by Joy Dike, PhD

Fort Knox. I'm sure the name conjures images of all sorts of heavily fortified deterrent devices. The reality? 

• Fortress-like
• Electric fences
• Heavily armed guards
• Alarms
• Video cameras
• Granite-lined vault
• Torch-resistant and drill-resistant walls
• Combination locks
• 22 ton blast door
• Mine field
• Barbed razor wire
• No visitors allowed

Fort Knox rightly deserves its reputation as a heavily fortified site!  

Why are we talking about Fort Knox today? Sometimes we go in to a risk assessment and our client worries that we want to turn their school or campus or building into Fort Knox. They're worried that we're going to recommend fortified fences, cameras in every crevice of the campus, alarms on every single door, a visitor management policy that prohibits all visitors, electronic access control measures on every single ingress/egress point, and armed guards at every entrance and roving the campus.

Listen, we do believe in the importance of physical security measures such as fences, alarms, cameras, access control, and guards. But unless your culture and policies reflect a commitment to safety, you could be as heavily fortified as Fort Knox and still be vulnerable. You could have card readers at every single door in the facility, but if people routinely leave doors ajar, the technology has done you no good. You could have CCTV cameras on every inch of the campus, but if no one is watching the displays in real time, the technology has not improved your security. You could have a visitor management policy that checks all identification with registered sex offenders, but if you  have areas of the campus that are wide open (i.e., no fences) and people can simply walk on to campus without going through a security check point, then your technology has not made the campus a safer place.

Technology is not a crutch. Without instilling proper values and policies to create a culture of safety, physical security measures can only go so far in protecting your people. 

by Joy Dike, PhD

Having and practicing a lockdown procedure at your school is something we ceaselessly advocate for here at Invictus Consulting. We believe that drilling your plan is just as important as having a plan. We've talked about this multiple times before on this blog - look here and here and here and here and here for further discussions of this topic.

What I want to talk about today is a scenario in which your school needs to go in to lockdown because of something happening nearby. Earlier this month in Katy, Texas a disgruntled former employee walked into the front door of his former place of work, yelled something about his life being ruined, aimed his shotgun, shot at multiple people (killing one of them), and then took his own life. This man had been fired from the company recently and was out to get revenge. We could discuss this situation in the context of workplace violence and warning signs or situations that may cause an employee to commit an act of violence, but the focus of this blog post is on the nearby schools. A high school, a junior high school, and an elementary school are located directly across the street from the business where the shooting occurred. These schools (Morton Ranch High School, Morton Ranch Junior High, and Franz Elementary) went into immediate lockdown. 

There are a few issues to think about here. (Before we go any further, please understand that this commentary is in no way reflective of the Katy ISD Police or schools and how they conducted themselves. The active shooter situation and subsequent school lockdowns in Katy, Texas are merely serving as the jumping off point for a thought exercise here.):

• Why didn't the other nearby schools go in to lockdown as well? A map of the area seems to indicate that there are at least three other schools within a mile of the business where the shooting occurred and another four schools less than three miles from the shooting. That's a total of 10 schools within a 3 mile radius of this incident. It seems that the local school district department put the first three schools on lockdown, but if you're a parent or educator or employee at one of the other nearby schools, wouldn't you want to keep your students safe as well? A lockdown plan (in addition to being drilled regularly), should stipulate what circumstances qualify for initiation of the lockdown procedure.
• At least three nearby schools did go into lockdown mode even though nothing violent happened at these schools; they were put on lockdown because of a nearby incident. If you are an administrator or educator, you need to realize and understand that incidents at other locations can affect you, even if the incident is not on your campus. Many administrators and educators that we work with think that nothing bad will ever happen at their school. Whether or not that is a reality, the fact is that bad things may happen near your school, and this should be reason enough to write and drill a lockdown procedure.
• The three schools put on lockdown were ordered to do so by the local school district police department. We've met with a lot of school administrators who feel that they are perfectly well prepared for a lockdown or active shooter event because the local police department has a SWAT team. While a trained SWAT team may be effective in neutralizing an active shooter, are you going to rely on that SWAT team to set up your mass notification system? Audit your security protocols? Audit your camera and alarm coverage? No, of course you're not - its not the job of the SWAT team to write an evacuation plan for you or to make sure your mass notification system is in place and functioning properly. The job of the SWAT team is to neutralize the threat. The point here is that having a local police department and/or SWAT team is not enough - you need to have a proper security audit performed for your school and a proper lockdown procedure written and drilled. 

