The team needs a current picture of the threat. Who presents a concern? What have they done? Where might the principal be exposed, and what would indicate that circumstances were changing? Those questions should inform the practical decisions made throughout the assignment.
Without that understanding, even experienced personnel can find themselves working from assumptions that have not been examined closely enough.
Working with a small footprint
I have worked alone and in two-person teams, accompanying principals through appointments, walks and ordinary daily activity. In those assignments, keeping a low profile was an important part of how the protection worked.
That required preparation and continuing assessment. When the principal was settled and immediate duties allowed, there was research to do, information to review and developing concerns to consider. The aim was to understand enough about the situation to recognise a relevant change when it occurred.
On several occasions, we identified surveillance against our movements. Our understanding of the environment helped us notice what did not fit and assess it against concerns we were already considering. We could respond with a clearer picture of what the observation might mean.
Making time for the analytical work
On a small operation, the same person may carry out protective duties and maintain much of the assessment. That makes the allocation of time particularly important. If those duties leave no room for analysis, the plan needs to account for that shortfall.
A larger team faces a different coordination problem. Information may be held by several people, and responsibility can become unclear. Someone needs to bring it together, assess its relevance and ensure that any resulting changes reach the team.
The arrangements will differ with the assignment. What matters is that the responsibility is explicit and that the work can actually be carried out within the resources available.
Questions a client can ask
A client should be able to ask who maintains the threat assessment, when it was last reviewed and what has changed as a result. They should also be able to understand the reasoning behind the scale and nature of the protection provided.
There may be sensible limits on sharing particular information, but the overall explanation should be understandable. The client needs enough insight to make informed decisions about their own arrangements.
Operational skill remains essential. The people on the ground must be capable of carrying out their responsibilities when circumstances deteriorate. A well-maintained assessment helps direct that capability towards the concerns that matter for the particular principal.
When reviewing an operation, I want to understand what its people know about the situation and how that knowledge informs their decisions. That gives a much clearer view of its value than its outward appearance.
Rewritten for AXRA from Ty Hopkins’s original LinkedIn article.