At a time of heightened concerns about physical threats to executives and those in leadership roles, a survey reveals what is top of mind for business heads. It also is a reminder of that physical security is an important wealth management topic.

Murders of senior executives in recent months, for example UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in late 2024 and of Blackstone executive Wesley LePatner in July were among shocking incidents that have put physical security at the top of the C-suite agenda.

And technology, while it has its place in security, is not a complete fix for threats people face, whether against physical attackers, fraudsters or activists, this publication has heard. 

Concern about the safety of business leaders has risen sharply, as nearly half (42 per cent) of security chiefs from large, global companies say the threat of violence toward company bosses has increased in the last two years. That is one of the conclusions from the World Security Report, published last week. The study was commissioned by Allied Universal®, the security and facility services provider, and its international business, G4S.

Some 97 per cent of global institutional investors say it is important for companies to invest in security for their executives; seven in 10 say contributions of senior executives represent 30 per cent or more of the value of the companies they invest in.

FWR asked Edward Marshall (pictured below), founder and CEO of Presage Global, an intelligence-powered risk and business advisory firm, what lessons should be learned from the report and recent grim events. (Marshall is also a member of FWR’s editorial board.)

Edward Marshall

“This report highlights a dangerous paradox that persists: while security technology budgets may be rising, many family offices and corporate C-suites continue to bet on technology as a risk reduction silver bullet,” he said. “They're investing in advanced cameras that are more akin to 'security jewelry’ –focused on reaction rather than prevention. They're deploying sophisticated and expensive cyber tools without the expertise to use them or configure them properly. And they're checking boxes with superficial digital background checks instead of building robust insider threat programs. It's security theater, not security strategy.”

The how and why
“Here's an uncomfortable truth: technology without coupling it with proper risk intelligence analysis can often be expensive hardware. You can remove all your leaked personally identifiable data from every data broker (which is not possible), but if you haven't identified why and how your information continues to leak, you're bailing water from a boat while ignoring the holes,” Marshall continued. “And remember [that] nation states and other malicious actors have already collected your leaked data. They don't care about takedown requests.”

The report cast a wide net in finding out executives’ views. It surveyed 2,352 chief security officers (CSOs) or those in equivalent roles, working for medium and large, global companies, in 31 countries, with total annual revenue exceeding $25 trillion. The study also incorporates the perspectives of 200 global institutional investors managing over $1 trillion in assets.

Almost half (49 per cent) of security chiefs say they have enhanced their security procedures (i.e. enhanced background checks, on site firearms or explosives screening). Some 44 per cent are monitoring online threats (i.e. social media, deep web, dark web); 40 per cent offer training and preparedness for leaders, such as self-defense, situational awareness, de-escalation tactics. The survey found that 35 per cent of security heads provide leaders with personal/close security personnel, and more than a third give them personal protective equipment (such as body armor, secure vehicles, emergency escape masks).

Misinformed
Misinformation is a big problem, the report found. Three quarters of CSOs (75 per cent) say their companies were targeted by such a campaign last year. And 42 per cent say mis/disinformation motivates at least half of threat actors targeting their businesses. Activist groups, who often deploy this, increasingly pose a physical security risk to facilities and executives, according to 85 per cent of investors, the study continued. 

“In a world of increasing polarization, and when mistruths and untruths can be shared instantaneously, companies and their senior leaders face heightened risks,” Steve Jones, Allied Universal global chairman and CEO, said. “As a CEO, this impacts me personally and professionally. Now more than ever, personal safety is on my mind and the minds of my loved ones. Professionally, I’ve seen an increase in our customers’ concern for the safety of their employees.” 

A shrewd approach
Presage’s Marshall said there are several traps that executives and groups such as family offices must avoid.

“This misplaced faith in technology Band-Aids makes family offices particularly vulnerable,” he said. They occupy a precarious middle ground – attractive enough to draw sophisticated threat actors while frequently lacking the enterprise-level security infrastructure to defend against them. Attackers recognize this asymmetry: they can deploy advanced tactics against high-value targets protected by retail-level defenses, unfortunately, dressed up with pricey security and privacy tech.”

