How AI is Changing Workplace Violence Detection in 2025: What Every Security Director Needs to Know

By Warren Pulley, BTAM Certified | CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions

The workplace violence prevention landscape is undergoing its most significant transformation in decades. Artificial intelligence isn't just changing how we detect threats—it's fundamentally rewriting the rules of behavioral threat assessment and management.

As someone who has spent 40 years protecting lives across military installations, law enforcement operations, diplomatic facilities under daily attack, and corporate environments, I've witnessed every evolution in security technology. But what's happening in 2025 with AI-powered threat detection represents something entirely different: the ability to identify concerning behavioral patterns before they escalate to violence.

The statistics tell a sobering story. Workplace violence costs U.S. businesses over $130 billion annually. Two million workers experience workplace violence each year, with 48% of incidents going unreported. Traditional reactive security measures—cameras, guards, access control—catch threats too late. By the time physical violence occurs, the damage is done.

But artificial intelligence is changing this equation in ways that seemed impossible just five years ago.

The AI Revolution in Behavioral Threat Assessment

Traditional behavioral threat assessment relied on human observers recognizing warning signs, reporting concerns, and threat assessment teams conducting investigations. This approach works—when people report what they observe. The problem? Most concerning behaviors go unreported until it's too late.

AI-powered systems are now achieving detection accuracy rates that exceed human observation by significant margins. Machine learning algorithms can analyze behavioral patterns across multiple data sources simultaneously, identifying risk indicators that even trained security professionals might miss.

Recent research on insider threat detection demonstrates how AI categorizes behavioral features into distinct types: time-related patterns, user-related behaviors, project and role-related activities, activity-related actions, and communication patterns. Random Forest algorithms are now reaching 99.8% accuracy for email-related features and 96.4% for user-related behaviors—numbers that would have seemed impossible with traditional monitoring approaches.

But here's what most organizations don't understand: AI doesn't replace human expertise in threat assessment—it amplifies it. The technology identifies patterns. Trained professionals interpret those patterns within behavioral and situational context. This human-AI collaboration represents the future of workplace violence prevention.

How AI Detects Pre-Attack Behavioral Indicators

Active shooter incidents don't emerge from nowhere. The FBI's research on targeted violence consistently shows that perpetrators engage in observable pre-attack behaviors: pathway to violence indicators, planning, preparation, and leakage of intent.

The challenge has always been identifying these indicators early enough to intervene.

AI systems excel at continuous monitoring and pattern recognition across timeframes that human analysts simply cannot match.

Here's what modern AI threat detection platforms analyze:

Communication Pattern Analysis

Machine learning algorithms scan internal communications for indicators of grievance, fixation, identification with previous attackers, and direct or veiled threats. Unlike keyword filtering systems that generate massive false positives, AI understands context, tone, and escalation patterns.

An employee expressing frustration about a denied promotion generates different risk indicators than someone repeatedly researching workplace shootings while making veiled references to "settling scores." AI distinguishes between these scenarios with increasing sophistication.

Access Pattern Anomalies

Normal job functions create predictable digital access patterns. Marketing staff access creative files during business hours. Finance personnel pull reports at quarter-end. Night shift workers authenticate from specific IP ranges.

AI establishes baseline behaviors for every user, then flags deviations: a terminated employee attempting system access at 3 AM, unusual database queries by someone without legitimate need-to-know, mass file downloads to external drives, access attempts to restricted HR or executive areas.

These anomalies often precede theft, sabotage, or violence. Traditional security tools generate alerts. AI distinguishes between innocent explanations (employee working remotely on tight deadline) and genuine threats (disgruntled worker exfiltrating data before planned violence).

Behavioral Change Detection

Perhaps AI's most powerful capability is identifying changes in established behavioral baselines. Someone who consistently arrives early suddenly shows chronic tardiness. A collaborative team member becomes isolated and withdrawn. A normally professional employee exhibits increasing irritability and conflict with colleagues.

In isolation, these changes might reflect personal problems unrelated to workplace violence risk. But when AI detects multiple concerning indicators clustering together—social isolation + grievance expression + research into violence + policy violations—it alerts threat assessment teams to conduct deeper investigation.

This is where my experience conducting threat assessments for schools, hospitals, and corporations becomes critical. Technology identifies patterns. Human expertise evaluates whether those patterns represent genuine risk or innocent circumstances requiring different intervention.

