Whistleblowers, Incident Reporting, Incident Management…Are You Ready?
Posted In Incident Reporting, Information Security, Legal, Regulatory Compliance, Risk Management, Workplace Violence on August 19th, 2010 Tags: bank fraud, CYA, financial reform, Incident Reporting, online safety, SEC, whistleblower, Workplace Violence
Have you been paying attention to recent headlines?
“New whistleblower reward program has law firms gearing up”
“Attorney tells audience to brace for a storm of whistleblower lawsuits”
“Financial reforms up retaliation risk”
“Preventing violence in health care setting”
“Banks seek customers’ help to stop online thieves”
Lessons learned and headlines are mounting and organizational leaders from nearly every sector should be paying close attention if they want to prevent their name and their organization’s name from being featured in unwanted headlines and lawsuits.
In a few of our next blog posts, I will be sharing lessons learned on how incident reporting, incident management, threat assessment teams, prevention, intervention, documentation and CYA will play a critical role for the foreseeable future….are you ready?
No Comments
Email This Post
Are Your Security Cameras Mobile, Capable of Making Incident Reports?
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, School Safety, Workplace Violence on August 17th, 2010 Tags: Incident Reporting, NASRO, school resource officer, School Safety, School Security, security cameras, threat assessment, TIPS
I met some really outstanding people this month while presenting at the NASRO national conference and I deeply appreciate how school resource officers (SROs) and school security officers (SSOs) are striving to make a difference with students and with schools.
Before and after my presentations I had some interesting conversations with several SROs from schools all across the U.S. One of the SROs I spoke brought up an ongoing challenge with cameras. He would like to replace outdated analog cameras that do not give him the clarity he needs to recognize and identify people. He also wants to add more cameras for better coverage in problem areas. He went on to say that he was having a difficult time getting school Administrators to understand his concerns and he also cited budget limitations too.
So I suggested a new and different approach. What if you “connected” hundreds or even thousands of existing “security cameras” that are mobile and capable of reporting incidents too?
The SRO looked at me a little funny and said what do you mean?
What if the eyes of every student and every teacher became your security cameras?
And what if the students and teachers were also able to provide details about suspicious activities that are taking place at school, even in the places at school where cameras aren’t allowed and away from school where you will never have cameras?
Lessons learned clearly show that if we want different results…we have to start trying different solutions.
For example, new and different tools like TIPS (Threat Assessment, Incident Management and Prevention Services) empower students, teachers, faculty, counselors, janitors, bus drivers, parents and others to become your mobile cameras that also report incidents…but only if you have the tools to “connect” them.
Are you ready for different and better results?
No Comments
Email This Post
Blueprints Do Not Build Skyscrapers
Posted In Business Continuity, Human Resources, Regulatory Compliance, Risk Management, School Safety, Workplace Violence on August 11th, 2010 Tags: Anti-Bullying, policy and procedure management, preparedness program
In my previous blog I suggested that building a successful preparedness campaign is like building a skyscraper…and in some cases it seems like building a skyscraper may actually be easier than building a successful campus-wide or organization-wide preparedness effort.
I mentioned that building a skyscraper and building a campus-wide or organization-wide preparedness effort have a lot in common and one of those common items is blueprints.
Blueprints can be a technical drawing, a mechanical drawing, an architectural plan, a model, a prototype, a detailed plan of action and etc. Blueprints can also include programs, policies, procedures, processes, guidelines, checklists and etc.
But blueprints are not skyscrapers.
Lessons learned continue to reveal that many organizations are extremely vulnerable because they purchase blueprints (emergency plans, anti-bullying programs, checklists, and etc.) and schedule a meeting or training session and post their blueprints on an intranet/portal and think they have built their “skyscraper”.
More and more organizations are learning the hard way that having blueprints is not enough.
Even though financial organizations have policies, government entities have plans, schools have procedures, healthcare organizations have checklists and organizations have been offering general training on an annual basis for years… tragedies, failures, bullying and lawsuits continue to escalate.
Do your organization’s leaders understand that building organization-wide preparedness efforts or a culture of safety or an anti-bullying environment requires more than disseminating blueprints?
