Bodyguard Careers - Bodyguards and Executive Protection » Bruce Alexander

A Good Resume

Hucky — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 00:44:08 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

As a business owner, I read a significant amount of cover letters and resumes. I really don’t mind because I find it interesting to read about what people have done (more accurately, claim they have done). Regrettably I’ve noticed a propensity in certain professions that draw heavily from military, former military, law enforcement, security, firefighters etc…to write resumes that are simply non-responsive to the requirements.

This is really unfortunate because I believe that otherwise capable individuals are missing great opportunities merely because they can’t write a decent resume that has a better than average chance of being read. If most of these resume writers could make a few simple tweaks to their resume, I think their prospects might be significantly increased.

So here are some tips that I have learned overtime from reviewing thousands of resumes to help you write the good executive protection resume:

• What Can You Do For Me? There is a enormous difference between what you’ve done and what you can do for me (the employer). Are you sending me your work history or depicting what value you can bring to my organization?

Can you solve my problems? This is probably the biggest point missed by most applicants. I don’t care what you did for someone else. What can you do for me? Answer this question with everything you put on a resume.

• You need more than one resume. A Good Resume should be written to respond to specific requirements. Do the work and develop more than one resume. There is no one size fits all when it comes to resumes.

• Less is more. Employers have a limited amount of time.
A longer resume is not a better resume. Usually it means the candidate is trying for anything and everything and winds up with nothing. Focus, focus, focus. A two page resume is the limit. Use your cover letter to add additional information.

This is another reason why you need more than one resume. You can’t send the same resume to every possible employer. Read the position requirements. If it says a Curriculum Vitae (CV) is acceptable send a CV but you better know what goes into a CV.

• Write to the position. Space is limited. If the position calls for “X” don’t put “A,B and C.” The employer is trying to tell you something. They are looking for a certain profile. Respond to that profile.

• No personal stuff. Leave your marital status, hobbies, community service, etc…off your resume. It doesn’t add value and might hurt you. The only exception is when your hobby supports the position but then again, that belongs in the resume body.

• Awards and decorations. Everyone is proud of what they have accomplished but guess what, unless the position has a specific requirement for something you have been decorated for, it’s extra baggage. If the award or decoration is not related to the position, leave it off.

• Professional appearance counts even in your resume. Spend the extra money to get some decent resume paper. It will help you standout.

• Think about what image you are conveying. Let me illustrate this point by sharing this tidbit. A colleague once applied for a position listing his personal e-mail address as part of his contact information. His e-mail address began with “chainsaw.”. Then he wondered why he wasn’t receiving a response to his resume. Enough said.

• No pictures please. Unless you are applying for a job as a TV reporter, forget about it. Pictures hurt more than they help. If the announcement requires a picture, get a conservative one.

• Spell-check. Spell-check your resume. What you put into your resume is what you will get out of it. Employers are busy people. The reality is unless you capture the reader’s attention in the first few lines, your chances of being considered drop significantly regardless of your qualifications.

Take the time and effort to write a responsive, well-crafted resume. You’ll significantly increase your opportunities by doing so.

Personal Security Concerns Rank High Among High Net Worth Individuals

Hucky — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:00:06 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

According to a survey of high net worth individuals (over $500K) personal security is a primary concerns. In a survey conducted by Prince & Associates, concerns about being victimized by acts of violence grew as levels of wealth grew.

These survey results are hardly surprising since these high net worth individuals represent far more attractive targets for criminals than the less wealth. However the more wealthy have the ability to take the necessary precautions to avoid becoming victims of crimes. This makes them far less susceptible to becoming victims of petty crime since they can afford to live an insular lifestyle. Unfortunately it doesn’t stop there.

Unfortunately this also means that they will likely face a much more determined criminal who has planned, and prepared for a criminal attack since their access to the high net worth individual is going to be far less than the less wealthy.