Physical Security Integration

Advanced AI platforms integrate digital behavioral analysis with physical security systems. Facial recognition at access points tracks who enters facilities and when. Video analytics identify unusual behaviors: someone conducting surveillance, testing security responses, or attempting to circumvent access controls.

An employee repeatedly attempting to access restricted areas generates automatic alerts. Someone loitering near executive offices outside normal work areas triggers review. These physical indicators, combined with digital behavioral patterns, create comprehensive threat profiles.

Real-World Applications: Where AI is Saving Lives

The theory sounds impressive, but does it work in practice? Evidence from early adopters demonstrates that AI-powered threat detection is preventing violence that traditional methods would have missed.

Case Study: Healthcare Setting

A major hospital system implemented AI-powered monitoring across their employee network after experiencing an increase in workplace violence incidents targeting healthcare workers. The system flagged concerning patterns from a surgical technician: increased late-night system access, research into hospital security protocols, and communications expressing grievance toward specific surgeons.

Traditional monitoring would have missed these dispersed indicators. The hospital's threat assessment team investigated, discovering the employee was planning to sabotage surgical equipment. Intervention occurred before any harm. The employee received mental health support and was transitioned to a non-patient-care role. Crisis averted.

Case Study: Corporate Environment

A Fortune 500 technology company deployed AI monitoring as part of their comprehensive insider threat program. The system identified anomalous behavior from a senior engineer: mass intellectual property downloads, communications with competitors, and hostile statements toward management.

Further investigation revealed the employee was planning both data theft and potential workplace violence. The company's security team—trained in the behavioral threat assessment frameworks I teach in my book The Prepared Leader—intervened before either occurred. Legal action addressed the theft. Mental health intervention addressed the violence risk.

Educational Institution Success

A university implemented AI-enhanced monitoring across their campus network following training from campus safety experts. The system flagged a graduate student exhibiting multiple concerning indicators: social isolation, research into university shooting incidents, and communications suggesting grievance toward faculty.

The school's behavioral intervention team conducted assessment and connected the student with mental health resources. The crisis de-escalated. The student completed their degree. Another potential campus tragedy prevented.

The Technology Behind AI Threat Detection

Understanding how these systems work helps security directors evaluate solutions and implement them effectively.

Machine Learning Classification

Modern AI threat detection relies on supervised machine learning models trained on thousands of insider threat and workplace violence cases. These models learn to recognize patterns that precede violence, continuously improving as they process more data.

Random Forest algorithms—which combine multiple decision trees to improve prediction accuracy—have proven particularly effective. These systems analyze hundreds of variables simultaneously, identifying combinations of factors that human analysts would struggle to track.

Natural Language Processing (NLP)

AI systems use advanced NLP to analyze written communications—emails, chat messages, documents—understanding not just keywords but context, sentiment, and intent. This capability distinguishes between someone researching workplace violence for a security awareness presentation versus someone planning an attack.

Sentiment analysis tracks emotional tone over time. Escalating anger, hopelessness, or fixation on revenge generates risk scores. Combined with other behavioral indicators, NLP helps threat assessment teams prioritize investigations.

Behavioral Biometrics

Emerging AI applications analyze how people interact with systems: typing patterns, mouse movements, login behaviors. Changes in these subtle patterns can indicate stress, emotional disturbance, or deception—all relevant to threat assessment.

Someone normally typing 60 words per minute suddenly showing erratic, aggressive keystrokes while researching weapons or violence might warrant closer attention. These micro-behavioral changes provide early warning signs.

Predictive Risk Scoring

AI systems generate dynamic risk scores for every user, updated continuously as new data arrives. Low scores indicate normal behavior. Elevated scores trigger automated alerts to security teams. Critical scores activate immediate response protocols.

These scores aren't predictions of violence—no system can definitively predict human behavior. Rather, they identify individuals exhibiting patterns associated with increased risk, enabling proactive intervention before potential violence occurs.

Implementing AI Threat Detection: Best Practices

Technology alone doesn't prevent workplace violence. Successful implementation requires combining AI capabilities with behavioral expertise, clear policies, and organizational culture that supports reporting and intervention.

Start with Strategic Planning

Before deploying any AI system, organizations need comprehensive workplace violence prevention policies that address technology use, privacy considerations, and intervention protocols. What behaviors will be monitored? Who reviews AI alerts? How are investigations conducted? What interventions are available?