No Comments
Email This Post
Building A Preparedness Program…like Building a Skyscraper?
Posted In Business Continuity, Emergency Management, Human Resources, Regulatory Compliance, School Safety, Workplace Violence on August 9th, 2010 Tags: campus preparedness conference, Compliance, Ethics, safety, Security
I attended the Virginia Governor’s Campus Preparedness conference last week and had an interesting discussion with one of the attendees. We were talking about how building preparedness across an organization or an entire campus is becoming more complex and more difficult due to escalating challenges, regulations, obligations, liabilities and much more.
As our discussion continued, we started talking about how important tools can be when building campus-wide preparedness programs. In reference to whether tools can make a difference, I offered the following analogy:
Could a skyscraper be built using a hammer, a saw and some nails?
The attendee responded quickly, yes the skyscraper could be built but she wouldn’t go inside it!
Next we discussed how building a skyscraper and building a campus-wide or organization-wide preparedness program have a lot in common:
- Both require blueprints
- Both are complex and require planning
- Both require specialized tools to build
- Both have a lot of parts or “dots to connect”
- Both require specialized tools to maintain
- People will not trust poorly built skyscrapers or preparedness programs
Are you building your __________ program [preparedness, compliance, business continuity, safety, security, ethics, etc.] with old outdated tools such as binders, intranets, shared drives and general training?
No Comments
Email This Post
Improving Campus Safety – Prevention and Intervention – Part 2
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, School Safety, Workplace Violence on June 23rd, 2010
If you did not read Part 1…you may want to do so before reading Part 2.
During my EduComm presentation, I identified numerous school related incidents and lessons learned and multiple new ways to improve campus safety, reduce costs, protect reputations and save lives.
Then after reviewing multiple lessons learned I asked the group another question:
What does each of these well-documented incidents have in common?
- Columbine
- Virginia Tech
- Fort Hood
- University of Alabama-Huntsville
According to expert reviews and reports, each of these incidents could have been prevented.
Let me repeat….each of these incidents could have been prevented.
Each of these incidents could have been prevented had the organizations implemented Prevention and Intervention Plans with tools/systems to ensure incident reporting, red flag management, proactive action teams (prevention, intervention, behavior analysis, threat assessment, etc.) and documentation resources were accessible on-demand.
If your goal is to improve safety on your campus or within your organization or across your community, isn’t it better to prevent incidents from happening at all?
Based on lessons learned and based on costs, lawsuits, reputation damage, emotional damages and loss of lives, my guess is that if each of these organizations (and numerous others) had the opportunity for a do over, they would all vote for preventing their incident rather than reliving their incident.
Does your organization have the right tools to connect the dots and prevent incidents from happening?
No Comments
Email This Post
Improving Campus Safety – Prevention and Intervention – Part 1
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, Risk Management, School Safety, Workplace Violence on June 21st, 2010 Tags: Campus Safety, crisis management, EduComm, Intervention, Prevention, Virginia Tech
Just recently, I had the honor of presenting at the EduComm 2010 conference in Las Vegas. The title of my presentation was ‘Connecting the Dots to Improve Campus Safety’ and was selected as a featured presentation.
Presenting at conferences is definitely one of my favorite things to do. I get to share ideas, successes and lessons learned with other people who are coming from many different locations and I have the unique opportunity to ask questions and learn what challenges other people face.
During my presentation I asked the following questions:
How many of your organizations have a Crisis Management Plan?
(Everyone raised their hand)
How many of your organization have an Emergency Management Plan?
(Everyone raised their hand)
How many of your organizations have a Prevention/Intervention Plan?
(Only a couple people raised their hand)
WOW! You should have seen the faces of the attendees…and probably mine too.
This quick survey along with hundreds of other lessons learned continue to show that organizations are too focused on ‘reactive response plans’ rather than ‘proactive prevention actions’.
Maybe this explains why so many schools rushed out and purchased mass notification response systems after the Virginia Tech tragedy?
What do you think?
Should more schools invest in tools and systems for prevention and intervention efforts?
Stay tuned for Part 2…
No Comments
Email This Post
Are You Aware of TSA’s Bad Attitude and Bad Flyers List?