We are always sorry to hear about active shooter events, and our condolences go out to the family of the employee killed by the active shooter. However, we do strive to learn from active shooter incidents, and this particular incident has the ability to teach us a few things about school lockdown procedures. 

by Joy Dike, PhD

We talk about workplace violence frequently here at Invictus Consulting, but we feel pretty strongly about the topic and will continue to talk about it until its no longer a problem. We've written a white paper on the topic if you'd like to check it out. 

by Joy Dike, PhD

Here at Invictus Consulting we help a lot of schools and businesses improve their Emergency Action Plan. One part of an Emergency Action Plan is where to congregate if your campus, building, or property needs to be evacuated. Some people like to call this a "muster station," which simply means a pre-determined location to assemble people - students, employees, visitors, etc.

The question that should be asked with a muster station is: What are you going to do once everyone is there? This is a particularly crucial question for schools. If you've evacuated all students, faculty, and staff to a muster location, what do you do once everyone is there? Can parents just drive up and grab their kids? How do you even alert parents that their children are at a muster station rather than at the school?  How are you going to account for all persons? Will you keep students grouped by grade? By last name? Let them all mill around randomly? What about special needs students? Injured students? Can students have their cell phones? 

This is where a Reunification Plan is important. A Reunification Plan will give you policies, procedures, and concrete steps to take when faced with an evacuation and the need to reunify students with their parents. Like any other emergency plan, a Reunification Plan should be drilled regularly by teachers and staff so that they understand their roles and responsibilities.

We're super excited about May the Fourth (i.e., Star Wars day) over here. Here's a quick preview of tomorrow's Star Wars themed blog:

​Are you a trendsetter? 

Stand out from the crowd and be proactive about your security management. 

Sad boring stormtroopers just stand back and let chaos happen. Awesome trendsetter stormtrooper is proactive. He's got swagger, and he's got a plan.

​Come back tomorrow on May the 4th to learn more!

by Joy Dike, PhD

There has been an increasing level of attentiveness to active shooters in our nation over the past couple of years. The Google trend is quite telling - attention starts to rise in July and August of 2012 after the movie theatre shooting in Aurora, CO in July and the shooting at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin in August. The curve really starts to rise in December 2012 after the Sandy Hook shootings, and it peaks in December of 2015 after the San Bernardino shootings.

The Google trend for the phrase "active shooter training" is even more telling about people's fear. The general shape is the same, but the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut in December 2012 resulted in a large peak of interest in active shooter training. Ditto with the San Bernardino shooting in December of 2015 - a massive spike in interest in active shooter training. 

Its clear that people respond to events like Sandy Hook and San Bernardino by looking for information on how to defend themselves if they were to be confronted by such a situation. We've talked about this on the blog before, but its worth talking about again - having a plan in place to deal with an active shooter is becoming increasingly necessary for businesses and schools in today's world. As an individual, there's also some steps you can take.

Active shooter training classes geared towards civilians (as opposed to training for law enforcement on how to respond to an active shooter event) are popping up all over the country. Police departments, schools, and businesses are conducting training sessions in towns, cities, and schools all over the country. In addition, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), offers an independent study course on how to prepare for and respond to active shooter events. Similarly, the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center (ALERRT), which trains law enforcement and first responders on dealing with active shooters, has developed a course for civilians entitled Civilian Response to Active Shooter Events (CRASE). 

The point is that there is training available to individuals wanting to learn more about active shooters and how to prepare for and respond to an active shooter event. Don't think that you need to be a police officer or on a SWAT team to qualify for training. Many of these sessions are specifically geared toward civilians looking to gain a better understand of active shooters.

