Intrusion & Access Control

 

 

https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Message-to-the-Masses.aspxMessage to the MassesGP0|#cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8;L0|#0cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8|Physical Security;GTSet|#8accba12-4830-47cd-9299-2b34a43444652017-03-01T05:00:00Zhttps://adminsm.asisonline.org/pages/holly-gilbert-stowell.aspx, Holly Gilbert Stowell<p>Sanofi is a global pharmaceuticals business that manufactures and distributes vaccines and medications worldwide. The organization provides diabetes solutions, consumer healthcare services, animal health products, and other therapies. Sanofi Pasteur, the vaccines division of Sanofi, provides more than 1 billion doses of vaccines each year, which immunize more than 500 million people across the globe.<img src="/ASIS%20SM%20Callout%20Images/0317%20Case%20Study%20Stats%20Sidebar.jpg" class="ms-rtePosition-2" alt="" style="margin:5px;width:296px;" /></p><p>With more than 100 locations in the United States, Sanofi has approximately 25,000 employees domestically, and a global workforce of more than 125,000. Keeping track of those workers and ensuring their safety is of utmost concern to the company, says Joe Blakeslee, security systems manager at Sanofi. </p><p>For its North American sector, the organization incorporates several solutions as part of its overall security profile, including access control, CCTV, and emergency notification. For many years, Sanofi had several mass notification platforms that were disparate, without a centralized way to manage alerts for all employees. </p><p>In late 2014, Sanofi put out a request for proposal to find a product that could unify its many mass notification platforms into one seamless solution. Near the beginning of 2015, it chose Everbridge Mass Notification, a Web-based application that allows for distribution of messages to a large audience. </p><p>“The biggest part about Everbridge that stood out was the user interface,” Blakeslee says. “It provided everything we needed, and we were also impressed with how easy the system was to use.” The Sanofi North America security team started rolling out the application at the beginning of 2015 for internal security purposes, and in June of that year began registering all North American employees into the system.</p><p>He adds that the variety of options for reaching employees was paramount, given Sanofi’s mobile workforce. “Everbridge has multiple modalities in which you can actually send the message,” he says. “We use all the modalities whether it’s cell phone, SMS, home phone, or email. We give all of our employees the ability to elect whatever modality they would like.” Employees rank their preferred communication modalities in order when registering for the system; that way, if one method fails to contact the worker, notifications will automatically be sent via other methods until the party is reached.  </p><p>Everbridge is used on a daily basis at Sanofi, he adds. “Every day we use the application to alert various groups within the company, whether it’s related to fire alarms, evacuations, hazmat response, or other incidents.” </p><p>Sanofi has a central security services center (SSC). There, analysts monitor the business locations across the country for alarms and alerts using various security management software. Only designated individuals within the SSC can access the Everbridge platform and administrate messages through the platform. When there is an incident, such as a fire alarm, analysts send out alerts to the affected employees to give them situational awareness through the Everbridge Web portal. In the fire example, employees would be alerted to evacuate the building and await further instruction. The messages being sent can be selected from a set of prewritten options, or modified based on the particular event; normally in an emergency, the messages are written at the time by the security team. </p><p>“Say you have a building with 3,000 people in it. We want to reach them wherever they may be,” he says, “and reach as many people as we can in as little amount of time as possible.” </p><p>The Everbridge application is used to notify workers that it is safe to return to their desks. It also displays in real-time the status of employees involved in the incident. Employee status can either be confirmed or unconfirmed. If someone is unconfirmed, the Everbridge system allows the SCC to resend the message or try a new contact path based on the order of the employee’s preferred contact methods to try to get a response. For example, if sending an SMS to a cell phone doesn’t work, the system will make a telephone call, then send an email, and so forth. The confirmation lets the security team determine which employees are safe. </p><p>The system helps get employees back to work more quickly, because people aren’t wondering whether it’s safe to return to their desks. </p><p>Everbridge can also be used for incident management. For example, in the case of a trespasser, security would get an alarm or a phone call. “From there, SSC would send out a notification from Everbridge to the local emergency response personnel, asking for them to respond to the occurrence,” Blakeslee says. “After the message is sent to all the recipients’ devices, the SSC would, in real time, monitor the responses from the recipients’ confirmations and determine how many people are responding to the event.” </p><p>Everbridge isn’t just used for reactionary purposes. It provides proactive security measures as well. Sanofi has security officers at each of its locations, and the organization conducts daily check-ins with those personnel who are patrolling alone to ensure they are safe and accounted for. Sanofi expects a message back, and “if they don’t respond, we escalate that to the SSC and they handle it from there,” Blakeslee says.  </p><p>He adds that the mobile nature of the modern workforce means that employees won’t always be working from their primary location. “Our workforce is dynamic. One day I may be working in Pennsylvania, the next day I might be in New Jersey,” he says, noting that several employees and contractors travel frequently. To help keep track of its mobile workforce, Sanofi rolled out a newer feature from Everbridge called Safety Connection in the second quarter of 2016. The solution aggregates geo-location data from multiple systems so Sanofi knows where its employees are at any given time.  </p><p>Blakeslee says that given the sensitivity of materials they manufacture and distribute, as well as the importance of their services to customers, the culture at Sanofi is safety oriented. “Anything dealing with safety we’re really reactive to, so Everbridge provides us another means of communicating to keep our employees safe.”</p><p>--<br></p><p>For more information: Jeff Benanto, jeff.benanto@everbridge.com, www.everbridge.com, 781.373.9879 ​</p>