For the Executive Protection specialist, an awareness of this concern should help to understand what’s important to the high net worth protectee and enable you to respond to those concerns. From another perspective, it also points to employment and business opportunities for those Executive Protection specialists who provide protective services to the high net worth community. But be forewarned.

These individuals did not get this way by throwing their money away. Just because they can afford more doesn’t mean they will spend more or spend recklessly. Indeed, my experience is that high net worth individuals expect a certain level of performance and tend to be less forgiving when you don’t provide it.

Conversely don’t expect to have many “do-overs,” since there is no shortage of service providers for the higher end of the income spectrum. As with anything, your reward will be proportional to the level of service you provide.

Close Quarter Combat Skills For Executive Protection

Hucky — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:00:15 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

I’m constantly on the lookout for tactical concepts that have applicability to Executive Protection. A while back I discussed Richard Nance’s “Winning in The Kill Zone” as a worthwhile read for Executive Protection. I see lots of similarity and applicability in Kevin Davis’ article “The Combat Draw Stroke.” Like Richard Nance, Kevin Davis focuses on a close range tactical application which when analyzed, has a direct applicability to Executive Protection. I won’t try and rewrite the entire article for you since Mr. Davis does a superb job of getting the point across (therefore no need for me to muck it up with my two cents) but here’s where I see the Combat Draw Stroke as applicable for the Executive Protection community:

First, quick on target. With a close-in threat, and the very real possibility of multiple assailants, quick on target is a must for Executive Protection. Not that it’s any less important for anyone else, but the Executive Protection specialist usually does not have the ability to seek cover, or buy time or space by issuing commands during an assault on a principal (AOP). As I indicated in one of my earlier postings, the presence of a homicide bomber (assuming he/she has been detected) doesn’t allow much time or to assess multiple options before acting. Therefore, quick on target is a must for Executive Protection.

Second, response to spontaneous attacks. Let’s face it, in a crowd situation, your ability to adequately scan hands and demeanor is seriously stressed. Therefore the Executive Protection specialist must expect to confront a spontaneous attack. The standard Law Enforcement approach to escalation of force commensurate with the escalation of the threat, is usually not an option. Therefore the ability to draw in response to a spontaneous attack is paramount.

Third, draw and shoot with one hand. As I read this article I thought about the times during an Executive Protection mission that shooting with one hand might be a very real consideration during an AOP. I came to the conclusion, more often than not. One hand shooting takes on a real possibility when you start to consider the times we can be deprived of the ability to use two handed shooting given the nature of the Executive Protection assignment. One hand shooting is another one of those tactics that we must be ready to do.

Anyway, there are those who are far more skilled at this than I am but for me, this article was exceptionally enlightening.

Driving Considerations For Executive Protection

Hucky — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 12:00:45 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

I thought this article by Steve Ashley was as much applicable to the Executive Protection community as it is to the patrol function in Law Enforcement. With the high profile accident of Governor Corzine and the spotlight on Executive Protection and Executive Protection specific driving skills, Mr. Ashley’s reminder that driving skills are perishable skills is equally true for the Executive Protection community.

I have also been thinking about those agencies and organizations with protective details that are not staffed full time with Executive Protection agents who have to transition from one mind set to another. There is another set of challenges there which should be addressed in terms of training and policy.

We have at least three considerations when it comes to Executive Protection specific driving. First, we have the motorcade portion which calls for certain skills. Second, we have the emergency driving aspect which is performed during an attack and Third, we have accident avoidance or safety considerations which is performed in the motorcade formation as well as in response to a threat/attack.

One lesson learned from the Corzine incident, is that the Executive Protection community must consider driving on the same par as firearms or protective tactics. It’s not only the high speed low-drag stuff that will get us into trouble. It’s also the mundane (or what is perceived as mundane) such as accident avoidance and motorcade discipline. We can’t afford to be complacent with the ordinary.

