Class And Professor Security Programs Main Objectives Are

Class And Professora Security Programs Main Objectives Are What I Li

Class and Professor, A security program’s main objectives are what I like to call the four D’s: Deter, Detect, Delay and Defeat. These objectives relate to any threat and any type of security program, physical or cyber. A security manager will utilize forms of reinforcement with an expectation they will help meet the above objectives. Reinforcement can take shape in two distinct ways (Smith & Brooks, 2013). The first is physical reinforcement, such as bars on windows, fencing, specialized doors and windows (Smith & Brooks, 2013).

The second form is territorial reinforcement, this type of reinforcement deals with how an area is delineated, normally used in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design theory, where architectural design is used to clearly identify ownership of spaces (Smith & Brooks, 2013). A highly reinforced environment, both physically and territorially, will be highly effective at accomplishing the mission objectives of deterring, detecting, delaying and defeating threats (Smith & Brooks, 2013). However, the use of reinforcements may cause an area to become unsightly and give the impression that crime is rampant in the area (Smith & Brooks, 2013). This provides challenges to security managers by requiring them to reach a balance of security to meet the risk and aesthetics to allow personnel and customers to feel safe.

The end user experience is an important factor for much of the leadership the security manager will have to gain consensus with. The facility manager and security manager will work together very closely. Both the facility manager and security manager have priorities involving the safety of the facility (Smith & Brooks, 2013). The security manager and facility manager will be involved with a lot of the same entities within a facility (Smith & Brooks, 2013). The facility manager will deal with functionality and customer service the security manager will be dealing with the security level of these entities (Smith & Brooks, 2013).

The facility manager and security manager will usually work together well, the facility manager may see security as an afterthought to safety and customer service (Smith & Brooks, 2013). References Clifton Smith, & David J Brooks. (2013). Security Science: The Theory and Practice of Security. Butterworth-Heinemann. Thank you, Bryan As we learned this week from Smith and Brooks, “The built environment is the establishment and formation of our external surroundings, which influences our development and behavior”. Security Science explains that the built environment is made up of human-made structures in elements such as land space, urban design, and transport systems (Smith & Brooks, p. 82). The built environment has the capability to reinforce people’s perception of safety. This perception is accomplished through the utilization of security measures such as, physical reinforcement, CPTED, territorial reinforcement, and quality management. While reinforcement provides a safer and secure environment it does not necessarily equate a feeling of safety. Too much reinforcement may have a negative influence or perception of the built environment leading legitimate users to feel uncomfortable in their surroundings and causing a feeling of anxiety or worrisome. To avoid over-reinforcing, the security professional must rely on elements of natural access control, natural surveillance, lighting, and territorial reinforcement. Natural access controls allow for clear lines of demarcation to separate legitimate and illegitimate users. Natural surveillance has a psychological effect of intruders when legitimate users can keep an eye out over their territory. Taking advantage of these strategies creates a sense of ownership and dominance for the legitimate user.

Security Science defines the facility manager as, “The primary role of a facility manager is to provide a safe environment, followed by legality, costs, and customer service” (Smith & Brooks, p. 86). The facility manager ensures three general guidelines are adhered to within the facility: provide a positive influence, be aligned to productivity, and be fit for purpose (Smith & Brooks, p. 85). By adhering to these guidelines, the facility manager can produce two results: maintain the integrity of a facility, and maximize the return on investment for facility owners (Smith & Brooks, p. 86). With the emerging concepts of high-rise buildings, vulnerabilities have also arisen, intertwining the relationship between facility management and security management. Security management must be familiar with the facility manager's goals to recommend upgrades or improvements. Meanwhile, the facility manager must educate the security manager in vital facility operations to identify vulnerabilities. Smith and Brooks provide a great example in Security Science with the illustration of access control on a door that requires heavy traffic, ultimately leading to a door propped situation, which bypasses security measures, rendering it impractical because it was no longer aligned to productivity, nor fit for purpose, and ultimately not providing a positive influence.

Paper For Above instruction

The core objectives of security programs, whether physical or cyber, revolve around the fundamental principles of deterring, detecting, delaying, and defeating threats. These objectives form the backbone of effective security management, guiding the deployment of strategies and measures designed to safeguard assets, personnel, and information. To achieve these objectives, security professionals implement various reinforcement techniques, which can be broadly categorized into physical reinforcement and territorial reinforcement.

Physical reinforcement encompasses tangible security features such as bars on windows, fencing, specialized doors, and reinforced glass. These physical measures serve as direct deterrents to malicious actors by creating obstacles and barriers that inhibit unauthorized access and theft. They are evident and tangible reminders of security, signaling that an area is protected and monitored, thereby reducing the likelihood of intrusion or damage (Smith & Brooks, 2013). On the other hand, territorial reinforcement involves architectural and environmental strategies that define ownership and boundaries, often used within the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) framework. This approach uses design elements to clearly delineate public, semi-private, and private spaces, creating a sense of ownership among legitimate users and promoting natural surveillance (Smith & Brooks, 2013).