“It's precisely this gap – between perceived and actual security – that drove our team at Presage Global to partner with Nines on important research into The Estate Security Gap. We're examining how high net worth families actually manage security, risk, and crisis preparedness across their private residences. We want to help families to understand what genuine residential risk readiness looks like and, because many of them are sitting on preventable vulnerabilities they've never identified, protected by systems they've never truly stress-tested, following protocols that exist only on paper,” Marshall said.   

Fraught times
“Societal pressures, from inflation and tariffs to immigration issues and global conflicts, are driving stress, which in turn fuels desperation, radicalization, and violence,” Global Guardian CEO Dale Buckner told this publication. “We’ve seen this in the shooting of a healthcare CEO, crypto kidnappings, political violence, and terrorist attacks. All it takes is one small trigger for someone to say, 'I've had enough’ – and it is extremely difficult to stop these lone wolf attacks.”

“When experiencing personal tragedies, such as denied medical care or bankruptcy, people might look for someone to blame. In the United States, this often translates to individuals targeting corporations or executives.

“Internationally, the same pattern applies. Conflicts like Russia-Ukraine, Russian attacks on critical infrastructure across the UK and incursions into other European countries like Latvia, Romania, Finland, Estonia and Georgia, and global divisions over Israel-Palestine deepen friction. Combined with personal struggles, these issues push individuals to seek scapegoats.

“Western brands, once admired, now face backlash in parts of the world due to anti-US and anti-Western sentiment. Domestic unrest, international conflicts, and brand hostility together have made Western executives prime targets,” Buckner said. 

Predictions
In other findings in the report, it found that over the next 12 months, external threats are expected to jump to the same level as internal threats, which were previously more significant. Fraud is expected to rise to 30 per cent next year, up from 22 per cent in 2024.

Theft of company physical property is anticipated to rise to 28 per cent from 20 per cent in 2024. Malicious damage to company property is expected to jump to 27 per cent, from 16 per cent in 2024. The top two internal security threats for the next year are leaking sensitive information (32 per cent) and unauthorized access to company resources or data (28 per cent).

Global Guardian's Buckner ruminated on the kind of advice executives should receive.

"Protecting C-suite leaders starts at home: securing their primary and vacation residences, yachts, jets, and any other assets they may have, both physically and digitally. Conduct thorough scans on routers and Wi-Fi, online searches on the open, deep, and dark web to identify and compartmentalize personal information about executives and their families, ensuring addresses, schools, spouses' details, and philanthropic contributions are hidden. Implement professional, real-time camera surveillance and advanced access control beyond consumer-grade systems. This is critical to detect threats as early as possible.

"At the office, meticulously control information about C-suite movements, speaking engagements, and board meetings. Access to leadership floors must be tightly restricted to only those who need it. Lobbies once designed to impress are starting to be hardened with bulletproof barriers, TSA-style checkpoints, real-time surveillance with weapon detection, and strict access control. 

"Security teams should be digitally monitoring C-suite members and brand reputation in near real-time, setting up systems to red-flag direct threats every 12 to 24 hours, especially those tied to brand-damaging causes. When executives speak at conferences, delay releasing information about their attendance until 24 hours prior or as close to the event as possible to minimize planning time for potential threats," he said.

There are other measures executives should consider, Buckner said.

"For travel, executives should avoid taxis, rideshares, and standard car services in medium to high-risk environments. This includes previously-considered safe Western European countries like France, Spain, and Germany. Professional executive protection teams are essential, with agents coordinating with local law enforcement and monitoring from multiple vantage points. Public forums should have Secret Service-level protection incorporated, moving beyond the outdated reliance on a single guard presence," he added.

Fieldwork for the World Security Report was carried out between March 21, 2025 and April 16, 2025.