Automating Perimeter Protection for Executive Protection

Hucky — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:00:01 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

There’s a a product on the market that merits serious consideration for planning and integrating physical security features into an Executive Protection Plan (EPP).

Lighthouse is an Israeli computer aided design (CAD) program that assists in planning and designing physical security perimeters. Lighthouse integrates digital terrain models, with aerial and satellite imagery, GIS technology, sensor specifications, engineering and environmental data, and thereby creates a 3D interactive representation of the perimeter. The program “helps users analyze the terrain, identify weak spots, define physical obstacles, propose location of obstacles, and analyze technological obstacles” before the actual sensors are implaced.

Used correctly, Lighthouse designs plans for a variety of sensors configured to the actual terrain as opposed to “force fitting” technology to the environment. What I like about the concept of Lighthouse is that it you can model how sensors will act or react in a given environment before you can actually position those sensors. This seems like a very cost effective and efficient way to design a physical security perimeter as opposed to placing sensors and then trying to determine whether those sensors are appropriate for the terrain and vulnerabilities later on.

I can see multiple applications where Lighthouse can assist in designing a security perimeter with EP applications. The most obvious application would be designing and integrating physical security measures for estates and executive residences with a significant surrounding land. Another application might be private aviation facilities or marinas. Of course, Lighthouse can also be used for corporate facility security planning where EP is a consideration or concern.

As I’ve said in previous posts, I’m a big proponent of using physical security measures to enhance Executive Protection. Lighthouse might be one of those products worth considering for an EP application.

As usual with all of my product reviews, I have nothing to do with whatsoever with Lighthouse.

One Handed Shooting: An Executive Protection Tactical Must

Hucky — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 12:00:54 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

Officer.com has an article by Steve Denney entitled “One-Handed Shooting; Another critical and neglected skill” with a very valid application to Executive Protection. One of the points Denney makes in his article is that sometimes you have to play the cards you’re dealt and if that means shooting with only one hand, so be it.

There’s plenty of situations in Executive Protection that shooting with one hand is a very real possibility, notably when you are trying to move your principal during an attack. In fact, you are far more likely to have to shoot with one hand in Executive Protection than most other situations.

If you are responsible for providing “body cover,” then instinctively you reach for your principal and start to move, if that’s an option. However, if you are on a small detail where there isn’t the option of leaving your principal to engage the threat, shooting while engaging and moving off the “X” with your principal in tow, might be your only choice. Like Steve Denney says the time to learn to shoot with one hand is not when the shooting starts.

Assessing Publicly Available Information and Executive Protection Implications

Hucky — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 12:00:17 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

In a recent Rand study entitled Freedom and Information: Assessing Publicly Available Data Regarding U.S. Transportation Infrastructure Security, Rand researchers examined how publicly available data could be exploited by a terrorists to plan and conduct terrorist attacks.

Using a “red-team”, the researchers conceptualized a series of notional terrorist attacks using the publicly available information to plan their attacks. The research revealed two major findings. First,red-team members were able to identify
information that, with some exceptions, proved useful for planning terrorist attacks (based on six different notional attack scenarios). Second, publicly available information which might be useful to a potential terrorist varied
across information categories.

Detailed information about specific security procedures for the targets selected by the red-team was
the most difficult to find whereas general non specific information was readily available.

Based on these findings, the researchers recommended that polices and procedures regarding publicly available information should be continually reviewed and that publicly available should be considered as part of the vulnerability assessment process.

The study, which focused on transportation infrastructure, has implications for Executive Protection. All publicly available information on a protectee such as media reports, public records, tax rolls etc…should be reviewed, and analyzed from the perspective of how such information could be exploited by a potential attacker.

While there’s not a lot that can be done to eliminate information in public records, knowing what’s in those records are useful in developing vulnerability and threat assessments on a protectee. For example, the home address of a protectee obtained from a property record might be information which could be exploited by an adversary. Other public records might reveal the names of family members which in turn might be useful as a means of identifying and subsequently targeting those family members for harm.

