Workplace Violence—A Holistic Approach To Prevention

Today’s headlines highlight the country’s concerns over incidents of violence. Whether the violent acts are oriented around school or workplace shootings, we know that reactive postures aren’t a realistic solution.

BEYOND ACTIVE-SHOOTER SCENARIOS

While investing in active-shooter training does help prepare organizations for one aspect of violence, it only does so for the window of time between when the event begins and ends.

If we look at the various publications produced by law enforcement, we gain a clearer picture as to why a program that solely invests in active-shooter training is deficient. For example, the FBI’s report on active shooters published in 2013 clearly noted that most active shooting incidents were over in less than 10 minutes and typically before law enforcement arrived. This is further illustrated by the Police Executive Research Forum’s March 2014 publication titled “The Police Response to Active Shooter Incidents” in which the authors noted that in an evaluation of 84 events between 2000 and 2010, 41 of the incidents ended before police arrived. Out of those that concluded after the police arrived, 19 were over because of the attacker stopping their onslaught. Only 24 of the 84 incidents ended because of direct intervention by law enforcement. One could certainly argue that the 19 post-law enforcement stops were due to police presence and the attacker’s realization that their control over the incident was coming to an end. Yet, to this day, many companies invest most of their efforts in creating a workplace-violence policy that’s only supported by active-shooter training programs.

Organizations need to embrace the notion that beyond the myriad of solutions now being politicized, they need to take ownership of protecting their personnel. They ought to design a program that includes aspects of mitigation/prevention, preparedness, response and recovery. In doing so, an organization should take the first step of assessing the validity of their current violence-prevention program. Existing policies such as sexual harassment prevention, crisis counseling, weapons prohibition, etc. are all contributing elements to a comprehensive approach to violence mitigation. However, creating a holistic method helps a company recognize that violence can be exhibited in many ways. As a result, a violence-prevention strategy needs to bring all stakeholders to the table and drive education and cooperation to identify unwanted behaviors in their earliest stages.

HOW THINGS DETERIORATE

Undesirable behaviors may be early signs of an enhanced risk of violence in the workplace, including:

• Aggressive behaviors exhibited by employees, vendors or customers
• Sexual harassment
• Threatening or intimidation
• Domestic violence
• Narcissistic fantasies
• Delusional beliefs
• Abnormal fascination with weaponry
• Suicidal intentions

These behaviors can manifest themselves during disputes among co-workers, performance appraisals, normal daily interaction between peers and front-line leadership. Yet few peers and front-line leaders recognize the correlation between undesirable activities and future violence. As an individual’s ability to cope deteriorates amid the various stressors in their life, they could begin exploring options that the general population considers unreasonable solutions to the conflict. For instance, the frustrated spouse of an employee may struggle with a marriage that’s falling apart. Over time their ability to deal with the situation declines and they may begin to establish unreasonable beliefs that perhaps the cause for the failure is due to encouragement to leave the relationship by his/her co-workers. This then fuels humiliation and the perception that the only way to maintain the relationship is to eliminate those that threaten the sanctity of their marriage.

Similarly, an employee whose performance may be worsening over time and is characterized by increased outbursts, tardiness or lack of interest in long-term opportunities, could develop a suicidal urge, or “ideation.” Criticism from others and peers distancing themselves from this person could enhance these intentions. As coping skills weaken, they might pursue a solution that includes suicide or suicide by others (e.g., “death by cop”).

PROACTIVE PREVENTION

One challenge facing many organizations is the lack of an established process to collect data that would allow them to intervene early. For example, consider the restricted access to information about staff matters that otherwise could benefit professionals attempting to resolve conflict. Perhaps a shift leader believes the personality conflict between two employees is manageable at a lower level, and he or she doesn’t engage Human Resources. In other cases, Human Resources may experience a domestic matter and determine it’s a private affair and shouldn’t engage other partners in the company that could assist, such as Legal or Security. The Security team many times becomes the brunt of some of these situations, receiving notification two hours before a potentially hostile termination, thus leaving no time for proper planning. These flawed approaches unfortunately have led to incidents that otherwise could have been prevented.

Many times, when working backwards from an incident of violence, it’s more obvious how an individual progressed along a clear pathway. One that began with a grievance, then ideation or fixation on an activity. As their obsession on the matter evolves into identification of solutions (realistic or not), they move toward planning, preparation and perhaps implementation of an act of violence. This behavior may have been fueled by a shameful event that humiliated them and, in the end, triggered rage. Opportunities to intervene are likely present throughout this process of their moving from idea to action. Bringing the right people to the table is essential in data collection and their collaboration is key to resolving the matter. It should be noted though that some of the solutions identified are long-term and a lack of support could allow the individual to slip back into the frame of mind that put the organization at risk in the first place. For an organization to address the many ways these challenges evolve, the corporation will need to take the following steps:

• Conduct a comprehensive assessment of the existing violence-prevention program
• Establish a multidisciplinary threat assessment team (TAT) consisting of Human Resources, Security, Legal, CFO and appropriate subject-matter experts such as Certified Threat Managers (CTM)
• Conduct training for the TAT
• Revise existing policies and procedures based on the collaboration with the TAT
• Prepare a tiered training program that includes staff to address a broader employee awareness; supervisors to address their early recognition of unwanted behaviors; leadership to familiarize them with their role in prevention, response and recovery

COMMUNITY-BASED SECURITY

The process of designing a sophisticated program is complex and not to be taken lightly. For instance, capturing the information related to unwanted behaviors must be designed in a way that doesn’t imply a company is spying on the community. Think about how the program is communicated to the broader team to gain maximum participation. Why don’t they speak up? The FBI’s 2017 publication “Making Prevention a Reality” identifies concerns in their post-incident investigations as to why people don’t report abnormal behaviors, including:

• Potential for ridicule
• Possibility for reprisal from the person or the organization
• Perception as a snitch
• Potential of not being taken seriously
• Uncertain about the seriousness of the situation
• Mistrust of confidentiality
• Desire to remain uninvolved

These factors and many others contribute to a lack of information that may best position an organization to resolve conflicts early and mitigate the risk of future violence. Creating a sense of community where the workforce all see the opportunity to protect themselves from violent incidents is critical to overcoming some of these factors. Beyond this, established TAT teams with qualified investigation, assessment and management strategies will further enhance trust in the program.

Chuck Tobin, CTM (Certified Threat Manager), is president and CEO of AT-RISK International, a firm that helps companies and individuals enhance security through proactive threat analysis, protection, consulting, investigations and security training in the Americas, the Middle East, Europe, Asia and Africa. He is slated to address a general session on workplace violence during TRSA’s Workforce Management Summit on May 16 in St. Louis. Readers may contact him at ctobin@at-riskinter-national.com or 877.323.2444.