Posted In Human Resources, Incident Reporting, Workplace Violence on June 14th, 2010 Tags: pushy flyers, TSA
Did you see the article in the USA Today last week regarding TSA keeping a database of pushy flyers?
The pushy fliers program was launched in 2007 to help prevent the nation’s 50,000 airport screeners from being attacked or threatened. TSA officials voiced concern about passengers disrespecting screeners so they began issuing new uniforms with police style badges pinned to shirts. According to the article, the database has records from about 240 incidents and most are screeners in conflict with other screeners and 30 incidents involve passengers or airport workers attacking or threatening screeners.
Based on my experiences leaving a New York area airport this week, I understand why 8 times more incidents are screeners in conflict with other screeners. And based on my experiences, I am also curious if TSA has started creating a database of TSA screeners that disrespect passengers?
These New York area TSA screeners seemed more interested in being bossy than screening passengers to ensure safety and security. Maybe it’s the uniform and the pin on badge? Maybe the uniforms are the problem?
Maybe the uniforms make TSA scanners behave like control freak umpires – like Cowboy Joe West and Bossy Bill Hohn – both are major league baseball umpires that forgot about their real job responsibilities because they were too busy trying to be in control. MLB announced they were going to address Bill Hohn “in a very stern way”…perhaps lessons learned from the TSA database and lessons from MLB will help TSA address what seems to be a growing problem?
Passengers deserve respect and passengers deserve TSA scanners that put their roles and their responsibilities before their attitudes and personal control issues.
I wonder if organizational leaders are paying attention to these lessons learned when they travel? Or as organizational leaders watch TV and see all the negative feedback on umpires?
Organizational leaders must quickly realize that connecting the dots includes all types of dots – every good, bad and bossy individual must be connected to the organization’s culture and be accountable for their roles, responsibilities, obligations and decisions.
Did your organization use these lessons learned to achieve better results with your passengers, fans, customers and partners?
No Comments
Email This Post
Study Finds Rise in Lone Wolf Terrorism – Empowering Individuals to Identify Red Flags
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, Risk Management, School Safety, Workplace Violence on April 28th, 2010 Tags: Bystanders, Fort Hood, Lone Wolf, Red Flags, START, Terrorism, University of Maryland, Virginia Tech
A recent report from the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) has revealed that since 1995, a much higher percentage (33%) of terrorist attacks in the United States were conducted by unaffiliated individuals, rather than by organized groups.
From the Oklahoma City bombing to more recent attacks like Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, and the University of Alabama, another commonality has also been revealed; in 80% of the incidents, red flags and warning signs exist, but are often not identified.
There are many reasons red flags go unreported. Victims or bystanders may fear retaliation or they may feel like their report will be ignored or they might think they are just being overly suspicious. And sometimes victims or bystanders make reports but the person receiving the report decides it is not serious or forgets or other.
However, in order to save lives and prevent incidents like this from occurring in the future, suspicious activities and other red flags must be reported to the appropriate personnel immediately and ongoing. By providing employees, victims, bystanders, responders and third-parties the ability to confidentially report suspicious behaviors, they will feel more comfortable and more likely to move from bystander to hero.
Many times one single behavior might not constitute a genuine threat, but when all of the dots are connected, a serious problem may be revealed. For example, maybe one employee hears that John Doe has threatened to “make everyone pay”. A different employee learns that John recently broke up with his girlfriend. A third employee sees John putting a suspicious bag in his locker. Each of these events separately may not be reason for concern, but when connected….
Organizations must ensure they are “connecting the dots” at the individual level and sharing the right information with the right people at the right time. And lessons learned show the right tools can help make the shift from “lone wolf” terrorists to “lone wolf” heroes.
Comment (1)
Email This Post
Workplace Violence – “Don’t Get Caught in the White Zone”
Posted In Human Resources, Incident Reporting, Legal, Risk Management, School Safety, Workplace Violence on March 29th, 2010
While attending a recent conference, I sat in on a speaker discussing workplace violence, threat awareness and preparedness efforts.