Judges have wrestled with this issue for years. The Court Security Improvement Act of 2007 currently under consideration by the U.S. Senate specifically recognizes how publicly available information can be used to target members of the federal judiciary:
Sec. 119.

Protection of individuals performing certain official duties
(a) In General- Whoever knowingly makes restricted personal information about a covered official, or a member of the immediate family of that covered official, publicly available– (1) with the intent to threaten, intimidate, or incite the commission of a crime of violence against that covered official, or a member of the immediate family of that covered official; or

(2) with the intent and knowledge that the restricted personal information will be used to threaten, intimidate, or facilitate the commission of a crime of violence against that covered official, or a member of the immediate family of that covered official, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

(b) Definitions- In this section– (1) the term `restricted personal information’ means, with respect to an individual, the Social Security number, the home address, home phone number, mobile phone number, personal email, or home fax number of, and identifiable to, that individual;

Public sources of information, as well as the Internet, should be reviewed regularly for any information which might be useful to an adversary in targeting a protectee. Sources such as Lexis-Nexis© are very useful in screening media reports for content relating to a principal. Again, there might not be many options once that information is known however knowing what the bad guy knows is useful in and of itself.

The Trouble with Traveling

Hucky — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 12:00:42 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

Contributed by Joe Hemmer and Steve Mann of Aviation Facilities Security Group

There’s an old adage that the trouble with traveling is that you have to come home. Not true. The trouble with traveling is luggage; and human luggage is the worst type.

The first thing you have to understand, when escorting a principal, is what your real situation is. Are you making the arrangements? Are you making all of them? Is there an Advance Agent or Administrative Assistant involved? Is corporate handling all of this? Who is taking you to the airport? Is there a luggage service? Who is meeting you and what are the ground transportation arrangements upon arrival?

Traveling is stressful enough but being responsible for you and a protectee is even more frustrating. It’s like flying with the kids … but on steroids. There are many potential pitfalls in air travel and having a protectee along increases the risks exponentially.

This is the first in a two part series dealing with executive protection and air travel. Part one addresses an issue that me and many of my security colleagues have faced concerning commercial air travel.

Do think VIP’s travel commercial? Mid-level politicians and celebrities love commercial travel. It provides both public exposure and a means of denying that they have lost touch with the “common-man.” It also complies with the Unites States Government’s travel requirements and it presents some additional challenges.

Once all the ground transportation, luggage and ticketing is taken care of, there is still the specter of what’s actually going to happen at the airport. This is where a little preparation and a lot of patience pays off and a good trip can make or break you in this profession.

Trust no one … is the mantra of any good agent-in-charge and is the cardinal lesson in air travel. Even if you are not responsible for making the arrangements, confirm them yourself with the service providers. Corporate may tell you that everything is arranged but until I personally speak to the ticket agent, the car service, limo driver, luggage van driver, parking control officer, etc, etc … the hair on my neck is going to remain vertical.

If you are responsible for making the arrangements, use a certified travel agent. In addition to making the travel itinerary and securing the tickets, travel agents can arrange ground transportation, luggage transportation and special assistance for you once you arrive at the airport. Remember, once they tell you everything is handled, you should follow up behind them just like you would anyone else.

Get the information and get on the telephone. When possible get commitments from dispatchers and ticket agents about who, by name, is going to be the driver or take the luggage curbside. When possible talk to them, often and well in advance. Get their cell phone numbers and dispatcher contacts and make sure you have them with you when you get ready to leave.

Its easier to negotiate with a ticket agent over the telephone two days in advance than it is while you and your protectee are standing at the ticket counter ready to check in. This is definitely one of those circumstances where yelling “do you know who I am?” will get you absolutely, positively nowhere.

Ambassador Ed peck was my political tradecraft mentor and a legend within the State Department. Peck’s first postulate was, ‘no entity, government, individual or company has ever done anything that they didn’t perceive as being in their best interest at the time.’ Live it, learn it and use it to your advantage.