These questions require answers before technology deployment, not after. I've helped organizations nationwide develop these frameworks, drawing on methodologies proven across military, law enforcement, diplomatic, and corporate environments.

Establish Governance and Oversight

AI monitoring raises legitimate privacy concerns. Organizations must balance security with employee rights, transparency with operational security. This requires clear governance:

Privacy Protections: What data is collected? How is it stored? Who has access? What are retention periods? Clear policies protect both organizations and employees.

Human Review Requirements: AI generates alerts. Humans make decisions. Every elevated risk score should trigger human review by trained threat assessment professionals—never automated responses.

Legal Compliance: Monitoring must comply with federal and state laws: electronic communications privacy, labor relations, discrimination protections. Legal counsel should review policies before implementation.

Transparency: Employees should know monitoring occurs, what's monitored, and why. Transparency builds trust and actually improves security—people are more likely to report concerns when they trust organizational processes.

Build or Integrate Threat Assessment Capabilities

AI identifies patterns. Threat assessment teams evaluate those patterns and coordinate intervention. Organizations implementing AI monitoring need functional threat assessment programs with trained personnel.

At minimum, threat assessment teams should include:

• Security/Law Enforcement: Investigative capabilities, threat evaluation, emergency response coordination

• Human Resources: Personnel records, disciplinary actions, employment law compliance

• Mental Health Professionals: Clinical assessment, intervention planning, treatment coordination

• Legal Counsel: Policy compliance, liability protection, documentation standards

• Leadership: Decision authority, resource allocation, organizational support

My Threat Assessment Handbook provides detailed guidance on team composition, assessment protocols, and intervention strategies. Organizations without existing capabilities can develop them or engage external consultants like CrisisWire to provide expertise during program development.

Provide Comprehensive Training

AI tools require trained users. Security personnel need training in system operation, alert interpretation, and investigation protocols. Threat assessment teams need training in behavioral analysis, risk evaluation, and intervention planning.

All employees benefit from training on violence prevention, warning signs, and reporting procedures. When staff understand that monitoring serves safety—not surveillance—they become partners in violence prevention.

I've delivered workplace violence prevention training to thousands of employees across diverse sectors. The consistent finding: education reduces fear, increases reporting, and strengthens organizational safety culture.

Create Intervention Pathways

Detection without intervention accomplishes nothing. Organizations need established processes for responding to AI-generated alerts:

Triage Protocols: How quickly must different risk levels be investigated? Who conducts initial assessment? When does the full threat assessment team convene?

Intervention Options: What resources exist for addressing concerning behavior? Mental health services, employee assistance programs, conflict resolution, performance improvement plans, security measures, law enforcement involvement—different situations require different responses.

Case Management: How are ongoing cases tracked? Who monitors compliance with safety plans? When can cases be closed? Systematic case management ensures nothing falls through cracks.

Documentation Standards: Detailed documentation protects organizations legally and improves program effectiveness. Every case requires standardized documentation showing assessment rationale, intervention decisions, and outcomes.

The Human Element: Why Expertise Still Matters

With 40 years protecting lives—seven years securing nuclear weapons in the U.S. Air Force, 12 years as an LAPD officer investigating violent crimes, six years protecting diplomats in Baghdad's combat zone under daily threat, and years directing university campus safety—I can state unequivocally: technology has never been the limiting factor in violence prevention. Human judgment is.

AI systems are extraordinarily good at pattern recognition. They're terrible at understanding human complexity, cultural context, and situational nuance that determines whether concerning behavior represents genuine threat or innocent circumstances.

Consider: An employee researching workplace shootings could be a potential perpetrator. Or they could be a security professional preparing a training presentation. An AI system flags both identically. Human expertise distinguishes between them.

Someone exhibiting social isolation and grievance expression might be planning violence. Or they might be going through divorce, caring for a dying parent, or struggling with depression requiring support, not security intervention. Trained threat assessment professionals understand these distinctions.

The organizations achieving best results combine AI capabilities with experienced behavioral threat assessment professionals who understand violence dynamics, have investigated actual cases, and possess clinical or investigative training to evaluate complex human behavior.

This is why I emphasize certification and training in behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM). Technology provides data. Training provides wisdom to interpret that data accurately.

