Organizations of all shapes and sizes need to consider their physical security.

From the largest to

the smallest, they all have something to protect. The primary assets organizations are protecting
are:

• Property
• People
• Data

How to protect your organization

There are multiple ways to work to secure the premises and be proactive about security and
safety. Not all of these will be appropriate for all organizations.

The strategies for protecting people and for protecting property are often very similar.

• Access control systems: These systems are designed to verify a person’s

identity using credentials previously supplied by the organization. Only people with
appropriate credentials are allowed to enter certain areas. Doors lock automatically and
unlock only with approved credentials.

• Security personnel: In some organizations, it is appropriate to have on-staff

security guards who are trained to keep an eye out and respond to threats. In others, it
may be more appropriate to have an on-call security company who can send staff when
there is an anticipated threat, e.g. an employee is being fired who has exhibited anger
issues.

• Visitor management systems: These systems require all guests to register upon
arrival, and sometimes to be issued a visitor badge identifying them as a guest. This can
help prevent them from gain access to dangerous areas. It is also a way of screening
visitors, making staff aware of the arrival of a guest who is deemed a threat.

• Non-disclosure agreements: To protect data, employees and visitors alike may

be required to sign documents agreeing to keep what they see and hear private. While this
isn’t a silver bullet – someone with ill intentions to share organizational information likely
will – it can discourage casual data transfer and give the organization a path to seek
damages.

• Security protocols: Perhaps the most important part of your security plan
involves guidelines people follow and instilling these guidelines in your employees. It is
likely your security handbook will have many different procedures to follow. A few
examples:

o Always having employees go in pairs or be accompanied by a security guard to

deposit money in the bank. This is a safeguard both for the employees and for the
assets. (There is less temptation for the employee to steal from the money bag if
there is another set of eyes.)
o Prohibiting the transfer of company data to employee devices and/or vetting
employee devices before allowing them on company systems.
o Requiring all visitors to sign in and have a visitor photo taken, and encouraging
employees to preregister guests.
o Running regular safety drills and training employees on emergency procedures.
• Security cameras and alarm systems: Cameras and alarm systems, much like
door locks, keep honest people honest. They also provide just-in-time notification to
security personnel, law enforcement and/or emergency services in case of a problem. If
there is a fire or robbery in progress, the right people can respond quickly to try to
neutralize the threat. Even in the case of discovering a crime after the fact, cameras create
a record that can be used for investigation and prosecution.

For the situational multiple-choice questions.

• Populist Revolt vs. the Necessity for Expertise in the Public Sector: As was
indicated at the beginning of this lecture, western democracies in recent years experienced
strong reactions to unelected officials of all stripes and elected many committed to cutting or
eliminating such individuals, but at the same time the demand for more government services
remains unabated. How to reconcile these opposites which simultaneously reject and sustain
effective government as well as the core values of neutral, objective expertise at the heart of
public professionalism?

• Social Media vs. Sustained Expertise: In 2007 Apple launched it iPhone; late 2006
Facebook opened its doors; Google came out with the Android operating system in 2007;
Amazon introduced Kindle in 2007; and Airbnb started in 2007. Thanks to social media the
last decade witnessed a fundamental reshaping of individual behavior, work, commerce,
finance, education, government, the economy, and yes, public professionalism. Social media
asks everyone to be immediately involved, offering immediate answers to complex issues,
plus making rapidly shifting demands on public officials. Yes, social media is more
democratic because it allows everyone to be involved almost instantaneously, but
simultaneously social media fosters “presentism” that drives out long-term thought and
action. So how can public professionals who value-indeed require--long term, neutral,
applied, objective expertise for problem solving cope with social media? How can they
nurture applied expertise that involves thoughtful reflection and careful decision-making
among those “who know best”? Given the massive data available-more information than
accumulated by humans up to 2003-what is the right sort of data to identify, collect, and
utilize vs. ignore and disregard? How do we know the real impact of social media on public
professionals?

• The Pseudo-Event vs. the Real Event: Many years ago Daniel Boorstin referred to
a media created event that was unreal or fake as “a pseudo-event”. The rise of social media
has accelerated what now is called “fake news”. Often pseudo-events create reality that
happens and has serious consequences, such as suicides, staged riots, or shootings. Yet,
professionalism rests upon honest information, verifiable facts, as well as objective analysis.
Sorting out truth from fiction has always been challenging for public professionals, but the
expansion of social media during the last decade only exacerbates an already devilish
dilemma. How can professionals discern fact from fiction today and respond appropriately in
an increasingly social media saturated world?
• The Drive to Specialize vs. Integrated Professional Policy-Making: As was
emphasized before, the drive to specialize and sub-specialize and so on is apparent within
the professional ranks as new issues and new information demand new varieties of
expertise. The result is what some term, “stovepipes” throughout government or little clusters
of experts who talk to themselves rather than those outside their specialization, beyond their
immediate agency, or wider general public. Hence, the right hand often is unaware of what
the left hand is doing. Competition among professional groups such as within the defense
department-army, air force, navy-further inhibits collaboration. Yet, effective public policy
making requires integration across many professional fields to succeed. No professional
group can go it alone in any policy-making arena. Thus the dilemma: how to foster
integration and collaboration across increasingly narrow specialized and competitive
professional ranks?

• Proliferation of Temporary Contractors vs. In-House Professionals: The recent

devastating leaks in American Intelligence have all been the result of temporary contract
employees such as Edward Snowden. Increased use of contractors is often justified
politically for keeping costs down and cutting government employees. That is good political
rhetoric, but there is little evidence to support such rationales. Instead, in the words of Hugh
Heclo, we have become a “government of strangers”. As a result, there is potential for a
serious erosion of a professional corporate identity due to the lack of commonly shared
professional norms plus effective ethical enforcement mechanisms. Hence, the key question:
how can professionalization of government as a whole advance when it is seriously
challenged from within due to the rise of temporary contract workers (which in national
security and law enforcement cases can jeopardize human life as well)?

• Global Interconnectedness vs. Local Accountability: As mentioned before,

professional groups are rooted in state and community level associations such as the State
Bar Association or State Medical Societies for entrance exams, credentialing, ethics
enforcement, and much more. Yet, increasingly professional work spans the global or at
least are interconnected beyond the borders of any single nation. Again, problem-solving
demands wider international cooperation and collaboration to succeed in almost every field
today from environmental protection to military intervention. Hence, how to insure that public
professionals, educated and credentialed within a local jurisdiction, are prepared to see “the
big picture” and work effectively with colleagues across national boundaries?