While we have done a considerable amount of research on this topic, there were a few items in this presentation that grabbed my attention:
1) Zero reports of violence do not equal zero violence
This is a critical statement for employers to understand and address. Over 80% of violent incidents have clear warning signs, but red flags are often not reported. How is your organization ensuring your employees, third-parties, etc. understand their responsibility to report suspicious incidents, threats, etc.? Have you made it easy for employees to submit an incident report? Can they do so anonymously? Once an employee submits an incident report, how does your organization ensure the appropriate personnel or threat assessment team members are notified? How does your organization know what actions were taken?
2) Distinguish between “making a threat” and “posing a threat”
The speaker addressed three key points:
- Some people who make a threat do pose a threat
- A few people who pose a threat never make a threat
- Most people who make a threat do not pose a threat
How can organizations determine the difference between threatening behavior and odd or unusual behavior? John Doe might have a fascination with guns. Jane Smith just broke up with her boyfriend. Henry Johnson has a history of mental illness. However, just one of these risk factors alone does not generally constitute a threat. The whole picture has to be reviewed and Threat Assessment Teams need specialized awareness to help identify and mitigate risk factors.
There are several assessment tools available (VRAG, RAGE-V, etc.) that can help Threat Assessment Teams evaluate behaviors and determine risk factors. Risk factors can include contextual factors, deterrent factors, potential stressors and resiliency factors, and all should be taken into account when evaluating a potential threat.
3) Don’t Get Caught in the White Zone
As soon as an organization thinks they are safe (“My employees would never do that”) and stops preparing is when they will get caught. It is critical for employers to understand that the risk of workplace violence is real and implement a proactive approach to ensure workplace safety and security.
Organizations must ensure they are “connecting the dots” across all departments, locations, individuals, etc. and eliminate silos between management, staff, mental health, law enforcement, third-parties, etc. When the right information is shared with the right people at the right time, your organization’s chances of preventing workplace violence, negative publicity, lawsuits and much worse, are much better.
No Comments
Email This Post
$800,000 – Will Your School be the Next to Face a Bullying Lawsuit?
Posted In Emergency Management, Legal, Risk Management, School Safety, Workplace Violence on March 12th, 2010 Tags: bullying, cyber-bullying, education, Incident Reporting, michigan school district, Red Flags, threat assessment team, Virginia Tech
I blogged a few weeks ago about the parent suing the Ottawa Catholic School Bard for $325,000, alleging the school failed to protect her child from repeated acts of bullying. Two more lawsuits have recently made the headlines and school leaders are probably wondering, “Will we be next?”
In Australia, a teenage girl was awarded $290,000 in compensation by the Education Department after years of harassment and bullying at school left her a physical and emotional wreck. The girl’s parents had pleaded with the school principal to protect their daughter, and held regular discussions with teachers and the school chaplain. But the school failed to respond to the complaints and did not have established procedures to deal with bullying. The parents claim the girl’s injuries included psychological disturbance, panic disorder, insomnia, an eating disorder, stress-related psoriasis and suicidal thoughts.
In a landmark U.S. decision, a Michigan school district has been ordered to pay $800,000 to a student who claimed the school did not do enough to protect him from years of bullying.
This case makes it clear that just having an anti-bullying policy will not be enough to protect schools from future lawsuits. School officials must take a more proactive and preventative approach to ensure bullying and harassment incidents are identified, addressed and prevented ongoing.
It is critical for schools to provide all faculty, staff and students with training to identify red flags and provide tools to confidentially report suspicious behaviors (threats, bullying, discrimination, harassment, etc.) and tools for threat assessment teams to manage incident reports and red flags.
- Do your schools have Threat Assessment Team tools to ensure Red Flags are not falling through the cracks?
- Have your schools implemented the 93 recommendations from Virginia Tech Review Panel?
- Do your students, faculty, employees, and third-parties understand their responsibilities to report and document suspicious incidents before and actions during and after an emergency situation occurs (meeting Clery Act and other regulatory requirements)?
- Have your schools’ emergency plans, crisis management procedures, lockdown procedures, etc. been communicated, to appropriate personnel, acknowledged and documented?
Lessons learned clearly show schools will see expensive lawsuits, embarrassing headlines and damaged reputations if they fail to connect-the-dots and manage red flags.
Comments (3)
Email This Post