Addressing Privacy Concerns and Ethical Considerations

AI-powered employee monitoring generates understandable privacy concerns. How do organizations balance security with civil liberties? Several principles guide ethical implementation:

Legitimate Business Purpose

Monitoring must serve genuine security needs, not general surveillance. Detecting imminent violence risk justifies monitoring. Tracking productivity or personal activities does not. Clear policies define scope and limitations.

Proportionality

Monitoring intensity should match threat level. Baseline monitoring for everyone, enhanced monitoring for elevated risk indicators, intensive monitoring only for active threat cases. Proportional response protects both security and privacy.

Transparency and Notice

Employees should know monitoring occurs. Secret surveillance erodes trust and may violate laws. Transparent programs build legitimacy and actually improve effectiveness—people self-regulate behavior when they know monitoring exists.

Data Minimization

Collect only data necessary for threat assessment. Retain it only as long as required. Delete it when cases close. Excessive collection creates privacy risks without security benefit.

Independent Oversight

External review of monitoring programs—by legal counsel, ethics boards, or privacy advocates—ensures accountability and identifies potential overreach before it causes problems.

These principles aren't just ethical—they're practical. Organizations that respect employee privacy while maintaining security build cultures where people report concerns, support safety measures, and contribute to violence prevention.

The ROI of AI Threat Detection

Security directors operate under budget constraints. Does AI threat detection justify the investment?

Consider the costs of workplace violence that AI can help prevent:

Direct Financial Costs: Medical expenses, legal fees, workers' compensation claims, property damage, increased insurance premiums. A single workplace shooting can cost organizations millions.

Productivity Losses: After violent incidents, surviving employees experience trauma affecting performance for months or years. Absenteeism increases. Turnover spikes. Recruiting and training replacements cost far more than prevention.

Reputational Damage: Organizations experiencing workplace violence suffer lasting brand damage. Customers leave. Investors flee. Talent recruitment becomes difficult. The costs compound over years.

Legal Liability: Organizations failing to prevent foreseeable violence face negligent security lawsuits. Corporate leadership can be held personally liable for inadequate threat management. Prevention costs far less than litigation.

Emotional Toll: Beyond financial calculations, violence destroys lives. Victims suffer lasting psychological trauma. Families are devastated. Communities are shattered. The human cost of preventable violence is incalculable.

Studies show that workplace violence costs U.S. businesses over $130 billion annually. Organizations implementing comprehensive prevention programs—including AI detection capabilities—see dramatic reductions in incidents, typically achieving positive ROI within 24 months.

The question isn't whether organizations can afford AI threat detection. It's whether they can afford not to implement it.

Integration with Physical Security Systems

Maximum effectiveness comes from integrating AI behavioral monitoring with physical security infrastructure. Modern platforms connect:

Access Control Systems

AI analyzes badge data to identify unusual patterns: terminated employees attempting entry, authorized personnel accessing inappropriate areas, repeated failed access attempts, piggybacking through secure doors.

Combined with behavioral indicators, these physical anomalies provide comprehensive threat pictures.

Video Surveillance

Advanced video analytics identify concerning physical behaviors: surveillance activity, testing security responses, weapons display, aggressive interactions, unauthorized presence in restricted areas.

When someone exhibiting digital behavioral risk indicators also shows concerning physical behaviors, threat assessment teams can investigate before situations escalate.

Intrusion Detection

Perimeter sensors, duress alarms, and panic buttons integrate with AI systems. When someone triggers emergency alerts, AI instantly provides behavioral context: Is this person known to the system? Are there existing risk indicators? What's their typical behavior pattern?

This integration enables faster, more informed emergency response.

Visitor Management

AI-enhanced visitor systems flag individuals who pose potential threats based on background checks, watchlist screening, or prior incident history. Integration with behavioral monitoring provides comprehensive security.

My work establishing physical security programs for sensitive facilities taught me that layered security—combining technology, procedures, and trained personnel—provides optimal protection.

Emerging Trends: What's Coming Next

AI threat detection capabilities continue evolving rapidly. Several emerging trends will shape 2025 and beyond:

Multimodal AI Analysis

Next-generation systems analyze multiple data types simultaneously: text, voice, video, biometrics, behavioral patterns. This multimodal approach identifies threats that single-source analysis would miss.