Intrusion & Access Control

 

 

https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Message-to-the-Masses.aspx2017-03-01T05:00:00ZMessage to the Masses
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Yale-Opens-Doors.aspx2016-12-01T05:00:00ZYale Opens Doors
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Sounding-the-Alarm-at-Lone-Star.aspx2016-08-01T04:00:00ZSounding the Alarm at Lone Star
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Cannabis-Cash.aspx2016-07-01T04:00:00ZQ&A: Cannabis Cash
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/What-the-Pulse-Nightclub-Attack-Means-for-Soft-Target-Security.aspx2016-06-14T04:00:00ZWhat the Pulse Nightclub Attack Means for soft Target Security
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/A-Dearth-of-Gun-Data.aspx2016-04-01T04:00:00ZA Dearth of Gun Data
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/When-Simulation-Means-Survival.aspx2016-04-01T04:00:00ZWhen Simulation Means Survival
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review--The-Alarm-Science-Manual.aspx2016-02-01T05:00:00ZBook Review: The Alarm Science Manual
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Campus-ID-Gets-a-Makeover.aspx2015-11-30T05:00:00ZCampus ID Gets a Makeover
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Access-Under-Control.aspx2015-08-10T04:00:00ZAccess Under Control
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Washington-Navy-Yard-On-Lockdown-After-Reports-of-Shooter.aspx2015-07-02T04:00:00ZWashington Navy Yard On Lockdown After Reports of Shooter
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Airports-Scrutinize-Employees.aspx2015-06-23T04:00:00ZAirports Scrutinize Employees
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Driving-Toward-Disaster.aspx2015-06-15T04:00:00ZDriving Toward Disaster
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/10-Factors-to-Consider-in-Designing-Vehicle-Checkpoints.aspx2015-05-28T04:00:00Z10 Factors to Consider in Designing Vehicle Checkpoints
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Night-Watch.aspx2015-05-01T04:00:00ZNight Watch
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review-Integrated-Electronic-Security.aspx2015-02-09T05:00:00ZBook Review: Integrated Electronic Security: A Layered Approach
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Preparing-for-the-Worst-2.aspx2015-01-21T05:00:00ZVIDEO: Preparing for the worst
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/School-Security-How-To-Build-and-Strengthen-a-School-Safety-Program.aspx2015-01-01T05:00:00ZSchool Security: How to Build and Strengthen a School Safety Program
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Retail-Theft-Inc.aspx2014-10-01T04:00:00ZRetail Theft, Inc.
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/college-campus-meets.aspx2014-09-01T04:00:00ZCollege Campus Meets Urban Landscape

 You May Also Like...

