Killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Spotlights Complex Challenge Companies Face in Protecting Top Brass
The Threat Landscape
In an era where online anger and social tensions are increasingly directed at the businesses consumers count on, companies are facing a daunting task: protecting their top executives. The fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson while he walked alone on a New York City sidewalk has put a spotlight on the widely varied approaches companies take in protecting their leaders against threats.
The Challenges of Evaluating Threats
“We are better today at collecting signals. I’m not sure we’re any better at making sense of the signals we collect,” says Fred Burton of Ontic, a provider of threat management software for companies. Burton notes that the political, economic, and technological climate is only going to make the job of evaluating threats against executives and taking action to protect them even more difficult.
The Cost of Protection
Some high-profile CEOs surround themselves with security. Meta, whose businesses include Facebook and Instagram, reported the highest spending on personal security for top executives last year, filings culled by research firm Equilar show. The company spent $24.4 million on guards, alarms, and other measures to keep CEO Mark Zuckerberg and the company’s former chief operating officer safe.
The Varying Approaches
But not all companies take the same approach to protecting their executives. While some, like Meta, spend heavily on personal and residential security, others may opt for more limited measures. For example, some companies may require employees to go through airport-style security checkpoints before entering a meeting or event.
The Role of Company Culture
“Determining the need for and appropriate level of an executive-level protection program is specific to each organization,” says David Johnston, vice president of asset protection and retail operations at the National Retail Federation. “These safeguards should also include the constant monitoring of potential threats and the ability to adapt to maintain the appropriate level of security and safety.”
Conclusion
The killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson has put a spotlight on the complex challenge companies face in protecting their top executives. As the threat landscape continues to evolve, companies must adapt and take proactive measures to protect their leaders. Whether it’s investing in personal and residential security or implementing measures to detect and respond to threats, companies must prioritize the safety and security of their executives.
FAQs
Q: What is the most common threat to CEOs and other top executives?
A: The most common threat is typically from disgruntled individuals who may be motivated by personal grievances or ideological beliefs.
Q: How do companies evaluate threats against their executives?
A: Companies use a variety of methods to evaluate threats, including monitoring online activity, reviewing social media comments, and conducting background checks on potential threats.
Q: What measures can companies take to protect their executives?
A: Companies can take a variety of measures to protect their executives, including providing personal and residential security, conducting regular threat assessments, and implementing measures to detect and respond to threats.
Q: How much do companies typically spend on protecting their executives?
A: The amount companies spend on protecting their executives can vary widely, depending on the company, the executive, and the level of threat. Some companies may spend millions of dollars per year on executive protection, while others may spend much less.