Imagine systems that detect stress in voice patterns during phone calls, correlate with aggressive typing behaviors, identify concerning research activities, and alert security teams to investigate—all in real time.

Predictive Intervention Timing

AI is getting better at identifying not just who poses risk, but when intervention will be most effective. Some individuals respond well to early casual conversation. Others require formal assessment. Still others need immediate law enforcement involvement.

Machine learning models are beginning to optimize intervention timing and methods, improving outcomes while reducing organizational disruption.

Cross-Organizational Threat Intelligence

As more organizations deploy AI threat detection, opportunities emerge for anonymized threat intelligence sharing. Someone terminated from one employer for threatening behavior shouldn't simply move to another organization undetected.

Privacy-protected information sharing—similar to credit reporting systems—could identify individuals with patterns of concerning behavior across multiple employers, enabling better hiring decisions and risk management.

Integration with Threat Assessment Standards

Professional standards for threat assessment and management continue evolving. ASIS International, the FBI, the Secret Service, and Department of Homeland Security all publish evidence-based frameworks.

AI systems are increasingly incorporating these frameworks directly into algorithms, ensuring technology aligns with proven behavioral threat assessment methodologies.

Common Implementation Mistakes to Avoid

Having consulted with hundreds of organizations on threat assessment program development, I've observed common implementation mistakes:

Mistake #1: Technology Without Strategy - Deploying AI monitoring without comprehensive violence prevention policies creates legal risk and operational confusion. Strategy must precede technology.

Mistake #2: Insufficient Training - Purchasing sophisticated AI tools but failing to train users adequately wastes investment. Technology requires trained operators.

Mistake #3: Ignoring Privacy Concerns - Heavy-handed surveillance erodes trust and may violate laws. Balance is essential.

Mistake #4: Alert Fatigue - Systems generating excessive false positives overwhelm security teams, leading to missed genuine threats. Proper tuning is critical.

Mistake #5: Lack of Intervention Resources - Detecting threats accomplishes nothing without intervention capabilities. Organizations need mental health resources, conflict resolution processes, and law enforcement partnerships ready before crises occur.

Mistake #6: Poor Change Management - Implementing AI monitoring without explaining rationale to employees generates resistance. Transparent communication builds support.

Mistake #7: Operating in Isolation - Effective threat management requires collaboration across security, HR, legal, mental health, and leadership. Siloed operations fail.

My book Locked Down: The Access Control Playbook addresses these implementation challenges in detail, providing practical guidance for security directors establishing comprehensive programs.

Getting Started: Practical Steps for Security Directors

For security directors considering AI threat detection implementation:

Step 1: Assess Current Capabilities - What threat assessment capabilities exist today? What gaps need addressing? Where does AI add most value?

Step 2: Define Requirements - What behaviors require monitoring? What risk levels trigger investigation? What intervention resources are needed?

Step 3: Evaluate Solutions - Multiple AI threat detection platforms exist. Evaluate them against your specific requirements. Request demonstrations. Check references.

Step 4: Develop Policies - Create comprehensive policies addressing privacy, monitoring scope, investigation protocols, and intervention procedures. Engage legal counsel early.

Step 5: Build Your Team - Establish or enhance threat assessment team capabilities. Provide training in behavioral threat assessment, AI tool operation, and intervention strategies.

Step 6: Pilot Implementation - Start with limited deployment in one department or location. Learn, adjust, then expand.

Step 7: Train Broadly - Educate all employees on violence prevention, warning signs, reporting procedures, and how AI monitoring enhances their safety.

Step 8: Monitor and Refine - Track program metrics: How many alerts? How many investigations? What interventions occurred? What worked? Continuous improvement is essential.

Organizations without internal expertise can engage consultants like CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions to guide implementation, provide training, or deliver ongoing threat assessment services.

Conclusion: The Future of Violence Prevention

Workplace violence is preventable. Not every incident—human behavior is too complex for perfect prediction—but the vast majority can be stopped before they occur.

AI-powered threat detection represents our best opportunity yet to identify concerning behaviors early enough for effective intervention. The technology is here. It works. Organizations implementing it are preventing violence that traditional methods would have missed.

But technology alone is never the answer. Success requires combining AI capabilities with human expertise, clear policies, organizational commitment, and cultures that support reporting and intervention.

