In this week’s episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO Bryan Strawser takes a look at how to conduct an effective after-action process – or you may call it a Lessons Learned process at your organization.

At Bryghtpath, we believe an effective after-action process is a critical component of learning from a crisis or disruption – enabling you to continue to mature your program and improve preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery for future situations.

Topics discussed include the “hot wash”, structuring your after-action process, meetings, and surveys, leading discussions with survivors and those impacted by a crisis or disruption, and assembling an after-action report.

Related Episodes & Blog Posts

Episode #1: Shouldn’t we have a plan for alien invasion?

Episode #4: The Crisis Team

Episode #7: After the Storm

Episode #9: The Hot Wash

FEMA: Homeland Security Exercise & Evaluation Program (HSEEP)

Episode Transcript

Hey everyone, welcome back to the Managing Uncertainty Podcast. This is Bryan Strawser, Principal and CEO at Bryghtpath, and hey, I wanted to start off by pointing out that this is our 50th episode of this podcast, and I know we’ve had some inconsistencies in the past in terms of delivering the podcast on a weekly basis, but so far in 2019, we’ve been quite consistent with that, but I just wanted to thank everyone who listens for your support, your encouragement, your comments, and feedback, both good and critical.

All of that helps us be better, but welcome to our 50th episode.

We’re going to be talking about how to conduct an effective after action report or AAR, or sometimes called a lessons learned document.

I just want to start off with some basic philosophy before we get into some of the nuts and bolts about how to do this effectively. My philosophy kind of revolves around four things when it comes to after action reports, and they all have to do with you as the leader and your approach to how you manage this process. It starts with understanding that every crisis situation, every incident that you have is a learning opportunity. It’s a learning opportunity to be better the next time around. That’s the principle reason we do after-action discussions and reports are to understand what worked, what didn’t go so well, and how do we want to improve next time around.

I would tell you based on my personal experience, I’m a pretty good crisis manager. Over time at my previous employer, we built a fantastic team and we dealt with some really difficult and emotional situations around the world. Every single time, even when everything went well from we had good results and nobody got hurt or injured or killed. We got great feedback from the business a

In this week’s episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO Bryan Strawser takes a look at how to conduct an effective after-action process – or you may call it a Lessons Learned process at your organization.

At Bryghtpath, we believe an effective after-action process is a critical component of learning from a crisis or disruption – enabling you to continue to mature your program and improve preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery for future situations.

Topics discussed include the “hot wash”, structuring your after-action process, meetings, and surveys, leading discussions with survivors and those impacted by a crisis or disruption, and assembling an after-action report.

Episode Transcript

Hey everyone, welcome back to the Managing Uncertainty Podcast. This is Bryan Strawser, Principal and CEO at Bryghtpath, and hey, I wanted to start off by pointing out that this is our 50th episode of this podcast, and I know we’ve had some inconsistencies in the past in terms of delivering the podcast on a weekly basis, but so far in 2019, we’ve been quite consistent with that, but I just wanted to thank everyone who listens for your support, your encouragement, your comments, and feedback, both good and critical.

All of that helps us be better, but welcome to our 50th episode.

We’re going to be talking about how to conduct an effective after action report or AAR, or sometimes called a lessons learned document.

I just want to start off with some basic philosophy before we get into some of the nuts and bolts about how to do this effectively. My philosophy kind of revolves around four things when it comes to after action reports, and they all have to do with you as the leader and your approach to how you manage this process. It starts with understanding that every crisis situation, every incident that you have is a learning opportunity. It’s a learning opportunity to be better the next time around. That’s the principle reason we do after-action discussions and reports are to understand what worked, what didn’t go so well, and how do we want to improve next time around.

I would tell you based on my personal experience, I’m a pretty good crisis manager. Over time at my previous employer, we built a fantastic team and we dealt with some really difficult and emotional situations around the world. Every single time, even when everything went well from we had good results and nobody got hurt or injured or killed. We got great feedback from the business and we felt like we were clicking on all cylinders, we still had a ton of things that we felt we could do better, and that’s how you get to be good.

That’s how you build a mature and sustainable process for your organization. So, you’ve got to view every one of these incidents or crisis situations as a learning opportunity, a chance to get better.

