Target Security Breach Affects 40 Million
Target faces multiple law suits after a security breach when about 40 million customers had their credit and debit card data taken.
Armed Security is the Best Defense
by Frank Barile The shooting at Johns Hopkins Hospital again brings the concept of workplace violence into focus. By all accounts, those charged with tactically handling this situation did a great job, but this incident is one of hundreds which occur in organizations around the world each year. In this post 911 world, private and public sector organizations that house or convene large numbers of people must rethink their security strategies. Security personnel must be better trained and equipped to handle violent crises that are associated with both active shooter and bomber situations (those who detonate explosives on their persons). There is no question the security landscape now is more ominous than it has ever been; and, an armed, immediate response is, at times, the only response that will truly stop an immediate threat of violence before real damage or loss of life occurs. Without an immediate armed response, unarmed security personal run the risk of becoming a liability. In my opinion, security entities must routinely recruit educated individuals who are both physically and mentally fit to be armed. Without an immediate armed response, unarmed security personal run the risk of becoming a liability which further adds to the complications of an emergent situation. Generally, a workplace violence incident takes less than a minute to unfold which is not nearly enough time for a first responding police department to engage and stop the threat. Therefore, the only way to truly prevent loss of life during an active shooter situation is for on-site security personnel to take action. And, in order for the security personnel to be effective, they must be trained & armed or they too run the risk of becoming victimized. Recruitment, policy making and training are critical. Security departments must implement new strategies for the 21st century – recruitment, policy making and training are critical. I would encourage every organization to evaluate their policies as no one expects the worst to happen, but it can at any moment. Leaders must ask themselves if their workplace is really protected; if not, take action now before it is too late. The cost associated with these expenses is small compared to the potential cost of liability, or worse, loss of life. Contact the Fallston Group at 443.690.0765 to learn more.
Target, Best Buy Provide “Lesson Learned” for Corporate World
By Rob Weinhold — As a result of the January Supreme Court decision which allows corporations to contribute unlimited funds for political activities, both Target and Best Buy each contributed $100,000 to a business group in Minnesota called MN Forward. MN Forward is an organization who advances political agendas in the spirit of private sector job creation and economic opportunity. The issue is that MN Forward used the funds from Target and Best Buy to help support the gubernatorial campaign of state Representative Tom Emmer, who supports lower corporate taxes. That wasn’t the problem; the issue, apparently unbeknownst to Target and Best Buy executives, was that Tom Emmer also supports the very controversial banning of same-sex marriages. Regardless of which side of the political aisle you sit on, corporations must fully vet each interest it supports and fully understand the risk while entering the political arena. As a result of this “alignment,” Target has now been the subject of immense stakeholder skepticism, protests, product boycotts and public apologies. Yes, this is a crisis that impacts brand and has now made national news – www.washingtonpost.com – August 18th. This blogger is neutral in his opinions about the political issues, but not middle of the road when it comes to the realization about the lack of strategic planning and foresight by both companies. Regardless of which side of the political aisle you sit on (perhaps it’s directly in the aisle), corporations must fully vet each interest it supports and fully understand the risk while entering the political arena. Most times, the support garnered with one group will alienate another group. And, the alienated group could well be very important stakeholders which could have enough clout to mobilize and impact the bottom line. CRO – Chief Reputation Officer This is yet another reason that I support the concept of a corporate CRO – Chief Reputation Officer. This executive should be fully engaged at every level within the organization and be the expert who accurately researches and predicts every internal and external decision’s impact on brand integrity. Organizations who do not continue to critically define, promote and defend their brand will never achieve ultimate growth and profitability goals.