 

 

https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Guns-and-Security-The-Risks-of-Arming-Security-Officers.aspxGuns and Security: The Risks of Arming Security Officers<p>​Cinemark was not to blame for the 2012 shooting at its Aurora, Colorado, movie theater where gunman James Holmes killed 12 people and injured 70 more. A jury did not find a <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/2016/05/19/cinemark-not-liable-for-aurora-theater-shooting-civil-jury-says/" target="_blank">lawyer’s argument compelling</a> that Cinemark should have provided armed security officers at the premier for <em>The Dark Knight Rises</em> because it was anticipating large crowds.</p><p>But should Cinemark have? Debates about armed security officers have flared up in the media and public discourse over the past few years. With the combination of a uniform and a firearm, armed officers may suggest a sense of security to the greater public, signaling that a business takes security and protection seriously. Others believe the presence of a gun merely stands to escalate dangerous situations.<br></p><p>The debate over the effect of firearms in such settings will not be settled anytime soon. But there are some things we do know about the consequences of arming security officers. Looking at it from an insurance perspective gives us a vantage to examine the risks and real-life consequences of arming security officers.<br></p><p><strong>Demand for Officers</strong><br></p><p>There are more than 1 million private security officers in the United States and about 650,000 police officers, according to the federal <a href="http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes333051.htm" target="_blank">Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)</a>. After several years of steep increases in the number of security officers, the field is expected to grow by a steady 5 percent every year, the BLS estimates. Private security officers, more and more, are the face of security in the United States.</p><p>In some industries, such as healthcare, armed officers are a growing presence. Crime in healthcare facilities is a serious issue, so hospitals are looking to provide stronger security. The percentage of healthcare facilities that reported staffing armed officers in 2014 was almost double the rate four years prior, according to an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/14/us/hospital-guns-mental-health.html" target="_blank"><em>article in The New York Times. </em><br></a></p><p>“To protect their corridors, 52 percent of medical centers reported that their security personnel carried handguns and 47 percent said they used Tasers,” the Times reported, citing a 2014 survey by the International Association for Healthcare Security and Safety.<br></p><p>As discussed in a previous <em></em><a href="/Pages/The-Dangers-of-Protection-What-Makes-a-Guard-Firm-Low--or-High-Risk.aspx" target="_blank"><em>Security Management </em>article,</a> there’s been a pronounced demand for insurance for armed security officers at legal marijuana facilities. We can always expect there to be demand for armed officers at government facilities, though the demand at schools has decreased slightly.<br></p><p><strong>Pros and Cons of Armed Officers</strong><br></p><p>Many people perceive armed security officers favorably as a deterrent against violence and an assurance that a violent incident can be quickly quelled. From a client’s standpoint, it offers a perception of higher protection.</p><p>Armed security officers are widely accepted as warranted in certain locations where the threat level matches the use of force. Government contracts and high-profile corporate executives are protected by highly trained armed officers. At banks, the risk of robbery also justifies an armed officer.<br></p><p>But from an insurance and risk standpoint, it is difficult to craft a convincing argument for armed security officers in many settings. The presence of a gun is not proven to de-escalate a situation in every environment, and it is unlikely to deter violent and determined individuals. The presence of an additional firearm—even in an officer’s hands—only stands to increase the risk of casualties. This is particularly true of public or crowded environments, like stadiums, schools, and restaurants.<br></p><p>By looking at insurance claims, it’s clear that when a security officer discharges his or her gun, the resulting claims are serious. There is a big difference between an officer using mace and an officer using a gun. Claims resulting from the use of firearms are likely to breach insurance policy limits, so firms employing armed security officers are wise to purchase higher limits of liability than firms not employing armed officers.<br></p><p>When someone is shot by a security officer, his—or his estate—will likely sue the business that contracted the officer. And the security firm and officer are going to be brought into the suit as well—no matter how well-trained the officer. If it goes to trial, it is very rare for a judge and jury to believe use of the weapon was justified. It is almost always perceived as excessive force.<br></p><p>The insurance marketplace for security firms is very small, and employing armed officers reduces the market even further. This means firms that provide armed officers will be paying a higher premium for less coverage; they will most likely be relegated to the surplus lines insurance market, which can mean more policy exclusions. Therefore, it’s important for the security firm to weigh the increased costs and policy limitations of taking on an armed contract.<br></p><p><strong>Mitigating Risks of Armed Officers</strong><br></p><p>If a client insists on armed officers, there are steps that can be taken to reduce the risk of an officer discharging his or her weapon. </p><p>All officers should be checked against lists of individuals who are not permitted to carry firearms, in addition to the usual criminal background check. For armed posts, staff them with off-duty or former law enforcement officers; police receive extensive firearms training, as well as other training that helps them de-escalate challenging situations.