The second is that you as a leader as you go through this after action process, you’ve got to be comfortable accepting and seeking constructive criticism because even your best folks, even when you do everything, it feels like you’ve done everything right, you can always be better. And so, there are things that you’ll learn during the after-action process that might come across as a little critical, but the point is that these are things that we see that can help you be better. And so, be comfortable seeking that constructive criticism.

The second is as the leader, the best way to do these is to ask a lot of open-ended questions. What are the questions that you want to ask? They should be ones that allow free form answers. You want the folks that you’re seeking their opinion about what went well and what could’ve gone better,

In this week’s episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO Bryan Strawser takes a look at how companies can prevent violence in the workplace. Using highlights from a recent article in Marketwatch about preventing workplace violence, Bryan talks through several steps that organizations can take to deter, prevent, and mitigate acts of violence in the workplace.

This is a topic we’ve touched on a number of times – including how to overcome hurdles in workplace violence prevention programs, determining the effectiveness of a workplace violence prevention program, and the top 5 reasons your company needs a workplace violence prevention program.

it’s important in any organization for workplace violence prevention to be an important part of the culture and security programs in the workplace. This episode uses recent examples of incidents to help drive that point home.

Episode Transcript

Hello and welcome back to the Managing Uncertainty podcast. I’m Bryan Strawser, principal and CEO at Bryghtpath.

This week I want to talk about active shooter situations and violent incidents that occur in the workplace. Specifically, I want to highlight some recommendations from an article that was in Market Watch on May 28th of this year, because I thought that it included a really succinct and valuable set of recommendations. It really highlights how employers, managers, workers, and human resources professionals can help prevent violent incidents at work. I would add, because it leaves this out, the role of the security professional and the crisis management team in such things as well.

So, let’s take a look. They have 11 recommendations and I want to just talk through these briefly and highlight, you know, some of my own personal experiences with these. The first is a recommendation that companies have more than a zero tolerance policy. We heard a lot, 10 or 15 years ago, about having zero tolerance workplace violence policies. Zero tolerance weapons in schools policies. Zero tolerance violence policies. There’s certainly value in that, but workplace violence prevention shouldn’t be limited just to traditional zero tolerance policies around threats, fights, and sexual harassment.

These are still important, and I don’t want to diminish the importance of taking these kinds of incidents seriously, but we should also have policies and programs that educate employees on warning signs of leading folks to a workplace violence incidence. That can be changes in behavior and sudden withdraw, depression, disgruntlement, and none of these really fall under the traditional zero tolerance policies. We should have, maybe, described a zero tolerance based policies, but we need these other elements to be in a part of that.

The second recommendation is to create a relaxed, open, and transparent work culture. Really what they’re getting at here, in the article, is that hostile, fearful environments don’t help. You want a workplac

In this week’s episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO Bryan Strawser takes a look at how companies can prevent violence in the workplace. Using highlights from a recent article in Marketwatch about preventing workplace violence, Bryan talks through several steps that organizations can take to deter, prevent, and mitigate acts of violence in the workplace.

This is a topic we’ve touched on a number of times – including how to overcome hurdles in workplace violence prevention programs, determining the effectiveness of a workplace violence prevention program, and the top 5 reasons your company needs a workplace violence prevention program.

it’s important in any organization for workplace violence prevention to be an important part of the culture and security programs in the workplace. This episode uses recent examples of incidents to help drive that point home.

Episode Transcript

Hello and welcome back to the Managing Uncertainty podcast. I’m Bryan Strawser, principal and CEO at Bryghtpath.

This week I want to talk about active shooter situations and violent incidents that occur in the workplace. Specifically, I want to highlight some recommendations from an article that was in Market Watch on May 28th of this year, because I thought that it included a really succinct and valuable set of recommendations. It really highlights how employers, managers, workers, and human resources professionals can help prevent violent incidents at work. I would add, because it leaves this out, the role of the security professional and the crisis management team in such things as well.

So, let’s take a look. They have 11 recommendations and I want to just talk through these briefly and highlight, you know, some of my own personal experiences with these. The first is a recommendation that companies have more than a zero tolerance policy. We heard a lot, 10 or 15 years ago, about having zero tolerance workplace violence policies. Zero tolerance weapons in schools policies. Zero tolerance violence policies. There’s certainly value in that, but workplace violence prevention shouldn’t be limited just to traditional zero tolerance policies around threats, fights, and sexual harassment.

