The physical security industry has a talent problem, but I think we need to be more precise about what that problem actually is, Adrian Voorkamp, Director of Learning, i-PRO Americas, says.
The physical security industry has a talent problem, but I think we need to be more precise about what that problem actually is.
The newly released asmag.com Manpower survey puts numbers behind what many in the industry already feel. More than 80 percent of respondents said their organizations have faced notable manpower issues over the past two years, either significantly or occasionally. When asked about the main issues, 47.6 percent said applicants did not have the right qualifications, while the same percentage cited salary expectations as a big issue. Fewer applicants were also a concern, but the qualification gap was just as prominent as the size of the applicant pool.
That matches what I am seeing in the field. I hear constantly that there is a shortage of candidates. So, as part of a new scholarship initiative, we went into a high-demand market, Las Vegas, and helped train motivated entry-level candidates who wanted to work in the security industry. The feedback from some integrators was that they were too entry-level.
The real disconnect
Adrian Voorkamp, Director of Learning, i-PRO Americas
The industry says it cannot find talent. In many cases, what it means is that it cannot find talent that is ready on Day 1. Integrators want turnkey people who already understand job sites, tools, network configuration, cybersecurity practices, access control, video systems, AI-enabled cameras, customer communication, and service workflows. Project schedules are tight, margin concerns are real, and senior technicians are already stretched, so I understand the pressure. Training someone from the ground up takes time, and time is exactly what many integrators feel they do not have.
But waiting for a sea of fully formed technicians to appear is a bad strategy. The industry needs to build them.
This matters because physical security work has changed dramatically. A modern technician is no longer simply hanging cameras and pulling cable. They are deploying networked devices that sit on customer infrastructure. They may be configuring AI analytics, hardening devices, updating firmware, documenting systems, and working alongside IT teams that expect professional discipline around cybersecurity and lifecycle management. A camera, VMS (video management system), or access control system is part of the customer’s broader technology environment. Treating it like isolated low-voltage equipment is how organizations end up with poorly maintained systems and unnecessary cyber risk.
The challenge is that we do not have a common industry pathway that prepares people for this new reality.
In IT, certifications carry recognized meaning. If I see CompTIA or Cisco CCNA on a resume, I have a reasonable understanding of what that person has been exposed to. The physical security and low-voltage world does not have an equivalent framework with the same broad recognition. We have strong manufacturer certifications, but they are typically product-specific. They tell you someone knows how to install, operate, service, or maintain a particular platform. That is useful, but it does not tell you whether the person can operate a hammer drill, make a clean wall penetration, work safely on a lift, or troubleshoot across the physical and network layers of a deployment. That gap is where the industry needs to focus.
It takes a village
The asmag.com Manpower survey results support this distinction as well. When respondents were asked what could improve the situation, vocational training was the dominant theme. One respondent put it plainly: vocational training and engineering degrees are too far apart, with too little in between. That is exactly the space physical security expertise needs to occupy. We need programs that combine hands-on trade skills with IT fundamentals, cybersecurity awareness, and product-agnostic system thinking.
Manufacturers have a role to play here. Integrators should not have to solve the entire workforce pipeline alone. At i-PRO, our long-term goal with i-PRO University is to move beyond manufacturer-specific content and toward trade-specific content that strengthens the broader industry. That means building training that can be picked up more easily by trade schools, community colleges, and vocational programs. It also means giving integrators a clearer indication about what a candidate has actually learned.
The i-PRO Security Technician Scholarship Program in Las Vegas was one step in that direction. The program provided 19 participants with a blended curriculum that included online coursework followed by a four-day, hands-on training program. It covered video technology, access control, IP networking, camera configuration, AI analytics, and video management software. It gave new entrants a foundation before they ever stepped onto a job site. That does not make someone a senior technician overnight. Nothing does. But it shortens the distance between motivated entry-level candidate and productive team member.
The industry needs to stop treating “entry-level” as a defect. Every senior technician was entry-level once. The difference is that many of them learned through years of informal apprenticeship, trial and error, and institutional knowledge that lived inside small teams. That model is becoming harder to sustain. Experienced people are retiring. Technology is moving faster. Customers are more demanding. Cybersecurity expectations are higher. The old informal pathway cannot carry the load by itself. We need a more deliberate model.
A useful certification framework should cover the basics of the trade, including installation practices, safety, cabling, device mounting, documentation, and customer-site conduct. It should also cover networking fundamentals, secure configuration, firmware management, segmentation concepts, and the practical realities of supporting connected devices over time. From there, candidates can specialize in video, access control, AI analytics, VMS platforms, service, sales engineering, or cybersecurity-focused roles.
Integrators also need to rethink what they ask of new hires. A better training pipeline will help, but it will not remove the need for mentoring. Manufacturers can reduce the burden by providing stronger baseline education. Community colleges can help create the talent pool. Industry associations can help validate standards. But employers still need to bring people into the field, give them supervised experience, and create a reason for them to stay.
The good news is that there are people who want the work. They may not arrive fully formed, and they may not yet speak the language of the industry. That is solvable. What is less solvable is an industry that keeps asking for experienced talent without investing seriously in how that talent is created.
The skills gap is real. But the bigger issue is readiness. If we want technicians who understand physical security, IT, and cybersecurity, we need to build a training structure that reflects all three disciplines. Complaining about the shortage will not produce the next generation of professionals. A real, recognized, trade-specific pathway can.