Over 40 years protecting lives in the world's most dangerous environments—from nuclear weapons facilities to Los Angeles streets to Baghdad's daily combat to university campuses—has taught me one consistent truth: the difference between tragedy and near-miss is almost always whether someone recognized warning signs and acted on them in time.

AI dramatically improves our ability to recognize those warning signs. But humans still must act on them.

The question for every security director, every organizational leader, every person responsible for others' safety is simple: When AI identifies concerning patterns suggesting potential violence, will your organization have the expertise, resources, and commitment to intervene effectively?

The answer to that question determines whether AI-powered threat detection prevents violence or simply documents it more thoroughly.

About the Author

Warren Pulley is founder of CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions and brings 40 years of continuous experience protecting lives across military, law enforcement, diplomatic, corporate, and educational environments.

His credentials include:

• BTAM Certified - Behavioral Threat Assessment & Management (University of Hawaii West Oahu)

• 20+ FEMA Certifications - Including IS-906 (Workplace Violence), IS-907 (Active Shooter), IS-915 (Insider Threats)

• Former LAPD Officer - 12 years investigating violent crimes and organized crime

• U.S. Embassy Baghdad Security - 6+ years protecting diplomats under daily threat (zero incidents)

• Former Director of Campus Safety - Chaminade University of Honolulu

• U.S. Air Force Veteran - 7 years nuclear weapons security

• Published Author - Five books on threat assessment and security management

• Licensed Private Investigator - California

Warren has designed and implemented threat assessment programs for schools, hospitals, corporations, and government agencies nationwide. His evidence-based methodologies combine military precision, law enforcement investigative expertise, and diplomatic protective intelligence to deliver comprehensive violence prevention capabilities.

Published Works:

• The Prepared Leader: Threat Assessment, Emergency Planning, and Safety

• Threat Assessment Handbook

• Campus Under Siege: School Safety Strategies

• Locked Down: The Access Control Playbook

• Uniformed Silence: A Journey Through Security Careers

Academic Research:

• How to Conduct an Insider Threat Audit in 10 Steps

• School Threat Assessments 2025: Preventing Violence Before It Happens

• Do Armed Guards Prevent School Shootings? Evidence and Alternatives

• Executive Protection in 2025: Why ASIS's New Standard Changes Everything

• Leadership Liability in Crisis: How CEOs Can Be Held Responsible

Additional research available at: Academia.edu/CrisisWire

Connect With CrisisWire

Website: CrisisWire.com Blog: CrisisWire Blog Email: crisiswire@proton.me

Quick Contact: bit.ly/crisiswire

Social Media:

• LinkedIn: Warren Pulley

• Twitter/X: @CrisisWireSec

• Instagram: @crisiswire

• Facebook: CrisisWire

• Quora: CrisisWire Profile

Training Videos:

• Workplace Violence Prevention Training Series

• Behavioral Threat Assessment Fundamentals

Get Professional Threat Assessment Services

If your organization needs expert guidance implementing AI-powered threat detection, developing threat assessment capabilities, or responding to active threat situations, CrisisWire provides:

✅ Threat Assessment Program Development - Custom policy creation, team training, implementation support

✅ AI System Evaluation & Implementation - Technology selection, integration, optimization

✅ Emergency Threat Consultation - 24/7 availability for active cases requiring immediate expert guidance

✅ Workplace Violence Prevention Training - Staff education, supervisor training, executive briefings

✅ Campus Safety Assessments - Comprehensive security audits for K-12 schools and universities

✅ Corporate Security Consulting - Executive protection, insider threat programs, crisis management

Contact CrisisWire Today:📧 crisiswire@proton.me🌐 rypulmedia.wixsite.com/crisiswire🔗 bit.ly/crisiswire

Serving organizations nationwide with zero-incident track record protecting lives in the world's most dangerous environments.

Tags: #WorkplaceViolence #ThreatAssessment #AISecurity #BehavioralThreatAssessment #WorkplaceSafety #InsiderThreat #SecurityManagement #ViolencePrevention #BTAM #CorporateSecurity

Related Articles:

• The Complete 2025 Guide to Building a Behavioral Threat Assessment Team

• School Active Shooter Preparedness: 7 Critical Mistakes Districts Make

• Insider Threats Cost Companies $17.4M in 2025: Early Warning Signs Every Executive Must Know

© 2025 CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions. All rights reserved.