These are still important, and I don’t want to diminish the importance of taking these kinds of incidents seriously, but we should also have policies and programs that educate employees on warning signs of leading folks to a workplace violence incidence. That can be changes in behavior and sudden withdraw, depression, disgruntlement, and none of these really fall under the traditional zero tolerance policies. We should have, maybe, described a zero tolerance based policies, but we need these other elements to be in a part of that.

The second recommendation is to create a relaxed, open, and transparent work culture. Really what they’re getting at here, in the article, is that hostile, fearful environments don’t help. You want a workplace that is comfortable in communication warning signs and red flags, rather than this more fearful culture that erodes trust and creates a chilling atmosphere for your employees. The best way to describe this, when it comes to this issue, is that we want employees who are willing to speak up if they see behavior that makes them worry about their safety or the safety of someone else in the workplace.

The next recommendation is to not respond to reports in a...

In this week’s episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO discusses a number of reputation management and crisis communications topics that arose during a recent day he spent at the Carlson School of Management, part of the University of Minnesota.

Topics discussed during this episode include the Boeing 737-MAX crisis, the Starbucks crisis in Philadelphia some time ago, and personalities and leadership skills for reputation management, crisis management & communication leaders.

Episode Transcript

Hello and welcome to the Managing Uncertainty Podcast. I’m Bryan Strawser, principal and CEO at Bryghtpath. And what I would like to talk about in this week’s episode is a series of questions that I was asked this past weekend. Some of you might know from looking at my bio I’m an alumni of the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota where I earned my MBA in 2014. and this past weekend I was invited to come back to the university and serve as a judge along with a faculty member for students’ final projects in the executive MBA program. Ironically, it was five years to the day since I had done the exact same thing there at the Carlson School presenting on my final project along with a five of my fellow classmates from Minnesota, Vienna, and China. But I had a chance to talk with several students over lunch, and of course when we talk about what I do for a living, people are always totally fascinated by this idea of crisis management and business continuity, crisis communications.

And so, I got three interesting questions and I thought that it would be fun to kind of riff on these a little bit for a podcast episode. So here it goes. The first question that I got was about the Boeing 737 Max issues that the Boeing organization has been faced with following their recent crash, two crashes, of that aircraft. And a lot of commentary in the public sphere in the media about how Boeing got the aircraft approved, about the level of government oversight of that development and flight certification, about potential software issues with the aircraft, and how Boeing has been managing all of this reputationally. And the question that it was asked kind of along the lines of what did I think about the timing of this situation in terms of just how quickly or not quickly that the story got out and how Boeing responded to those questions.

And really the question was about how quickly do you have to respond in a reputational crisis, and then kind of apply that to Boeing? And my answer was a little complicated. First I think that there’s a, you have a very brief period of grace following something happening that impacts your organization reputationally that before you need to get out and address it head on in a very clear statement or a narrative about what your organization’s response is to these allegations, or this potential issue, or the reputational crisis that’s your faced with. If you don’t react during that time, if you don’t act in time so to speak, then your opportunity to influence the story, your opportunity to get your own spin on the story out in public is gone, and it will be taken over very quickly by the news cycle, by social media, by all of the different forces that come into play in a reputational challenge that an organization might face.

So from a timing standpoint, I argued in this kind of lunch discussion that timing is very important and that we should be reacting quickly as facts are known and you can start to tell the story about what happened. I also mentioned that I think that there’s a level of forgiveness I think to an organization that comes out and addresses the issue head on. That you can come out and say, look, we were wrong, or hey, we screwed up and here’s what we’re going to do to fix it. Or you can also say that in like the 737 Max situatio...

A crisis management team within an organization has to be a team that is action-oriented, able to consume and triage a significant amount of information and make decisions and recommendations that move the incident or crisis situation forward.

In this episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO Bryan Strawser discusses approaches to work through major issues and challenges during a crisis management team activation – and how to ensure that the team does not become an academic debating society.