<br></p><p>Consider local or state licensing requirements for armed security officers—they can vary by municipality. In some states, armed officers are not required to have special firearms training. For those states that do, officers and clients can be protected by ensuring that officers are trained to use firearms. Situational training, which is recommended for all officers, is particularly important for armed security officers as it teaches them to understand a judicious use of force for the environment they serve.<br></p><p>There are no easy, blanket answers to the question of whether to arm security officers. But looking at the risks and financial implications might help security leaders make decisions on a case-by-case basis.<br></p><p><em>Tory Brownyard is the president of Brownyard Group, a program administrator that pioneered liability insurance for security guard firms more than 60 years ago. He can be reached at tbrownyard@brownyard.com or 1-800-645-5820.</em><br></p><p><br></p>GP0|#cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8;L0|#0cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8|Physical Security;GTSet|#8accba12-4830-47cd-9299-2b34a4344465
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Access-Under-Control.aspxAccess Under Control<p>​<span style="line-height:1.5em;">Companies spend significant resources on access control equipment. Estimates of the size of the global market range from about $6 billion to around $22 billion, and a recent ASIS survey indicates that 57 percent of U.S. businesses will be increasing access control spending through 2016. </span></p><p>Upfront costs are just the start. Security professionals take time to determine which doors need to be locked and when.  They decide where to install readers and decide how to pro­cess visitors. Despite the effort spent on the access control equipment layout and maintenance, over time the access control database can become mismanaged. Requests for tweaks to reader groupings and access levels are continuous. One group may want time restrictions for the janitorial crew; another group may need access to one door but want to restrict others. If these accommodations are made without regard for the overall system, over time a complicated tangle of access control levels is created. The next thing you know, security no longer controls access; access control takes charge of the organization’s security, resulting in a chaotic mess.</p><p>BB&T, a large financial services institution headquartered in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, has protocols in place that ensure appropriate and accurate administration of access control systems at its corporate locations. The Fortune 500 company has more than 1,800 financial centers in 12 states.  In addition, it has approximately 120 corporate buildings–data centers, operations centers, call centers, corporate and regional headquarters–that have access control systems. ​</p><h4>Challenges</h4><p>Regulatory developments over the last decade make it necessary to closely maintain access control data. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 require health­care and financial organizations, respectively, to keep strict watch over sensitive and personal information. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 forced a strengthening of internal controls within corporations. More recently, the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard requires that companies keep tight control over credit and debit card data. </p><p>These regulations, as well as others that affect specific industries, have brought more scrutiny to the administration of access control data. Most large organizations, especially those in regulated industries, have experienced an increase in audit activity as it relates to physical access controls. This means that regular reviews of access reports are required in many cases. For this reason, it is critical that the data in a company’s access control database be clean and accurate.  </p><p>Numerous challenges can arise from failing to properly maintain an access control system. Maintenance lapses can result in thefts when, for example, terminated employees get into a facility. What good is an access control system if, due to negligence in maintaining the system, people can enter places they shouldn’t? If your access control database has been around for years and has turned into a Byzantine web of access permissions, what steps can be taken to get control over the data? </p><p>Access control database administrators must have an ongoing process of maintaining the accuracy of the data. A standards-based approach must be taken to manage any effective access control program. Standards include defining the types of users in the system–employees, vendors, visitors, temporary card users– and establishing credentials for which each of these user categories will be managed and reviewed. Once the user categories are defined, space definitions and ongoing maintenance procedures must be established. ​</p><h4>Database management</h4><p>BB&T categorizes its cardholders into three groups based on the users’ network login ID. There are employees and contractors with a company network login ID; vendors, tenants, and others without a company network login ID; and temporary users. BB&T uses the network login ID for employers and contractors because the network ID is also used in the IT security database. This allows security to match the IT access records to the physical access records. Human resource data was considered for this match, but the bank determined that many vendors, temporary employees, and contractors who have a BB&T network login ID are not included in its human resource system. Matching the network login ID covers a majority of the organization’s users. If the records do not match, the user’s access is terminated.   </p><p>For cards not involved in the matching process, BB&T identifies a company employee who can serve as a sponsor for each vendor and tenant. The company conducts quarterly reviews of those cards, during which the company sponsor ascertains whether the vendor or tenant employee still works for the third-party company and still needs the BB&T card.