated attacks on the United States by Al-Qaeda would not be possible if American Airlines' and United Airlines' security communicated with the national security apparatus (Dupont, 2014). Dupont (2014) argues that both private security and public security practices are critical; the national government cannot efficiently address the problems of insecurity without including the private sector. To a larger extent, private sector security agencies' practices complement those efforts by public security organs; working together ensures that loopholes within the security system are closed. The 9/11 attacks had a profound impact on the role of private security sectors in national security. Private security sectors went from being an afterthought to becoming a cornerstone and a critical part of the United States national security. Before 9/11, private security and public security agencies operated as separate entities. Private security agencies focused on loss prevention and served clients' needs, while homeland security was left entirely in the hands of the state (Nalla & Crichlow, 2017). The agencies rarely crossed paths unless it was needed or within each other's mutual interest. After the 9/11 attacks, it became evident that insecurity issues could stem from anywhere, including the private sector. Importantly, extremists and other criminals had developed new ways of attacks, using private infrastructures such as planes to attack civilians. There are three times as many private security guards as law enforcement officers (Berndtsson, 2012); these security guards protect, airports, nuclear plants, electricity facilities, malls, and other government facilities. These professionals are the "true first responders," according to Berndtsson (2012). Furthermore, most of the critical infrastructure in the United States is under private ownership. Water treatment, power grids, chemical processing, among other infrastructures, are often the first to encounter security threats. Private security agencies often guard such infrastructures. These agencies are required to report any situation that might threaten national security. For instance, there are over 90 nuclear reactors in the United States; these reactors are supposed to report or file a statement with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or the United States Department of Homeland Security in cases they lose critical chemicals such as Uranium. Apart from reporting incidences, private security agencies have helped coordinate plans with the public sector regarding evacuation and food service during emergencies (Nalla & Crichlow, 2017). The importance of private security in national security was seen in the recent attack on the United States' capitol by President Trump's loyalists. Capitol security guards, alongside United States Capitol Police, deterred protestors from entering the capitol building (Leonhardt, 2021). All in all, the private-public security partnership has changed how national security issues are handled in the United States. Private security agencies working in critical infrastructures are required to maintain communication with law enforcement agencies; in most cases, security guards act as first responders who enable people to evacuate in times of emergencies. 2 Identify two key obstacles to convergence of public and private sector security efforts. Provide potential solutions to the problems you discuss Although many benefits have been accrued from law enforcement-private security partnership, obstacles that hinder progress remain. Barrier to information sharing is one of the biggest obstacles (Sarre & Prenzler, 2011). There are many instances that make it challenging for private and public security agencies to share information freely. One instance is the believe that private security agencies exist to making money. Because private security agencies are in the business of making money, their core interest is often in their clients (Sarre & Prenzler, 2011). This instance makes it hard for such private agencies to release information. In most cases, if company representatives speak openly about critical security information, competitors can acquire and exploit this information to their gains. Public security agencies, by the same token, have their challenges. In most cases, law enforcement agencies are discouraged from sharing information with private entities. This is a legal requirement. Berndtsson (2012) believes that lack of trust is the underlying factor that pushes or prevents these institutions from sharing information. The lack of trust prevents these entities from developing effective partnerships (Argueta, 2012). The level of confidence is very poor, despite significant debate about alliances between the two organizations, overlapping missions, and the need to work together. Both private and public security agencies view each other as having distinct goals and see each other as competitors. In order to be effective in dealing with the United States in security issues, both sides must overcome this obstacle. Eichler (2015) agree that partnership between the law enforcement and private security agencies cannot endure unless the two entities learn to trust each other. The trust and the flow of information between private and public security agencies are often hindered by a top executive. In most cases, private security executives have worked together in the past because many security directors and managers serve in local public security agencies before joining the private sector. Misinformation and misunderstanding is another barrier that limits law enforcement-private security partnership. In most cases, neither the private security agencies nor the public security agencies understand the role of the other. None understands what the other can do or cannot do. This, according to Abrahamsen and Leander (2015), can be problematic with regards to crimes and disorder; but in matters concerning homeland security, this instance can be dangerous. Even small scale and coordinated terror attacks can trigger considerable psychological, physical and economic harm. Every law enforcement officer must understand the role of private security; each officer should note how private security can help with national security. Importantly, they must understand this before an incident occurs, not after. Moreover, to overcome trust issues and establish a framework where information between the two entities flows freely, both the private and...