Seal Team Six is not on Standby
I pride myself on being an expert planner, whether as an operations officer in the military or managing a security detail in a developing nation. I always allocate about 70% of my effort to planning for any project, as the idea of preventing catastrophe through careful planning seems logical. Identifying potential threats allows me to avoid crises, ensuring the safety of those under my care.
One might assume that organizations sending their employees abroad would adopt a similar mindset. However, having spent a couple of decades in the travel risk management industry, I can attest that the majority do not. Most managers responsible for employee safety rely on third parties to provide reactionary services, attempting to extract their people from trouble after an incident has occurred. Unfortunately, many of these organizations selling crisis response services operate reactively and sometimes fail to fulfill their promises.
I vividly recall visiting a prominent travel risk services provider while working for a large corporation in the Middle East. Wanting to test their capabilities, I walked into their offices and presented a hypothetical scenario: "I have 80 people in Egypt right now, and a catastrophic event has taken place. Let's tabletop your evacuation." Their panicked response was, "Well, the reaction depends on your internal plans… here is a list of security providers you can call." I was mildly irritated to say the least.
Despite being contracted to respond to our employees worldwide, their response to the test revealed significant gaps in their capabilities. Recognizing that, irrespective of the contract, any harm to our employees would ultimately be our responsibility, we started enhancing our internal response plans based on the risk levels in the countries where our employees operated.
From that moment, I realized that full assistance from third-parties for our employees was unattainable, and we were the best equipped to handle evacuations. We developed plans, communicated them to managers, and ensured employees knew whom to contact first in times of trouble. Additionally, we monitored the travel itineraries of our employees to provide them with information to avoid crises.
Evacuating at-risk personnel is a complex task that requires thorough planning. It should be an integral part of travel itineraries, but often it is not. As I developed the travel risk program for my company, I recognized that the lack of proactivity stemmed from a psychological issue. Individuals accustomed to security and control find it challenging to acknowledge and address risks that make them feel vulnerable. The exercise of identifying threats is uncomfortable, leading many to ignore them.
Another factor was the fear of employees refusing to travel if they were aware of potential threats, hindering organizational growth. Managers found it easier to reassure employees that someone would come to their rescue rather than disclose the risks they faced. Although unrealistic, this reassurance was accepted by many as long as they didn't have to confront the threats.
My company now collaborates with organizations to ensure responsible tracking of employees and works diligently to avoid catastrophes. We believe that 95% of the crisis situations travelers face are avoidable with proper planning and threat mitigation. However, we acknowledge that there will always be unavoidable crises, which is why we also provide secure geotracking and communication tools.
While many companies have provided reactionary services in the past, they are increasingly realizing the need for proactive planning. Crisis events occur more frequently, even in locations once considered low-risk. Companies are aware that the potential for evacuations is no longer slim, necessitating a shift from budgeting for potential lawsuits to proactive planning. Organizational leaders recognize the value of planning to avoid crises in enhancing safety and security programs.
If in doubt, take the time to test your service providers without informing them. Tabletop a realistic scenario and observe their response. If possible, engage an outside company to red team their services. Most companies do penatration testing from an IT perspective. Why not for the physial safety of people? An honest provider will appreciate the test and the opportunity to put your mind at ease.
Seal Team Six is not on standby. Only you can ensure that your people are being cared for responsibly.
I am the Principal Consultant at Morton Executive Decisions, bringing over two decades of expertise in analytical intelligence and security across government, commercial, and non-profit sectors. With a foundation as a US Army infantry soldier and later an intelligence officer, I've honed my skills over 16 years of military service. Transitioning to corporate security, I contributed to large teams at Amazon, JP Morgan, and General Dynamics for a decade. Recognized for agility and fresh perspectives, I hold an ASIS Certified Protection Professional certification and serve as the Vice Chair on the Operational Intelligence Steering Committee.