Protecting Your Company From Terrorsim From Within…

In his article Dr. Rovner, writes that Employee-Terrorist is “calculated” and will wait for opportunity to strike, while using employer to survive beyond stipends provided by their terrorist group, unwitting employer is potential target depending on type of business or government agency. But even if companies are not specifically targeted says, Dr. Rovner, they are indirectly and unknowingly supporting Terrorist by providing a source of income. Like Terrorist who awaits call to action, disgruntled employee is “event driven” by circumstances. Both “Terrorist” and “Disgruntled Employee” share some other common opportunities as “employees”; they have access to company and are familiar with company secrets.

The Potential Threat…

Driving home a clear and evident example of potential terrorist’s ability to penetrate even a secure environment, I am reminded of British Daily Mirror Reporter, Ryan Parry who compromised Buckingham Palace’s hiring and recruitment procedures by providing false credentials and gaining precarious access to President of United and his wife while staying at palace. Even though palace had an elaborate security system and employed most stringent security measures to guarantee safety of President Bush, Parry successfully breeched security by falsifying his references. According to security officials they were satisfied that both security and criminal records check were robust and done correctly. The response may have satisfied some political end but didn’t answer question of what type of employee background check was done to authenticate and validate hiring during screening process. Such access was a breach at hiring phase when in all likelihood, responsibility fell on lonely shoulders of a lowly paid clerk who merely followed checklist.

What To Look For…?

I believe collaborative process of Threat Assessment Team concept enhances prevention and proactive essentials and promotes shared awareness in identification of potential threatening applicant during hiring process. The same collaborative process can be used to insure right individual passes hiring and recruitment process early on before permanent employment. Dr. Rovner says that companies, agencies and organizations can take preventive measures. He suggests that Human Resource Department be a bit more aggressive during hiring phases by instilling essential skills of investigator. Verification of all data at hiring process is critical. He said, “One of scariest things about Terrorist is that they look just like you and me”. While psychologist have not developed a foolproof terrorist profile, he suggests that most Terrorists posses a number of same traits. Tactfully worded questions during interview process will alert interviewer. Dr. Rovner further suggest that since Terrorist possess common traits use of properly designed questions will tell whether applicant has most or all of traits. He suggest they are:

-Loners -Dissatisfied with their lives -Have low self-esteem -Are true believers -Are antisocial -Lack pity or remorse -Have grievances against our country and our allies -Are tremendously loyal to their terrorist group.

Anyone intimately familiar with Threat Assessment Process would quickly discern that some of Terrorist’s traits and characteristics are common to disgruntled employee.

If anyone would like a copy of Dr. Rovner's article, please send me an email requesting article.

4. Stress is a real factor...

Profiles of perpetrators suggest that high stress levels are commonly experienced just prior to an act of violence says Worthington J. Hurrell, in 1999 in an article entitled: "Job stress, gender, and workplace violence Analysis of assault experiences of state employees". Dr. Frank Ghinassi, PhD, and assistant professor of psychiatry at University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, said that start of war can bring on feelings of anxiety over personal safety, financial security and safety of loved ones in military service. He stressed that it was possible that many would experience feelings of increased stress and anxiety. I believe aggressive intervention and security awareness are essential to interdiction of potentially explosive situation.

5. The President comes to rescue...

Challenging effectiveness of an aggressive Workplace Violence Interdiction Program was 1999 Federal Trade Commission Fair Credit Reporting opinion that prohibited employers' use of outside professional investigators in cases of suspected employee misconduct unless same requirements used in credit investigations were satisfied. This meant that worker suspected of misconduct had to be notified before any investigation. In addition, FTC required that employer provide a complete copy of investigation's results to suspect employee, including names and comments of witnesses.

Thanks to yeoman efforts of ASIS (Association of Security Industrial Society), U. S. Chamber of Commerce, SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management) and National Council of Investigation and Security Services, President Bush signed a bill into law Dec. 4, 2003 re-authorizing Fair Credit Reporting Act, which includes a provision that removes workplace misconduct investigations from notice and disclosure requirements of FCRA. This re-authorization aids workplace security intervention. ASIS officials said these barriers were overlooked by Congress until Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) perceived possible threat posed to security and safety of employees and consumers by FTC opinion. Sarah Pierce, SHRM manager of employment policy, said, "the FTC's 1999 interpretation was problematic because it contradicted numerous other laws that were specifically tailored to apply to workplace." "Because of changes, employers can now hire outside experts to investigate incidents of workplace misconduct without fear of liability", said Josh Ulman, Director, Labor Law Policy for U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The re-authorization restores employer's right to maintain a safe and secure workplace and insures a suspect's right to a professional, thorough and impartial investigation.

6. Corporate America takes responsibility and accountability...

Employers who take responsibility and accountability for hostile conduct of its employees are employers who follow their Security Policy, Plans and Programs. Merely disciplining perpetrator without a thorough knowledge of facts and circumstances does not do justice to adverse potential to morale, performance, production, future compensation claims and security. It fails to identify root cause or contributing behavior of participants. Remember, every catastrophe has a precursor event before triggering action. Knowing Risk Indicators warns all of suspicious intentions. When there are clear reporting requirements all involved will benefit from early warning and collaboration. Corporate America can again regain lost turf. Being able to conduct a proper investigation, take corrective measures will assist with rehabilitation process.