See for yourself if there is civilian training available where you live. A quick internet search will probably uncover a number of options, and if you live in a place where there aren't in-person training options, take the self-directed FEMA/DHS course.

by Joy Dike, PhD

I recently read one of the most apt metaphors for why we should prepare for the possibility of terrorist threats in our nation's school. Written in the Foreword to Innocent Targets: When Terrorism Comes to School,  Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, U.S. Army (Ret.) compares preparing for a fire with preparing for a terrorist attack at a school. It's worth repeating a few paragraphs verbatim:

"Our children are dozens of times more likely to be killed by violence than fire, and thousands of times more likely to be seriously injured by violence as compared to fire. And yet, in any school you can look around and see fire sprinklers, smoke alarms, fire exits, and fire extinguishers. If we can spend all that money and time preparing for fire (and we should, since every life is precious), shouldn't we spend time and money preparing for the thing that is far more likely to kill or injure a child? 

The most negligent, unprofessional, obscene words anyone can ever say are, 'It will never happen here.' Imagine the firefighter saying, 'There will never be a fire in this building, and we don't need those fire extinguishers.'

When someone says, 'Do you really think there will be a terrorist act or a school shooting here?' I just point to the fire exit and say, 'Do you really think there will be a fire here? Statistically speaking, it is very unlikely that there would ever be a fire here. But we would be morally, criminally negligent if we did not prepare for the possibility. And the same is far, far more true of school violence.'" (pp.xviii-xix)


I really like this analogy because it speaks so clearly to the do-nothing strategy so many schools employ about a terrorist attack - school administrators often have the mindset that a terrorist attack or school shooting could never possibly happen on their campus. It's a problem for other people in other countries. Or at least other cities. "I don't have to worry about this problem in my community" is a mindset we find in far too many schools.

We need to break ourselves of this mindset. The methods to mitigate the threat of a terror attack are the same methods to mitigate the threat of an active shooter, and it starts with admitting that the school needs to have a risk assessment done and put a plan in place for various types of emergencies, not just fire emergencies. 

by Joy Dike, PhD

The interview process is never used a source of blame or condemnation - it is a data collection tool used to uncover gaps in security. With that said, sometimes interviewees are nervous to answer questions truthfully, fearing that they will be reprimanded or seen as ratting out the administration. This is precisely one of the times at which being a woman in the world of security consulting is a virtue. So many security consulting firms are paramilitary in nature - the majority of their assessors are ex-military and ex-law enforcement men, which can be intimidating. Imagine being nervous about an interview in the first place and then sitting face-to-face with an intimidating man who looks like he just stepped out of a RoboCop movie who asks you who has access to the building. "ummmm.... I think people have to sign in and the doors have keycard access...." (Never mind admitting to this man that sometimes teachers leave doors propped open! Best leave that little confession out of the interview...)

As a woman in the security industry, I see the value in sometimes having a less intimidating person conduct interviews at schools. We want people to be completely open and honest (otherwise we aren't really uncovering gaps in security), and the reality is that women faculty and staff are apt to be more open and honest with a woman interviewer.  

Being a woman in the security industry is a topic we will continue to explore on this blog, so come back regularly to take a look at this subject with us.

by Joy Dike, PhD

We talk a lot about active shooters, mass shootings, and workplace violence here on the Invictus Consulting blog. Here we go again...

Recently a man walked into a leasing office at an apartment complex In Tallahassee and opened fire. What we know so far is that this man was acting out in retaliation for his wife having been fired from her job at the apartment complex earlier that day. He shot an employee of the apartment complex 6 times (not fatally) and then went back outside and casually waited for the police to come, looking, "like a man who had accomplished his goal."

Let's look at this case in the context of active shooter, mass shootings, and workplace violence. Is this man an active shooter? Is this an an instance of a mass shooting? Is this a case of workplace violence?

Remember that the agreed-upon definition (by the White House, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, the Department of Education, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency) of an active shooter is "an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area; in most cases, active shooters use firearm(s) and there is no pattern or method to their selection." 