‘Prep’ the protectee and traveling party. Yes, the whole party. All the ‘strap-hangers’, administrative assistants, relatives and friends of relatives traveling with the protectee are going to fall into your lap. Incorporate them into your plan and rely on your protectee to garner their compliance. Your responsibility is ultimately the protectee, but anyone who has been in this business very long knows that you’ve just been promoted to ‘head den mother.’

No matter how experienced the travelers are, whenever possible have a short meeting with them well before the trip or write a short note addressing areas of concerns and specific information about times and itineraries. Everybody feels better when they know what’s going on. There are certain unique concerns at a commercial airport and a little advance preparation can cut down on a lot of trouble. Let them know that you appreciate their cooperation and that seemingly insignificant efforts on their part will make traveling much easier.

You’ll be traveling un-armed unless you fit in the narrowly defined Section 1544.219 of the TSA’s regulations. If you usually travel armed, make certain that your protectee understands this and explain to them what arrangements have been made as a result.

You need to mark the checked luggage of everyone in the traveling party. You see people tying bandanas and scarves to their luggage all the time to make them more easily identified. You want to do the same but in a more unique way. I’ve gone as far as having special luggage tags printed at the local stationary story and have resorted to something as simple as fluorescent colored ‘parts tags’ from the hardware store. Regardless of your system, make the tags easily recognizable to everyone in the party and unique to a specific trip. Make certain that everyone in the traveling party knows where there luggage is to be taken and precisely at what time.

Make your party aware of TSA regulations concerning gels and liquids in carry on luggage. Also acquire and use a ‘valuables carry-on case’. Your protectee’s luggage is going to the tarmac and while an Armani suit can be replaced, jewelry from Van Cleef & Arpels can’t. Such items should be placed in a hard sided Hardigg, Pelican or ‘Zero’ case of an approved size for carry on luggage and be taken on board. Consolidate everyone’s valuables into one case.

Either the protectee themselves or their highest-ranking administrative officer in the traveling party should be responsible for the valuables carry-on. Not you! Your job is to watch out for trouble and the statically most likely place for trouble to occur is at the security checkpoint. You don’t need to be humping luggage and should never become a bag carrier for the boss.

Unless you have absolute control over your traveling party, take along an 8 1/2 x 11 padded self-addressed envelope and make sure you have a $5 bill. Anything, except a weapon, that can’t get through security can be mailed back to you from the ‘drop boxes’ located at the security checkpoint. The supplies are available there, usually, but who wants to stand around while you look for a pen.

Your first telephone call should be to airport operations (Ops). That’s one of those small offices down those long hallways that you pass on your way to the bathroom. Like the public library, there’s a wealth of information and experience waiting inside. Ops can provide you with a map of the terminal and provide information about where vehicles can arrive, stage and depart as well as direct contact with a ticket agent physically located at the airport, information about luggage procedures and lounge contacts.

Ops exist to support and promote the airport. It’s in their best interest that you and your protectee have an enjoyable experience at their facility, lest you choose another airport next time. They also realize that irritating even the lowly State Congressman may have a detrimental effect on the reputation of the airport. Did I mention that the airport is named after the Congressman’s father? No one wants them on the Tonight Show talking about their horrible experience at the airport.

Ops can also assist you in formalizing a request with the airport police, should the need arise. Remember at a commercial airport, you’re going to be un-armed. If your request is approved, airport police can provide special parking arrangements and officers to accompany your protectee from curbside, through check-in, arrival at the TSA security checkpoint, and in some cases all the way to the gate.

Next talk to a ticket agent. Not the 800-number, but a real person who works at the airport you are using. Ops can give you their direct telephone number. You might be able to pre-arrange boarding passes, arrange special meals, get information about the use of lounge facilities and help in coordinating baggage.

