In that situation, making time to speak directly with the principal can improve the decisions that follow. What do they understand about the situation? Which facts have been established? What concerns them most? What options are available from here?
That discussion can be valuable at any stage. Advisers may already be engaged and decisions may already have been made. Taking stock gives the principal an opportunity to reconsider the position with a little more clarity.
An established relationship matters
In my experience, this conversation often becomes possible through the trust developed during a protective assignment. The security professional has been present, has seen the circumstances develop and understands something of the person affected.
A principal may be more willing to discuss uncertainty with someone whose judgement they have come to rely on. That helps identify concerns that might otherwise remain unspoken while the wider team concentrates on its individual responsibilities.
The role needs care. Legal advice belongs with the lawyers, and communications advice with the people responsible for it. My contribution is to help the principal understand the security implications and bring relevant information into those discussions.
When public attention affects personal safety
A reputational problem can have implications for physical protection. Public material may expose a location, generate unwanted attention or reveal a pattern of behaviour that deserves assessment.
I have worked with principals facing coordinated campaigns, timed disclosures and the amplification of damaging material. In those circumstances, we needed to consider who might be involved, what the available evidence supported and whether the activity changed our understanding of the threat.
Online hostility does not, by itself, establish an intention or capability to cause physical harm. It does provide information to assess alongside other evidence. The security and communications teams need an appropriate way to share relevant developments so that their work reflects the same circumstances.
The person receiving the advice
A crisis can be isolating. The people around the principal are working hard on the problem, while friends and family may have an incomplete understanding of what is happening. The principal still has to live with the consequences of each decision.
Giving them space to explain their concerns can reveal practical issues that a formal meeting misses. They may be worried about their children, reluctant to leave a home or uncertain about whom they can trust. Those concerns affect the feasibility of the advice being given and deserve attention in their own right.
Family and corporate situations bring different relationships and responsibilities, but both benefit from clear discussion. The principal needs to understand the advice, the limits of what is known and the choices that remain theirs to make.
I have found that a careful conversation can help someone engage more effectively with the specialists around them. The decisions may remain difficult. At least they can be made with a better understanding of the circumstances and the available support.
Rewritten for AXRA from Ty Hopkins’s original LinkedIn article.