Is he an active shooter? Was he:

• attempting to kill people
• by shooting them
• in a populated area
• with no particular rhyme or reason for who he aims at 

The four major parts of the definition of an active shooter may fit in this case, IF we learn that the mindset of the perpetrator was to kill people indiscriminately. This information hasn't come to light yet. The first question is whether he intended to actually kill people. The other question is whether he was shooting randomly or if had chosen targets. This information also hasn't come to light, but the fact that he went to the leasing office (rather than the nearby apartment complex gym, pool, or computer room) may indicate that his targets were employees of the apartment complex rather than random individuals (or renters) at the apartment complex. Without knowing his mindset, we can't fully commit to calling this an active shooter case.

Was it a mass shooting? While there is little consensus on what defines a mass shooting (see this blog post and this white paper on active shooter statistics for a more detailed explanation of this topic), all definitions assume at least 3 people are shot. This instance, then, would not be classified as a mass shooting. 

Is this a case of workplace violence? There are four types of workplace violence offenders:

• Type I - The offender has no relationship with either the victims or the establishment. (This is random violence, often attempted robbery.)
• Type II - The offender currently receives services (e.g., retail, health) from the facility where they commit violence. (This often manifests as violence towards nurses or healthcare workers by their patients.)
• Type III - The offender is a current or former employee acting out against current or former place of employment. (If the woman who had been fired from the apartment complex had done the shooting [rather than her husband], the Tallahassee case would be Type III workplace violence.)
• Type IV - The offender has a relationship with an employee and domestic issues spill over into the workplace. (This often manifests as domestic disputes or domestic violence carrying over into the workplace of one or the other of the domestic partners.)

In the Tallahassee case, we can certainly classify the violence as Type IV workplace violence. This man had a relationship with an employee (his wife), and he committed violence at her workplace. Even though the wife was not present for the violence and her husband was not acting violently toward her, he still committed violence at a place of work where he had a relationship with an employee. 

Now that we've determined that this is not a mass shooting, is potentially not an active shooter situation, but is definitely a case of workplace violence, do you feel relieved? Safer? More scared? Glad that one less active shooter case has NOT happened in the United States? 

The reality is that workplace violence - whether it is a case of domestic violence, harassment, emotional abuse, threats, or an actual armed gunman - poses a greater threat to the daily safety of workers than do active shooters. Workplace violence occurs every day in places all over the country, and someone does not need to be wielding a gun to be classified as engaging in workplace violence; most instances of workplace violence do not involve guns at all. We've said it before, and we will say it again until workplaces are truly safe, but you need to have a workplace violence policy (i.e., a zero-tolerance policy), you need to make sure employees know about and follow the policy, and you need to make sure that your employees feel safe at work.

by Joy Dike, PhD

It's 10:30 on a Tuesday morning and you're sitting in your fifth floor office working on an important report. Your phone lights up with a text message alert from your company's mass notification system:  "Active shooter on campus. Shelter in place." 

WHAT DO YOU DO?

Really, take a moment and actually put yourself in this position and think about what you would do. I'll wait... 

Would you panic and hide? Run to the elevator or stairs and high tail it out of the building? Call your spouse? Pull the fire alarm? Pop your head out of the door and see what everyone else is doing? Freeze up, unable to move?

HERE'S WHAT YOU SHOULD DO:
Avoid
Deny 
Defend

During an active shooter situation there are steps you can take to protect yourself and increase your chances of survival. Understand this: it is a matter of life and death - your actual survival may depend on what you do.

AVOID - Avoid the shooter at all costs. Escape from the vicinity of the shooter. If you can leave the confines of the building, do it. 

DENY - If you cannot exit the building, the next step is to deny the shooter access to you and those around you. Find a place to hide. Lock the door. Barricade the door with office furniture or anything big. Use rope, a tie, or a belt to secure outward opening doors. Turn off the lights. Remain quiet, silence your phone, and remain out of sight. 

DEFEND - If you have hidden and attempted to deny the shooter access to your location but he still finds a way in, the next step is defend yourself. Remember that an active shooter is trying to kill you, and you have the right to defend yourself by any means necessary. At this point your life depends on how well you defend yourself - do not fight fair. Position yourself where you can surprise the gunman. Use any objects at hand (scissors, hot coffee, fire extinguisher, etc.) to attack the gunman and incapacitate him.