My sympathy is with the families of victims and the victims of the
disaster in Manhatten. I have been wondering if a proactive workforce
could prevent such a terrible thing being perpetrated again. Seems to me
that 'security' is an operational risk that should be managed
appropriately in most organisations through a Security Management System.
I don't want to sound trite, but I wonder what reaction workers at the
airport terminals had when some of the potential attackers were
challenged, and ran out of the terminal. I would expect airlines in the
future to 'ring the warning bells' in several similar scenarios.
Australian Standard AS - 4360 - Risk Management defines risk in terms of
'what could happen ?', 'how likely is it to happen ?', 'what are the
potential consequences ?'. If you applied this rationale to the current
tragedy, would you find it foreseeable? What is the administrative risk
control for these situations, could policy and procedure, and a motivated
workforce have prevented the Manhatten Disaster.
I don't want to teach Americans to 'suck eggs', risk management should be
second nature to them, they do it often enough. But if you look around you
there is ample opportunity to foment a disaster. The security systems of
all establishments handling 'Dangerous Goods', probably need review and
audit on a regular basis, if we are to prevent people with the wrong
mindsets from getting their hands on poisons and radioactive substances.
I really recommend a systematic approach to security risk management, as
we have seen, we have so much to lose.
I have offered the above comment in an attempt to do something
constructive and proactive, please do not interpret it as criticism of
America in any way.
"Alan Cotterell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.