Workplace security top of mind with HR leaders after Manhattan office shooting
In the wake of this week’s shocking office shooting in Manhattan, organizations everywhere are grappling with how to reassure employees while genuinely improving workplace safety.
The challenge goes far beyond installing new security cameras or updating emergency protocols — it’s about fundamentally rethinking how companies approach both physical protection and psychological well-being in the workplace.
“HR leaders must first recognize that fear is a rational response to real events — ignoring it undermines trust,” says George L. Vergolias, a clinical psychologist and chief clinical officer at consultancy R3 Continuum. “Reassurance begins with acknowledgment and transparency. Leaders should validate employee concerns while clearly outlining the organization’s proactive safety measures.”
That perspective is driving a significant shift in how companies respond to workplace security concerns. Rather than treating safety as a separate, technical issue handled by facilities teams, organizations are discovering that effective responses require a deeply human approach that acknowledges the emotional impact of traumatic events.
Marissa Andrada, chief culture and transformation officer at WUF World, which promotes and facilitates pet-friendly policies in the workplace, emphasizes that the initial response to a tragedy sets the tone for everything that follows. “First, acknowledge the fear. Ignoring it or offering overly corporate messaging only erodes trust,” she says. “Employees need to hear directly from leaders that their safety and wellness — both physical and psychological — is a top priority. It is critically important for this message to be delivered and heard in-person if possible or via video conferencing. Communication needs to be human-to-human contact, not via email or Slack.”
That human-centered approach is transforming how companies think about workplace security. Sujay Saha, founder and president of consultancy Cortico-X, advocates for moving away from traditional top-down safety mandates toward collaborative approaches that engage employees as active participants.
“Rather than top-down communications, create employee-led safety committees where staff can actively participate in identifying concerns and solutions,” he suggests. “Host informal coffee chats or ‘safety circles’ where employees can share feelings and ideas in comfortable settings. This shifts the dynamic from ‘management telling us what to do’ to ‘we’re solving this together,’ which reduces anxiety and increases buy-in.”
The practical implications of such a shift are significant. Companies are offering multiple ways for employees to engage with safety planning, recognizing that people process trauma and anxiety differently. Some want detailed emergency procedures while others prefer general reassurance. Saha notes that organizations should “offer multiple communication channels and formats — visual guides, video walkthroughs, one-on-one conversations with supervisors or peer buddy systems. Let employees choose their level of involvement in safety planning and training.”
At the same time, organizations are strengthening their technical security measures, but doing so through a more comprehensive lens. Vergolias points to established best practices, including creating behavioral threat assessment teams, training staff to recognize early warning signs, implementing secure visitor protocols, and reinforcing clear pathways for reporting concerns confidentially.
He emphasizes that companies shouldn’t try to handle these challenges alone: “Most organizations do not have the internal expertise to adequately evaluate and mitigate threats, so it is critical to have proper consultation with trained experts in this area.” The ANSI/ASIS Workplace Violence and Active Assailant Prevention Standard provides a framework that many organizations are now implementing.
The quality of leadership communication during such critical moments has emerged as perhaps the most important factor in maintaining employee confidence and trust. Andrada stresses that “authentic, vulnerable communication is always best. Employees want to hear from real humans with heart, not templated statements. Acknowledge what’s happening. Share what you’re doing. Remind them of the resources available. And don’t go silent after one message — keep the dialogue open and ongoing.”
Vergolias agrees, noting that effective communication in high-anxiety situations must be “timely, clear, and grounded in both facts and empathy. Leaders should avoid vague reassurances or delayed responses, which can amplify fear and mistrust. Instead, use plain language to outline what is known, what’s being done, and what support is available—while acknowledging uncertainty when it exists.”
In the wake of the New York shooting, companies are already establishing what effective crisis response looks like. Vergolias describes how following a similar incident, a major healthcare system in the Midwest rapidly activated its threat assessment team, increased onsite security presence, offered trauma-informed counseling to employees and held daily town halls to keep staff informed. That transparency, swift action, and emphasis on employee well-being helped restore a sense of trust and control, he relates.
The key insight from the experts is that speed and empathy must work together. Andrada observes that “organizations that empower local leadership to respond quickly with empathy and decisiveness fare much better than those who wait for a top-down directive. After a tragedy, speed matters but so does tone. The best responses are immediate, compassionate and backed by follow-through.”
Meanwhile, beyond immediate crisis response, employers are also recognizing this moment as an opportunity to strengthen the overall workplace culture. Saha advocates for framing safety as part of overall employee wellness rather than a separate, scary topic; integrating stress management, mindfulness sessions and resilience building into safety programming; and offering “wellness check-ins” that address both physical safety and emotional wellbeing, “showing employees they’re valued as whole people, not just workers to protect.”
That broader approach includes practical accommodations for employees who may need time to process traumatic news. Saha suggests offering “reset days” after troubling incidents, allowing for informal mental health conversations, and providing options like quiet spaces for decompression or modified work arrangements during high-stress periods.
The goal, according to the experts, is to transform how employees experience workplace safety altogether. “This approach transforms safety from something that happens ‘to’ employees into something they actively participate in, turning a source of anxiety into an opportunity for connection, empowerment, and demonstrated organizational care,” Saha explains.
Andrada emphasizes that consistency is crucial for building and maintaining trust over time. “Ultimately, the most reassuring thing a company can do is show up and remain consistent. Say what you’ll do and do what you say. That’s how trust is rebuilt, one honest step at a time.”