How to temper fear and loathing of your security measures

Real Estate Weekly, Oct 6, 2004 by Frank Califano, Jr.

Managing the safety and security of buildings and facilities has never been more necessary than it is today.

Yet the very people that are being protected often perceive that protection as being overdone, exaggerated, silly, an intrusion on civil liberties and unwelcome.

In real estate venues, this can result in tenant dissatisfaction and higher turnover rates.

The challenge is to continue providing both raised-alert and normal security measures without causing protest, panic or contempt.

There are a number of things you can do to better achieve this balance.

Address perceived "silly security."

It's not uncommon to encounter security processes that seemingly make little sense--and are ultimately ineffective.

For example, when visiting an office building, you may have to wait in line, show your ID, sign in--and then receive a sticker or paper "pass" that any trespasser could easily produce on a home computer.

It's important to partner with a security provider that will suggest and implement both subtle and highly visible procedures that make sense--and that are effective. Such procedures could include:

* Working with local law enforcement to arrange for law enforcement vehicles to be parked at random times near entrances and exits

* Increasing vehicle, foot and roving security patrols--visible security that does not directly "infringe" on the public

* Approaching illegally parked vehicles in and around your facility, questioning the drivers as to their purpose and directing them in a courteous yet firm manner to move their vehicles

* Reminding occupants in a friendly, professional manner to properly display their security access badges, and consistently enforcing the rule

* Maintaining consistent visible procedures to eliminate frustrating "surprises" when interacting with the public, yet implementing a "behind the scenes" unpredictability, such as employing random security guard shift changes and varying patrols, to maintain a security edge over ill-intentioned observers

Be unpredictable in subtle ways.

Altering the routine application of less obvious security procedures leaves the "bad guys" with a reasonable degree of uncertainty about the outcome of their actions.

And as such security measures are employed in such a way that they're applied for the most part without the public's awareness, they are unlikely to cause undue alarm or resentment.

For example, traffic control is a critically important element in the protection of many buildings. During planning for an attack, terrorists would undoubtedly conduct surveillance of traffic patterns in and around the targeted building to identify areas of vulnerability and to formulate a plan of attack. If the traffic pattern is designed solely for the convenience of the public, it provides consistent vulnerability that can be easily identified and exploited.

However, if the building's traffic patterns are randomly changed and traffic barriers are utilized in such a way as to be different yet not difficult for the public, the traffic still flows and the public is not unduly inconvenienced, yet the terrorists lose the advantage of a predictable pattern they can exploit.

Be prepared.

Knowing how you are going to react to an incident or to the threat of an incident is critical to providing an effective response with minimal public alarm and resentment.

Let's use an emergency evacuation as an example. If a real or perceived emergency occurs at your facility, does your security team and your management have a clearly defined plan as to what actions to take, who should take them, and in what order?

An order to evacuate is sudden, confusing and resented. But if the evacuation is uncoordinated and disorderly, and your personnel are unable to provide directions or answer questions, occupants' fear and resentment of your security response is exacerbated.

At worst, an improperly handled response to a threat could induce panic--in many cases the ultimate goal of a threat caller.

Once a state of panic has set in, the potential for injury and property damage is greatly increased--even if the threat later turns out to be a hoax or the original emergency is quickly brought under control.

While pre-planning for fire emergencies has long been a standard procedure, today an effective "pre-plan'" for a broader range of emergencies--from threats to actual attacks--should include:

* Coordinating with law enforcement agencies to define how you will establish the validity of threats received by telephone, fax, email, etc.

* Specifying the actions your management and private security officers should take when such a threat comes in or if an event should occur; exactly who should do what, and in what order

* Specifying and communicating in advance to all occupants a coordinated evacuation plan, with directions on how to exit the facility, and where to gather away from the facility, as well as what to do when evacuation is not possible or not the best alternative

* Establishing a spokesperson and back-up personnel to take point on interacting with the public and provide information during an event