Can Access Control Redefine Keyholding?
Stuart Wheeler, Managing Director of Keynetics, looks at the role access control will play in the future of keyholding.
The security services sector is expanding year after year globally, and the UK market is no exception.
According to Statista, the number of registered security businesses has grown from 8,105 in 2015 to 10,675 in 2024. In financial terms, the top 10 UK security companies alone have generated a turnover exceeding £3.2 billion in 2024.
Yet, despite this impressive growth, certain aspects of the industry are experiencing a surprising decline.
The declining numbers of security guards
Despite the rising volume of registered security companies and booming turnovers, the number of security guards in the UK is on the decline.
After peaking at 171,600 in Q3 2023, it has been steadily dropping quarter-on-quarter, with estimates of only 136,400 guards in Q3 2024, equivalent to a 20% reduction in workforce.
Several factors contribute to this trend, including recruitment and retention issues.
Low wages and irregular shifts during unsociable working hours have been broadly discussed within the sector over the past few years.
In addition to the pay and work pattern challenges, all guards must hold relevant accreditations, which is most certainly a necessity but may be seen as an obstacle to recruitment.
Is technology playing a role?
The rapid evolution of security solutions and the development of technology could also be a contributing factor.
Automated systems, surveillance solutions and AI-driven security tools are reducing the reliance on human personnel.
However, security patrols and alarm response still require physical intervention, necessitating a workforce of trained guards.
Considering all of the above and given the high costs of running keyholding in-house, it is no surprise that some companies, including major industry players, are outsourcing their keyholding to specialist third-party providers.
But is outsourcing the ultimate solution, or does it introduce new challenges?
The nesting doll effect
Traditional keyholding operations demand significant capital investment, reinforced patrol vehicles and trained guards to handle alarm responses.
Outsourcing may seem like the answer to eliminate the challenges associated with keyholding and patrol staffing. However, there may be hidden challenges to such an approach.
When passing on these services to a well-established company with national coverage, the reality is that they are likely to subcontract further to smaller, local providers.
This “nesting doll” approach can be effective to a limited extent, but there could be risks that result in unmet Service Level Agreement (SLA) targets, damaged reputation and loss of client trust.
When multiple parties are involved, the most common issues are difficult to avoid.
There may be lack of control and oversight of who has the keys and who responds to alarms, as well as loss of keys and consequential lock replacements, in addition to delayed response times and the overall service cost.
Can access control redefine keyholding?
With the rising costs of outsourced keyholding and commonly experienced decrease in service levels, some businesses are exploring new ways to regain control over keyholding, potentially bringing it back in-house in more efficient ways.
The common dilemma revolves around how to maintain control over keyholding and access to various buildings (often scattered across the country) while avoiding operational issues and complex in-house processes.
In addition, the security levels of the chosen method must remain intact while the alarm response time should be minimised.
The most logical solution is to reduce the number of stored and managed keys: eliminating storerooms, heavy key lockers and specialised vehicles.
But can this be achieved while maintaining appropriate security standards, especially for commercial properties?
While access control solutions seem like the best answer (since they offer digital capabilities and complete audit trail), the majority of them are designed for staff and visitor access.
Meanwhile, there is always a physical key that locks up the building after hours.
Keys at the point of need
It comes as no surprise that physical key management solutions are gaining traction among security service providers for this particular reason: the key is at the point of need.
Basic push-button and over the counter key safes are clearly out of the consideration due to the lack of control and inadequate security for commercial application.
Yet there are options that are suitable and already widely deployed across the globe.
For example, SentriGuard, a key management solution by Keynetics, features an LPS 1175 (C1 and C3) certified key safe, an app that allows opening allocated key safes and a cloud-based platform for a complete control of access, users and numerous properties.
With a variety of such security systems on the market, there are clear advantages yet vital considerations when deploying them for all types of access, either alarm response or daily lock-unlock by employees.
Control is the key word
As discussed, outsourcing keyholding can reduce control over the key location and access to properties. This can create potential security breaches and increased chances of keys being lost.
With keys stored at the point of need, such issues should be removed, in theory.
In practice, unless the deployed keyholding method has digital capabilities to track access and report live data back to a central platform, the control is still lacking.
Data availability and reporting capabilities of any security system are critical in today’s security landscape, and key management solutions are no exception.
The digital requirements go beyond access reports and visit logs.
One of the most popular features of our solution is its unique key detection feature that creates an alert on the system when the key has not been returned and escalates the matter by sending an email and SMS to the key safe owner.
The importance of physical security due diligence
Smart systems, such as SentriGuard, may be the answer to keyholding issues, but it is necessary to ensure that they do not compromise security.
When deploying a new keyholding method, the service provider must complete due diligence and ensure that the key storage system holds correct certification and has been attack tested by reputable third-party professionals.
In the UK, there is no dedicated security accreditation for key safes, but the LPS 1175 certification by Loss Prevention Certification Board (LPCB) is the benchmark.
Besides timed attack tests with different grades of tools, LPS 1175 certified solutions undergo a full design evaluation, the supplier must hold relevant ISO certification, and a complete factory production control audit is completed within the certification process.
Any key safe solution must meet these criteria to guarantee resilience against tampering and forced entry.
The choices to make for a bright future of keyholding
The security scene is complex. While company numbers and turnovers grow, the workforce is shrinking and keyholding challenges are mounting.
Every security provider must consider whether to outsource keyholding or keep it in-house and transform the ways they deliver the service.
The in-house approach may offer more control over service delivery yet would require having a team of responders to complete the job.
Smart keyholding solutions can be the answer, and it looks like the industry is slowly yet surely converting to new ways of managing keys for long-term success in an increasingly complex security landscape.
This article was originally published in the April 2025 Edition of Security Journal UK. Read it here.