Analysis of Performance under ISO 18788

Introduction

Monitoring tells us what is happening, and measurement puts a value on performance. But without analysis, these numbers remain data without meaning. Clause 9.1 of ISO 18788:2015 requires that security organizations analyse performance information to evaluate whether objectives are being achieved. This involves comparing actual performance with objectives cascaded from the Board, CEO, and Executive levels down to tactical departments and operational teams.

The analysis process provides the feedback loop that ensures objectives remain realistic, aligned with risk appetite, and supported by resources.

Why Analysis Matters

  1. Accountability: Ensures managers and personnel at every level are accountable for achieving their agreed objectives.
  2. Alignment: Confirms that operational, tactical, and strategic performance are connected by a golden thread.
  3. Decision-Making: Provides leadership with evidence for resource allocation, policy updates, and corrective actions.
  4. Continual Improvement: Identifies gaps and weaknesses in the SOMS and feeds them into corrective action planning.
  5. Client and Stakeholder Assurance: Demonstrates that commitments made in contracts and human rights obligations are being met.

The Analytical Process

1. Define Objectives at Each Level

  • Strategic: Approved by the Board and CEO (e.g., strengthen organizational resilience, ensure compliance with VPSHR).
  • Tactical: Set by divisional or regional managers (e.g., reduce unauthorized entries by 30% in one year).
  • Operational: Daily/shift-based goals for supervisors and guards (e.g., ensure 100% patrol completion per shift).

2. Gather Measurement Data

From monitoring logs, KPI dashboards, ICE assessments, and incident reports (e.g., the Security Control Measurement Framework).

3. Compare Performance to Objectives

  • Identify where performance is on target, close to target, or below expectations.
  • Example: If response time KPI is 7 minutes vs. 5-minute target, analysis highlights a resource or training issue.

4. Identify Gaps and Root Causes

  • Operational gap: Guard patrols incomplete → weak supervision.
  • Tactical gap: Unauthorized entries not reduced → perimeter controls underperforming.
  • Strategic gap: High volume of grievances → reputational risks undermining client objectives.

5. Recommend Corrective/Preventive Actions

  • Reallocate resources.
  • Update training and SOPs.
  • Revise objectives were unrealistic.

Example of Analytical Insights (Based on the Measurement Table)

  • Access Control (PS-01):
  • Target = ≥95% prevention, Actual = 92%.
  • Analysis: Weakness in access control system → needs technology upgrade or reinforcement of guard procedures.
  • Patrols (PS-05):
  • Target = 100%, Actual = 95%.
  • Analysis: Shortfalls indicate staffing gaps or poor patrol discipline → requires supervisor accountability and refresher training.
  • CCTV Coverage (PS-07):
  • Target = 98% uptime, Actual = 96%.
  • Analysis: Technical downtime and blind spots → maintenance schedule and system expansion needed.
  • Alarm Response (PS-12):
  • Target = <5 minutes, Actual = 7 minutes.
  • Analysis: Delayed responses may be due to insufficient rapid-response resources → requires budget allocation for vehicles or staffing.

This analysis directly links operational gaps to tactical risks (e.g., weak perimeter security) and strategic objectives (e.g., client trust in reliable site protection).

Documentation and Audit Evidence

Auditors will expect:

  • Performance Analysis Reports: Consolidated evaluations of objectives vs. performance.
  • Management Review Minutes: Evidence that analysis is discussed at tactical and strategic levels.
  • Trend Reports: Graphs showing performance over time.
  • Corrective Action Plans: Records of responses to analytical findings.
  • Strategic Alignment Reports: Linking objectives from operational → tactical → strategic.

Conclusion

Analysis is the bridge between raw data and meaningful improvement. Under ISO 18788, organizations must not only monitor and measure but also analyse performance at operational, tactical, and strategic levels.

This ensures that objectives set by the Board and CEO are realistically supported by tactical managers and executed by frontline personnel. It also guarantees that failures are not ignored but systematically addressed, creating a culture of evidence-based governance, accountability, and continual improvement.