Make sure the ticket agent knows whom you are and what you’re doing. This is no time for silly cloak and danger secrecy games. If someone really wanted to know your travel arrangements, there are easier ways than the ticket agent at the Roanoke airport. Ticket agents know who else is going to be on the plane.

Think it’s a good idea to escort your Saudi Prince on a flight to JFK when the Widows of 9/11 are onboard? How would the boss feel looking across the aisle at John Mark Karr? Let the ticket agent know. This is especially true on longer domestic and transcontinental flights because they’ll alert any Air Marshals to your protectee’s presence and location aboard the plane.

Ticket agents will be able to provide you more precise time estimates, because they know the totally number of departing flights. They can give you precise check in times and more reliable estimates about the length of time necessary to transit through the security checkpoint. In a commercial airport setting, the object is to get your protectee through the unsecured portions of the airport (i.e. curbside, ticketing, etc) through the security checkpoint and into the secured portion of the airport as quickly as possible. In short a good ticket agent can save you a lot of grief.

Airlines at larger airports have liaison personnel, akin to a cruise director. Mostly overlooked and seldom used, these angels of mercy, are often able to meet your party curbside and accompany you through the entire process. They are de facto professional airport advance agents. If available, they’ll guide you through the terminal, check-in, the security checkpoint and lounge with ease.

While many airports have discontinued fulltime curbside check in and luggage service, simply asking will generally result in, at a minimum, luggage assistance. A telephone call and a $20 tip, is well worth it when you’re dealing with 52 pieces of luggage. Let them know your coming and local baggage agents will be glad to assist, if for no other reason than that it makes their job that much easier.

Ever travel and see airline gate agents meeting unaccompanied minors upon their arrival? If you ask, they’ll do the same for you. At connecting airports, they can meet your party at the gate, escort you to the lounge, if time allows, or to your connecting gate. They can help with special needs such as wheel chairs and can even arrange for everyone to ride on the giant golf cart. This service should be requested through your originating airports ticket agent.

Regardless of whether or not you request transit service, make certain that you get a good map of the connecting airport while doing your advance work. There can be errors and the gate agent may not be there as expected. This most often occurs because of last minute gate changes, where the gate agent simply can’t make it from the ‘old’ gate to the ‘new’ gate in time.

The airline won’t even know the arrival gate until well after you are already in the air and may not know until after you are already on the ground, so you’re going to need to be prepared. You might find yourself reliant on that map to get you from your arrival gate, to the lounge or your connecting departure gate all on your own.

Well, you’re almost there … but what are you going to do when you get there? As part of your arrangements your going to have to know where to meet ground transportation, you should have a map of your destination airport to help you negotiate the route and you need a plan about how you’re going to deal with luggage. Is everyone going to stand around the carousel waiting on the luggage to be processed? There are really only four ways to handle luggage.

First, everyone, including the protectee waits for the luggage. The protectee may wait in the car and allow someone else to get their luggage for them, but most won’t and you have the additional problem of staging vehicles. Remember, your luggage is with theirs, and you may be reliant on your luggage to regain a weapon. If so you’re probably going to have to wait on your luggage. In this case, consider making use of the lounge and if necessary the assistance of airport police.

The second alternative is for the protectee to leave the airport and allow other members of the party to wait for the luggage, making you reliant on them for delivery. This doesn’t happen very frequently, usually only when the protectee has an immediate engagement that other members of the party are not attending or it’s a corporate party where there is a personal assistant or another corporate officer to take charge of the protectee’s luggage.
The third alternative is a luggage service.

While you can’t have someone check in your luggage, you can have someone pick it up. If you choose to use the airlines’ contract delivery service, you need to present yourself and the claim tickets to the ‘lost baggage counter’ and request luggage delivery. The airline representative will take you tickets and once processed, pull your bags for storage until the contract delivery service picks them up.

Technically the airline remains responsible for the luggage’s arrival. I’ve never had luggage ‘go missing’ as a result of this service, but I have seen airports where there wasn’t enough secure storage space and bags were simply stacked outside the door. This is something that your ticket agent can help arrange.

