Strategic risks are likely to be the leading class of risks for G4S in the coming years. It is therefore imperative that G4S take advantage of this risk and turn it into an opportunity. To begin with, change in technology is unavoidable. It can be an opportunity for a multinational company like G4S to seize the opportunity and control the threat. The G4S can therefore embrace modern technology. As the world sharpens technology, technology sharpens it. The G4S can train its officers and staff on the latest technology adaptable to its functions. Zalud (2012, p.20) is for the idea that computerisation of services and employment of employees that have technology savvy will enable the company to have the upper hand in the market. The company can also carry out consistent research on technology development and adaptation in order to provide their clients with only the best (Dempsey 2004). The research will also ensure that its competitors do not leave behind the company. To the advantage of G4S, having techno-savvy will enable the company to be ahead of its adversaries, who include the robbers. For example, the company should have better weapons detectors than metal detectors, should have better communication devices, more sophisticated tracking devices, and better security alarms. Gary (2013,p.17) adds that the fact that the G4S security guards that operated at Dorney Lake during the 2012 Olympics did not have operational radio calls is an indicator that the company had poorly maintained communication devices. According to Phillips (2009,p.16), G4S security officers had to use their personal mobile phones that sometimes run out of airtime hence making the officers do their duties without communication. It is futile to perform security work without communication. The company should therefore ensure that it purchases good and modern communication devices for its officers. There should be well-trained information communication technology officers to maintain the devices and to ensure that the devices are upgraded with time. Maguire (2012, p.15) observes that the growing rate of insecurity and technology in robberies should inform the company to keep track of modern communication devices. Cases of radio call tapping by robbers and fraudsters have also been reported in many countries. The G4S Company should invest in technology that will ensure that their communications do not diverge to other recipients. Tapping of G4S’ communication can be disastrous since the company involves itself in courier services.
Changes in investors and clients can also be used to the advantage of G4S. The fact that investors are more informed makes it easier for the company to communicate with them. According to Díaz 2012, p.49), well-informed investors are easier to convince on matters of finances. Proper communication with such investors will also ensure that the company invests in profitable ventures. Investors can be a great source of information for the company. Whitehouse (2013, p.10) argues that having the investors have their fair contribution in the process of decision-making makes the company more democratic. The investors also own up the process. Conflicts are therefore reduced through investor relations, and decision-making can be made a faster process. Complaints and losses are likely to be highly reduced.
Financial risks can also be turned to finance fortunes. The transactions and structures that make the risks very pronounced can be turned around. The G4S can develop its structures to fit in modern society.
Modern society wants a structure that delivers on speed, accuracy and accountability. The G4S can invest in wire services of money transfer to ensure that clients receive their money on time and in safe means. This will reduce cases of robberies. Modern administration structures that seal administration loopholes should be implemented. The structures can be positioned in a way that they are more facilitative than obstructive to the course of success. Structures that will facilitate safe and secure transportation of money should be put in place. For example, the transport of cash should involve thoroughly vetted officers. The vehicles and devices that carry such cash should have various points of control to reduce cases of theft. Sophisticated tracking devices should also be mounted on safes and courier vehicles. Santiago (2012, p.22) recommends that the structures of administration should enable the company to work with armed police officers in operations that involve huge sums of money. Such moves should be factored in the company budget. Modes of transactions should also be well developed. Transactions should be put in a way that promotes efficiency and effectiveness. Automation of transactions will reduce the risk posed by handling cash and precious commodities. The transactions should also be made fast and effective through the placement of well-qualified human resources. Such an initiative will involve training of human resources on modern methods of business transaction.
Operation risks can also be overturned to the advantage of the G4S Company. The operations risks involve administration and operating risks. Internal and external changes in administration and operation may result in loss of resources. Armstrong (2008, p.24) observes that the risk of administration can be controlled by ensuring that the company properly vets its employees for competency, reliability and character. Santiago (2012, p.22) observes that employees of G4S have been accused of rudeness, harshness, and collusion with robbers to deprive companies of their investments. In the last two years, the image of the G4S has been tainted through robberies and allegations of the ruthlessness of its officials. The administrators must therefore ensure that the image of the company is mended or restored. Image is everything. The image of a company like G4S that deals with customer trust on security matters should be well defined. In the future, G4S and its administration must hire public relations officers that will manage, maintain, and med its image.
Compliance risks that have come with changes in governments and regulations can be turned to work to the advantage of G4S. Every regulation that a government come up with is geared towards securing both the interest of investors and the citizens. Business regulations can be made to work for the investing companies. The G4S can take advantage of legal risks by ensuring that it is fully compliant with government regulations. Whitehouse (2013, p.10) argues that most of the investors would want to invest in companies that are compliant with government regulations. The administration and the communication departments of G4S should ensure that the move receives enough publicity. Publicising the information that G4S is completely compliant with government regulations will instil confidence in the current investors and potential investors (Coleman 2006). The G4S can also take advantage of the compliance risk by making prior plans. The focus team can predict the likely regulations depending on developments in technology, finance, and business laws. The focus team should therefore prepare the company for any eventuality.
Armstrong, S 2008, ‘The new spies’, New Statesman, vol. 137 no. 4909, pp. 24-26.
Coleman, L 2006, ‘It’s Time For A National Risk Strategy’, Quadrant Magazine, vol. 50 no.1/2, pp. 40-43.
Dempsey, B 2004, ‘Target Your Brand’, Library Journal, vol. 129 no.13, pp. 32-35.
Díaz, B 2012, ‘G4S Security Services virtually strengthens clients’ sense of security’, Caribbean Business, vol. 40 no.15, pp. 49-49.
Gary, J 2013, ‘Woodford pick G4S sees Olympics loss rise to £70m’, Fundweb, vo. 1 no. 1, p. 17.
G4S plc Annual Report 2012, Securing Your World. Web.
Hackett, K 2013, ‘Best Practices For Minimising Your Digital Security Risk’, Quill, vol. 101 no. 4, pp. 34-39.
Maguire, K 2012, ‘Dave is not a Diamond geezer’, New Statesman, vol. 141 no. 5116, pp.15-15.
Phillips, T 2009, ‘The In-House’, Interview Lawyer, vol. 23 no. 3, pp.16-16.
Santiago, J 2012, ‘High crime hurting your business? Here’s one creative solution’, Caribbean Business, vol. 40 no.6, pp. 22-22.
Whitehouse, T 2013, ‘Boards Put Reputation Risk on Top’, Compliance Week, vol. 10 no.114, pp.10-10.
Zalud, B 2012, ‘Security Officers: A Matter of Values’, Solutions for Enterprise Security Leaders, vol. 49 no. 2, pp. 20-28.