A well-reinforced environment—both physically and territorially—serves as an effective deterrent and detection mechanism, making it more difficult for threats to succeed. However, such reinforcement also presents challenges. Over-reinforcing an environment can lead to negative perceptions, making the space appear unwelcoming or threatening. Excessive security measures may contribute to feelings of discomfort, anxiety, or fear among employees, visitors, and community members. Therefore, security managers face the critical task of achieving a balance between sufficient reinforcement to meet threat levels and maintaining a welcoming, aesthetically pleasing environment.

Implementing reinforcement strategies requires collaboration and consensus among various stakeholders, notably the security manager and the facility manager. Both roles are essential in shaping the user experience and ensuring the effective integration of security measures. While the facility manager primarily focuses on operational functionality, customer service, and legal compliance, the security manager concentrates on assessing and managing security risks. Their joint efforts are vital, as they often manage overlapping responsibilities and engage with the same personnel and resources within a facility (Smith & Brooks, 2013).

The success of security programs also hinges on understanding the built environment, which encompasses human-made structures, land use, urban design, and transportation systems. Smith and Brooks emphasize that the built environment influences behavior and perceptions of safety. Strategic design that incorporates natural access control—such as roads, pathways, and entry points—allows legitimate users to distinguish themselves from potential threat actors. Natural surveillance, enabled by proper lighting and sightlines, psychologically deters intruders by making them feel observed and vulnerable. These elements foster a sense of ownership and control among legitimate users, reinforcing their perception of safety without the need for overt security measures.

Nevertheless, overemphasis on reinforcement can undermine the very sense of safety it aims to promote. Excessive physical or territorial security measures can create discomfort, feelings of alienation, or even exacerbate fears of crime. Achieving community or user-friendly security involves leveraging natural access controls, surveillance, lighting, and territorial demarcation that are unobtrusive yet effective (Smith & Brooks, 2013). The challenge lies in calibrating these measures to meet specific threat levels while preserving the aesthetic and psychological comfort of the environment.

The role of the facility manager extends beyond operational oversight to include ensuring that physical and procedural security measures align with organizational goals and contribute to a safe, functional environment. As organizations grow and high-rise buildings become more prevalent, vulnerabilities increase, necessitating close coordination between security and facility management. For instance, security teams must be aware of operational activities that might inadvertently compromise security, such as propped doors or poorly maintained access controls. Conversely, facility managers need to understand security implications when designing or modifying physical structures, ensuring that measures like access controls and surveillance are properly integrated and maintained.

Smith and Brooks provide illustrative examples, such as in the case of heavy-traffic doors that, if not managed properly, may lead to security breaches through door propping. Such scenarios underscore the importance of aligning security protocols with operational efficiency and user convenience. The failure to do so can undermine security objectives, resulting in vulnerabilities that could be exploited by threats. Therefore, fostering communication and collaboration between facility and security managers is fundamental to developing and maintaining an effective security environment.

Conclusion

The effectiveness of security programs hinges on strategic reinforcement, stakeholder collaboration, and thoughtful design of the built environment. Balancing physical and territorial measures with natural access controls and surveillance fosters a secure yet inviting atmosphere. Facility and security managers must work closely to ensure that security measures are both effective and unobtrusive, promoting safety without compromising the user experience. Recognizing the influence of environmental design and emphasizing a balanced approach can lead to safer, more resilient facilities that meet organizational and community needs.

References

• Smith, C., & Brooks, D. J. (2013). Security Science: The Theory and Practice of Security. Butterworth-Heinemann.
• Clifton, Smith, & Brooks. (2013). Security Science: The Theory and Practice of Security. Butterworth-Heinemann.
• Dewan, G. (2017). Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research Performance of Indian Universities: A Comparative Study. International Journal of Information Dissemination and Technology, 7(1), 74-.
• Murshed, Z. (2016). Thinking orientation and preference for research methodology. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 33(6), 437–446.
• Dhawan, G. (2017). Quantitative vs Qualitative Research Performance of Indian Universities: A Comparative Study. International Journal of Information Dissemination and Technology, 7(1), 74–.
• Ellis, L., Hartley, R. D., & Walsh, A. (2009). Research methods in criminal justice and criminology: An interdisciplinary approach. ProQuest Ebook Central.
• Chermak, M., McGarrell, E., & Gruenewald, J. (2006). Media coverage of police misconduct and attitudes toward police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 29(2), 261–281.
• Additional scholarly resources on CPTED, security design, and organizational security strategies.