The fourth alternative is the use of your own delivery service. Many car services and transportations companies offer this service. In addition to being met by a driver, a dedicated delivery driver will also be present. You only need hand them the claim checks and then you can depart. The delivery driver will immediately remove you luggage from the carousel and return it directly. This option is much faster than the airline’s service and not much more expensive.

Congratulations … you’ve arrived, perhaps at home, but if not hopefully someone remembered to book you a room.

Steve Munn is a former Foreign Service Political Officer and Special Agent of the U.S. Department of State. Formerly assigned to the Protective Intelligence and Investigations Unit, he has been involved in hundreds of high profile anti-terrorism investigations and protective security details. He is currently the Chief Operating Officer for Aviation Facilities Security Group.

No related posts.

Overreliance on Technology For Protection; As Dangerous As No Security

Hucky — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:00:05 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

There’s a few articles out regarding how the surveillance camera system that is so extensive in the United Kingdom failed to detect the Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Devices (VBIED) in London last week. I think its too soon to tell the what exactly happened that allowed the bad guys to get through the net. The U.K. forces and services are exceptionally professional and there’s no doubt they will get to the bottom of what happened.

The U.K.’s system of using cameras to conduct surveillance of public spaces works for the U.K. The U.K. has a long history of combating terrorism and over the course of time, the U.K. government, and the citizens of the U.K., have accepted surveillance cameras as part of the price for security.

I’m not going to pass judgment on the U.K.’s system of public space surveillance. Sufficed it to say, it’s doubtful that such a broad system could be accepted anywhere in the U.S. although more and more U.S. cities are using surveillance cameras for monitoring events in the streets.

Apparently there were some performance limitations and maybe even maintenance issues associated with the system in London which allowed the perpetrators of the VBIED plot to positions the VBIEDs downtown London.

Fortunately thanks to a few quick thinking citizens the
vehicles were identified and the plot was disrupted. This should serve as a learning lesson for the Executive Protection community.

Over reliance on one particular security system, regardless whether it is a protective security detail or physical security technology is asking for trouble. Each element in a security system, to include Executive Protection, has strengths and limitations.

Each security system should be designed, and used to maximize the inherent strengths of each component within the system and to minimize the inherent weakness in any particular component within the overall security system. The system should work as a whole and each component within that system should overlap another component within the larger system.

When designing an Executive Protection program, there should be overlap among each component within the program. The goal should be to avoid or eliminate, a single point of failure within the overall system. Over reliance on a protective security detail for detecting and responding to all manner of threats is asking for trouble.

The protective security detail has limitations, namely those associated with humans. Conversely, the best surveillance camera system in the world can not respond to an event nor can it anticipate intent. It can only record. It’s tool, nothing more. However working together in an integrated system, weaknesses are mitigated and strengths are enhanced.

When putting together an Executive Protection program, ask yourself, what is this particular security component designed to do and then ask how can I defeat that component? Then find another security system, procedure, tactic, equipment or method to mitigate the limitations of that particular component. Use the concept of defense in depth as a guideline for developing your Executive Protection system by building layers of security.

Executive Protection-The Boston Way

Hucky — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 11:00:29 +0000

By Bruce Alexander

There’s an excellent (by my standards anyway) article on Executive Protection that recently appeared on The Boston Globe’s website that is must read for those in, or aspiring to be in, our profession. The article, written by Billy Baker, is entitled “Standing Guard for Rich and Famous.” It’s a refreshing look at some Executive Protection firms in the Boston area which stress professional standards, image and approach to Executive Protection. These firms eschew the “Hollywood bodyguard” and “rapper posse” in favor of a low profile, conservative demeanor approach to protection. Call me a fool or just plain naive, but maybe, just maybe, someone in Hollywood will read this article and get it.

You can find the article by going to the following link: The Boston Way