</p><p>All temporary cards in the system are assigned to the individuals who have the cards in their possession. The temporary cards may be used by visitors, trainees, vendors, and employees who forgot their badge at home. Information on the cardholder is housed within the access control database. Quarterly reports for all temporary cards are sent to one person who is responsible for ensuring that their temporary cards are accounted for.  ​</p><h4>Space</h4><p>BB&T has established criteria and definitions of the physical space in its environment and categorizes space into three categories: critical, restricted, and general. Criteria are established for each category of space. The critical category is reserved for high-risk, critical infrastructure areas, such as server rooms or HVAC sites. Restricted space is office space for departments that the company deems restricted. All critical and restricted space is assigned a space owner. The space owner is then responsible for approving or denying people’s access to that area. General access areas are common doors and hallways.</p><p>For each category of space, standards are established on how access is governed. For example, the data center standards might state that janitors or nonessential personnel are not granted access without an escort. Standards also dictate who can approve access to that space and how often access reports should be reviewed. For example, critical and restricted space reports are reviewed monthly or quarterly.</p><p>Access devices are grouped together based on the categories of space and the users that access the space. This streamlines the access request process and makes it easier for the requestors to understand what access they are selecting. Grouping as many readers together as possible minimizes the number of possible groupings meaning that there are fewer choices for those requesting access. It also makes it easier to ensure that access reports are accurate, and it simplifies the process of approving access and access report reviews. If all readers for critical space to a building are grouped together, only one approval would be required for critical space and only one report would need to be reviewed.  </p><p>However, in some cases, minimizing groupings may not possible. For example, one group of users may be allowed into the IT area but only a subset of that group has access to the server room that resides within the lab. In this case, groups would be categorized by the users rather than the readers.</p><p>It’s also important to make sure that access levels and device groupings don’t overlap. This can complicate the request process and the report reviews and could cause access reports to reflect an incomplete list of users who have access to a space. For example, in a building with three readers, grouping one may include the front and back doors, and grouping two may include the communications room. If, in addition to these two groupings, there is an overarching grouping three that includes all three readers, this could create a problem since each of the three individual readers belong to two different groupings. In this scenario, if a request is made to determine who has access to the communications room, rather than producing a report of the communications room reader group, an additional report of the group of all three readers would need to be provided. In many organizations, this second step is missed, causing an inaccurate representation of those with access to a specific area. This can be a major issue if discovered during an audit.</p><p>Another way to remedy this issue would be to run reader reports on individual doors, in this example, a reader report on the communications room only. Most access control systems allow for this type of report. However, in companies with a large number of individual card readers, this would require many more reports. The same users often need access to multiple doors, so combining them into groupings that don’t overlap makes more sense than running individual reader reports. As a rule, BB&T does not allow a reader that has been deemed critical or restricted to belong to more than one reader grouping. This ensures that access reports are accurate and complete.  It does, however, require that a user who needs access to a full building, such as a janitor or security officer, request access to each area of the building rather than requesting overarching access to the entire building. This is beneficial, not only for reporting reasons, but also because it requires that space owners approve all users who have access to their space and holds the space owners responsible for knowing who is entering their space. Controls in the report review process can be set up to ensure that a space owner does not remove access for a janitor or security officer. Some systems allow cards to be flagged and would require a higher level of scrutiny before access is removed. Nonetheless, this is a cleaner way to set up access levels and ensures that space owners will review a report of all users that have access to their space, which is what most auditors are looking for.   ​</p><h4>Clean-Up</h4><p>If an access control system has become muddled over time, a database clean-up is recommended. A good place to start is to deactivate all cards that have not been used in a specific timeframe, such as the previous six months. Thus there will be fewer cards to review. Then, security can find a common piece of data with another database in the company that provides a match of current employees. Human resource or information security data is best to determine whether active cardholders in the system still work for the company. Of the remaining cards for nonemployees, visitors, tenants, and contractors, security should research whether the card users can be associated with a manager or employee within the company. Security can work with these internal partners to implement an ongoing review of access cards. ​</p><h4>Maintenance</h4><p>Performing a regular match of human resource or information security data ensures that cards are deactivated for users whose information does not match that on the card. If a user is not captured in the match, that person should be assigned to a sponsor for quarterly review to determine whether any credentials need to be terminated. Access reports should be reviewed for all nongeneral space to ensure that users still need access to the designated areas. Such reviews should take place at regular intervals–not more than quarterly. An important piece of the access request process is to ensure that all necessary information is captured to support the new standards and to support the report review. For example, if the request is for a visitor, security should capture the name of the person who will have that card in their possession during the request.   ​</p><h4>Automation</h4><p>BB&T is working to upgrade the auto­mation of its access control request and audit reporting system by the end of 2015. It is considering software that automates the entire access control database management process from the onboarding human resource system to the access control system. This would include a software interface that would be fully integrated with the information security credentialing system. The ideal software would fully integrate with the access control system where approved access is automatically provisioned with no human intervention.</p><p>Cost is a major factor in implementing such automation. Some companies choose to automate pieces of the process. Some use a simple Web portal form that sends e-mails to approvers and ultimately e-mails the request to the team that provisions access or provides a dashboard for the access control team to view requests. Many companies have integrated with human resource or information security data to update their access control system, which allows for the automatic deactivation of cards for terminated employees, vendors, or contractors. Others have found a way to automate the report reviews. Few access control manufacturers provide these additional software tools in combination with their access control software. Some will work with or direct their customers to third-party solutions, while others are beginning to see the need for automation and are incorporating pieces into their standard software package, such as more robust reporting capabilities.  </p><p>These efforts may seem daunting, but once the standards are set and the database is cleaned up, ongoing maintenance is initiated, and some level of automation is implemented, the system will be under control. It is imperative that security professionals see beyond the equipment and installation and not rely solely on these for protection. A sound maintenance program ensures that, should access control processes be called into question, security can be confident that the company’s program is under control.  </p><p>--</p><p><em><strong>Briggette Jimenez, CPP,</strong> is physical security manager at BB&T where she manages the company’s security command center, security operations, and workplace violence prevention programs.</em></p>GP0|#cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8;L0|#0cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8|Physical Security;GTSet|#8accba12-4830-47cd-9299-2b34a4344465
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---Workplace-Safety.aspxBook Review: Workplace Safety<p>Butterworth-Heinema​nn; Elsevier.com; 180 pages; $49.95.</p><p>The threat of workplace violence is a continuous issue affecting the well-being of the American workforce. Horrific reports and images of violent acts in the workplace appear far too often in the media, disrupting the safety, well-being, and productivity of the general public. </p><p>In an attempt to help businesses and organizations deter or deflect these violent acts, Randall W. Ferris and Daniel Murphy authored <em>Workplace Safety: Establishing an Effective Violence Prevention Program. </em>This is a well-intended book designed to help organizations with the development of policies and practices to prevent violence in the workplace. The book offers information on applicable topics, including relevant definitions, justifications for workplace violence procedures, explanations of various types of violence, environmental causes, and possible motives behind the attacks, as well as details for creating and implementing methods to prevent violent incidents. The authors draw from the guidelines presented in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s standards for the prevention of workplace violence as their primary source of creditable information.</p><p>The book reads more like a how-to manual than a professional publication. The chapters are consistently formatted with a motivational quote, chapter contents, an abstract, and applicable key words. The chapters include various personal experiences from the authors, fictitious scenarios, and bulleted or numerical lists pertaining to the chapter’s content. Further diluting the professionalism is the use of common or slang terms in text that is often brash or casual. </p><p>There is value here for some audiences. For organizations that have not developed procedures to deter or respond to violent incidents in the workplace and those that do not understand the concept of these issues, this could be a helpful guide. Those working in human resources or facility management and individuals who are new to security management can gain some useful information. Also, managers desiring to completely redesign or reevaluate their workplace violence policies might use this book as a starting point. However, it should be viewed as a supplemental publication and not a primary source. Workplace Safety: Establishing an Effective Violence Prevention Program will not impress the educated or experienced reader or introduce new concepts that have not been previously explored. </p><p><em><strong>Reviewer: Joseph Jaksa, Ph.D., CPP, </strong>is an associate professor of criminal justice at Michigan’s Saginaw Valley State University. He is a member of ASIS International and the Saginaw Valley Chapter of ASIS.  </em></p>GP0|#cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8;L0|#0cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8|Physical Security;GTSet|#8accba12-4830-47cd-9299-2b34a4344465