Episode Transcript

Hi, folks. Welcome back to the Managing Uncertainty podcast. This is Bryan Strawser, principal and CEO at Bryghtpath. Today I want to talk a little bit about decision making during a crisis. In particular, I want to talk about just the interaction within a crisis management team when you’re in the middle of that crisis response. I want you to picture this for a moment to kind of set the stage. We’ve talked on previous episodes about the need to have a crisis management framework, about who should be at the table for those decisions and processes. You’re looking for this cross-functional crisis management team that includes teams like security, human resources, business continuity, crisis management, your business lines, facilities, information, technology, finance, and even lawyers. You start to picture this team sitting around the table or participating virtually and you’re moving through the crisis. First, you’re learning what it is and you’re learning about the impact on the company. Maybe you’re learning a little bit about how you got there. Probably thinking about some immediate mitigation activities. And then, the problems start to come in as you get moving. You start to be presented with a number of puzzles that you have to solve. Some of these may have been puzzles that you’ve seen before. You may have a building that’s been impacted, for example, and the building is not currently usable so you start thinking about well, the building has got to be evacuated. That’s probably already happened.

Now I got to think about how do I assess the building? How do I determine what kind of damage we have to deal with? How long might we have lost the use of this building? And we start to think about how do we get back into the building? What needs to happen for us to be able to do that? Maybe it’s available for immediate use, maybe there’s going to be a short period of time to do some cleanup and repair, or maybe it’s out of use for six to eight weeks. Or, maybe it’s destroyed. You start to be posed with these issues to deal with. The ones that you’ve seen before, the ones that the team’s experienced before, you’ve probably put together processes and procedures and a plan to be able to deal with this again because you’ve seen it. You experienced what you did before and you’re able to apply that to the crisis. The challenging part becomes when you’re confronted with something that you haven’t seen before. A problem that is unique or new, or unforeseen, as we see a lot of times in some of these situations. Now, as a crisis team, you’ve got to really talk through what is the answer to this question? How urgent, how imminent is it? Something that we need to deal with right now? It’s really easy to get sidetracked in this conversation.

What you don’t want to do is allow the crisis team to become a debating society. You cannot allow long, in-depth conversation in the middle of a response about dealing with just one aspect of the response. It can’t become an academic debating society. Here are some ways to think about how you can deal with this unknown problem that you’re confronted with and not detract from the overall crisis management response.

One way to do this is to assign an owner for th...

When we’re coaching clients, one of the most common questions that we receive is about how to interact with the C-Suite at a company. How does a business continuity, crisis management, or security professional communicate with senior executives day to day – and when it’s time to sell the program?

In this week’s episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO Bryan Strawser shares his personal experiences with C-Suite interactions, touching everything from interviews, communicating during a crisis, and the elevator speech.

Episode Transcript

Hi folks, Bryan Strawser, Principal and CEO at Bryghtath, and welcome back to the Managing Uncertainty podcast.

This week, I want to talk about communicating to senior executives, how to really talk to your CEO, your C suite, your board members, kind of that whole upper echelon of your organization.

My first, I had a number of encounters, I worked for a large Fortune 50 company for about 21 years, I had a number of encounters with senior leaders. Then eventually I got to the point where I was interviewing with them in order to obtain that next role or promotion. My first interview with one of our senior executives at that company back in 2009, once we got past the pleasantries, and of course, we knew each other. I had worked in his organization for some time.

He drops this bomb of a question on me. Bryan, given what you know about our current global operations and our plans for the next few years, how would you currently characterize our risk exposure from a continuity perspective, and what do you think we should change strategically during your tenure in this role?

Of course, I immediately kind of crapped my pants and I was like, oh God, what did I get myself into? Then I took a deep breath and kind of rolled into my answer for this question, which I kind of anticipated a similar question.

When I talk to folks about what keeps them up at night about interacting with their C suite, I hear some common things. I hear concerns about not being prepared, about not knowing the answer to a question, about being unable to get the message across because we don’t speak the same language. We’re not thinking about the same things, and I also get the concern about their reaction. What happens if my point of view gets challenged and what does that mean?

There’s a lot of challenges. There’s a lot of things here to really think through. The challenges I think that folks are dealing with going into these conversations with the C suite, the first is about jargon. If you think about the spaces that we work in, global security, enterprise risk, crisis management, crisis communications, business continuity, disaster recovery, there’s a lot of jargon.

There’s a lot of specialty in what we do, and we don’t always know how to communicate that to people that are not in our industry, that are not in our space but I’m going to tell you that that’s one of the critical skills as a leader in this area that you’re going to have to figure out how you make that work for yourself, because you eventually become the leader in your organization for the things that you do and you’re that interface. You’re the interface between the leadership of the organization and your function, and understanding how to communicate without using that jargon and provide simple explanations for the things that your team does, that you do, will be critical to your success.

