Description

A reading is attached to this exam regarding the need for an executive protection system in Australia that would mirror that of other countries such as the United States.  Your analyses will be based on evaluating the weaknesses listed, determining relevant data necessary for implementation, providing the "best" decision and providing a quality assessment of implementation suggested. Be thorough in your answers. ALL opinions need to be supported! (You can cite the article but you may need outside sources to support your opinions. Use the library databases and provide a Works Cited page using APA style.)

The article identifies several areas of weakness (threat assessment, executive training, contingency planning, residential/office protection, executive skill levels) within the Australian Executive Protection system.

            a. Investigate thoroughly, several alternatives for each weakness based on      research

            b. Using the DM process, clearly analyze your alternatives for each

c. Determine the "best" decision (given available information), convincing the reader of the merit of your decision

According to the article, there is a "lack of awareness regarding the true frequency of incidents [which] breeds complacency. No database of violent incidents against corporations or their executives is compiled." Based on your knowledge of forecasting and an investigation of  relevant databases maintained in other countries  having executive protection programs:

Describe the database necessary

Indicate clearly how the numerical data could be utilized/analyzed

State the results anticipated and the value to solving this problem

"This below-standard performance may be attributed to the fact that Australian corporations do not perceive a risk to their executives and, therefore, do not place the necessary attention on or resources into executive protection."  Use an example to illustrate appropriate risk assessment and financial considerations to convince an Australian company that added resources will reduce sub-standard performance.

Executive Protection Protection Down Under

By Richard Shrapnel

Corporate executives in Australia receive a lower level of personal protection than their counterparts in other countries, and most private security professionals in that country believe their company's senior managers are ill-equipped to handle a major security incident, according to a recent survey of Australia's largest companies.

The year-long study, which was conducted by the author and completed in February 1998, also found that Australian executives do not have a clear understanding of what executive protection is or how to achieve it in a corporate environment. Security professionals who responded to the survey said that senior managers have a false sense of security, believing that the risk to their personal safety is low or nonexistent, despite the fact that many of the respondents said that their executives had experienced a potentially life-threatening incident over the past five years.

While corporations around the world give serious attention to potential attacks by former employees, cranks, and stalkers, the survey found that Australian companies rate this threat as low. In addition, few Australian corporations have established threat assessment procedures or intelligence gathering techniques to gauge the threat to their top executives, instead of relying on their employees to be alert enough to report suspicious activity to the security department.