Another challenge is just the lack of organizational alignment like folks don’t know what you do and they don’t know, they, therefore, they don’t know how to interact. You may not know what level of detail to communicate. I’ve seen folks go to these meetings where they’re just not prepared or the r...

On this week’s episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO Bryan Strawser takes a look at small business continuity planning

Inspired by a question from Meg Cumby, in this episode we discuss the consequences of disruptions for small businesses, disaster recovery challenges, evaluating risks to your business, and small business continuity planning expectations.

 

Episode Transcript – Small Business Continuity Planning

Hi everyone, welcome to the Managing Uncertainty podcast.

This is Bryan Strawser, Principal and CEO at Bryghtpath.

On this week’s episode, we’ll be talking about small business planning and preparedness for disasters and disruptions. This is a topic that came up in a recent discussion on an online entrepreneur business owner forum that I’m a part of, and I asked for some questions that folks wanted to get answers to related to this topic, and my friend Meg Cumby had this specific question: What process should a small business, a one to five-person business, go through in order to evaluate and plan for disruption and disasters, and how often should you re-evaluate those risks or update your plans?

You can learn more about Meg and her business at megcumby.com. Her business is Meg Cumby Consulting: Where you can get client testimonials and case studies without the awkwardness.

So let’s take a look at Meg’s question and unpack this.

Certainly, a lot of our previous episodes have dealt with business continuity and crisis management planning and talking about enterprise risks really on a very large scale. We’ve talked about Fortune 500 organizations and the complexity of managing global operations and dealing with disasters and disruptions, but let’s bring this down to the small business level where you don’t have the resources and time to do the type of planning that a General Motors or a Merc or a 3M might have to do.

First, I think we can really simplify what we’re looking to plan around by looking at the consequences of disruptions that might impact the business.

And this is where I like to think about the four areas of consequence that happen when a disruption hits a business of any size, and those consequences are the loss of the team, the loss of the folks that do the work, the loss of the technology that the business is reliant upon, the loss of the facility that the work is conducted in … Where the work happens, in other words … and then finally, the loss of third-party services that you rely upon.

There’s another factor that can come into play with small businesses in terms of consequence, and that has to do with if you’re dependent upon a physical location because you are a restaurant or you are a small one- or two-location retail business, or you are a bar, for example. One of your dependencies that we can’t skip over is the need to have … the ability to reach the business. So you think about disruptions to transportation or lack of parking or lack of transit all suddenly become issues in those situations because you’re not able to reach the business.

Just this morning on the StarTribune … The Twin Cities newspaper, or one of the Twin Cities newspapers here in Minnesota … one of the more famed bars in Minneapolis is closing because they’re losing their parking lot. The parking lot is actually owned by the city of Minneapolis, and the city is taking the parking lot away from the business. They’ve been operating on this handshake agreement for years, apparently. They’re taking the parking lot in order to have a staging area for construction of a new rail line, a light rail transit line that’s being built here.

In this episode of the Managing Uncertainty Podcast, Bryghtpath Principal & CEO Bryan Strawser discusses what a successful incident or crisis management process looks like when you’re inside of an organization.

Topics discussed include: crisis management frameworks, leading in an incident or crisis situation, crisis management teams, executive crisis teams, global security operations centers, and communicating in a crisis

Episode Transcript

Hey folks, and welcome back to the Managing Uncertainty Podcast. I’m Bryan Strawser, principal and CEO at Bryghtpath. On today’s episode, I wanted to talk a little bit about what successful incident or crisis management looks like when you’re inside of an organization. When you’re a leader in a nonprofit, in a fortune 500 company, a public sector agency, that’s undergoing a major incident or a crisis situation. Whether you’re involved in the process or not, what does that look like? How do we know that that’s a successful incident management or crisis management process?

So there is a handful of things that, in our experience that we’ve identified that can really be seen inside of a company when we’re looking for signs or characteristics of a successful incident management process.

The first thing that we see is that there’s a radar screen. We’ve talked about this on previous episodes of the podcast, but there is a mechanism to detect incoming threats to the organization and this has to be really kind of a multidisciplinary look at threats, a holistic view of threats. It might be things like your cybersecurity detection tools being used by ISOC, or by an incident, an ISOC kind of team inside the organization. It could be proprietary global intelligence services that you use through third parties or an internal global intelligence team. It could be social media and regular media monitoring. It could be reputation management and monitoring. It could be your leading indicators of core business analytics like sales, shipping, your worst supply chain analytics and etc. But that you have these tools put into place where you’re able to see the incoming threat.

The second characteristic that we see in successful organizations is a rapid response process. And what I mean by that is that from the time that that threat is identified, there is a process that triages that threat to understand, it helps to understand the threat in the context of your organization and then activates or escalates this issue within your internal incident management, crisis management process. So there’s a way to, once that detection is made, to evaluate that, put it in front of the right folks for a decision and then escalate that process. The third is one of the most important and that is that there are clear roles and responsibilities in an incident. Who is in charge? How are decisions made? Who is informed? Who’s accountable for the process? Is there a crisis management team or some coordinating body that assembles? And even if there is a team that assembles, who’s in charge? We often build processes, crisis management frameworks where we have a cross-organizational team and middle management, some middle management layer. We typically assign a senior executive or a business leader to that team who is responsible for making decisions in that process or is the final arbiter of the decisions.

That next characteristic is exactly that. It’s that beyond clear roles and responsibilities that there is good cross-functional coordination. There’s a body, a crisis management team, a corporate crisis management team, an enterprise incident management team, you can call it whatever you want. But there is a body within the organization that gets together, that represents the business lines and all of the core s...

What does a threat management framework or process look like?

What are some key steps we should take when a threat is received or observed by our teams?

In this episode of the Managing Uncertainty podcast, Bryghtpath Principal and CEO Bryan Strawser answers these questions as he describes the model Workplace Violence and Threat Management Framework that is used at Bryghtpath. Topics discussed include initial threat actions, escalating issues to law enforcement, assessing a threat, creating plans for threat mitigation and personal safety, and long-term monitoring of threats.

Episode Transcript

Hi folks, Bryan Strawser, principal and CEO at Bryghtpath, and welcome back to the Managing Uncertainty podcast. Over the last couple weeks, we’ve been talking about workplace violence and threat management programs. And today we’re going to walk through the workplace violence and threat management framework that we use here at Bryghtpath.

You will want to look and follow along with the graphic that’s available with this podcast for free. You can get that at Bryghtpath.com/43, and you’ll be able to download a one-page version of our workplace violence and threat management framework that you can follow along with as we narrate through this podcast. If you’re looking at the framework that we use here at Bryghtpath for workplace violence and threat management, I’m going to start to the left and kind of move through the graphic.

We start with the actual threat incident. Something has happened. A threat has been made and received, and it’s been reported into whatever your defined threat management process is. Here we provide a set of risk factors to local leaders. We envision this happening in a larger organization, of course.

Perhaps you’ve got a branch, and a branch manager is the one that receives this initial report, and we’ve trained and provided them with some risk factors and categorization. And that is the threat incident risk factors that we talked about two episodes ago, now. And it is the severity levels that allow them to make an initial evaluation. And, really, their immediate evaluation takes us in one of a couple directions.

First, that the threat is a, it’s a low-risk threat, or it’s just simply unwarranted. Like, it’s been reported, but it turns out that the facts were not correct. There’s not an actual threat that’s been made. But an unwarranted or low-risk threat, basically, you skip all the way to the end of the process, and you move to monitor. We’re going to continue to monitor for newer developments. You should probably require this to be entered in some kind of case management or incident management system so that it’s reported, but there’s really no follow up. It goes into just this long-term monitoring mode until something else comes up.

The opposite of that is that this is a high-risk threat, or it’s an emergency. Like, it is quite clear that something serious has happened, many risk factors are present, or it’s dangerous to the point that you need to take immediate action.

For example, a bomb threat that is specific. You’re not going to wait. You’re going to call 911 here in the U.S. or the international equivalent of that. You’re probably going to evacuate the building. You’re going to take immediate action to ensure life safety.

The other immediate action that you’re going to take is if it’s a high-risk threat. It’s clear that there’s been an immediate threat made. This person is at high risk for suicide. They have access to weapons. There’s four or five risk factors present. We’re not going to wait and go through a threat management process. We’re going to contact law enforcement and emergency serv...