Anil Puri CMD, APS group A thought leader and an action catalyzer rolled into one – Anil Puri is a rare combination of a visionary, and one who has mastered the art of strategic and tactical thinking to the core. He has been using this combination to seed new ideas and to lead them to their implementation on-ground. This has been a consistent feature of his career. He has rich experience of approximately 35 years in corporate in diverse domains & from functional managerial level to apex as chairman of a corporate group. His acumen for handling crisis management has prompted him to share his exclusive and niche experiences. He will be discussing the topic in four distinct parts in separate articles; Part 1 – Hostage situation & ways to deal with hostage situation; Part 2 – Negotiation skills; Part 3 – How to survive an abduction or hostage situation, and finally in Part 4 – The role of corporate security. He will take you through realistically at ground zero in visualization and response matrix through series of these four articles. His second article illustrates at length the role of positive attitude in negotiation skills to counter hostage situation. Dynamics of Hostage Negotiation Hostage negotiation is all about psychology, and successful crisis negotiators are among the most skilled practical psychologists I’ve ever met. Think about it – in the typical hostage scenario, lives are at imminent risk of violent death at the hands of a depressed, suicidal, homicidal, delusional, drug fueled, or cold-blooded hostage-taker, often in the midst of a chaotic and uncontrolled workplace or family environment. Resolution of hostage crises may take hours or even days of incredibly focused and intense negotiation, and require the use of virtually every type of skilled communication strategy in the crisis intervention skill box. Although hostage situations can vary greatly based on the motivations of the hostage-taker and the exact circumstances surrounding the incident, there are some basic facts that apply to all hostage situations. The hostage-taker wants to obtain something as ransom. This can be as simple as money, personal safety or safe passage to another country, or it can involve complicated political goals. The target of the hostage-taker is not the hostage itself, it is some third party (a person, a company or a government) that can provide whatever the hostage-taker wants. The hostages are bargaining chips. They may have symbolic value (e.g., 1972 Munich Olympics, in which the target was the Israeli government and the hostages were Israeli athletes), but the hostages themselves could be anyone. Whether it is a barricaded crisis situation or negotiations with a bad actor holding hostages, the keys to success are the skills of the negotiator or intervener to effectively communicate. Little else matters if communications is not established, maintained and utilized in such a way that management of the instant situation becomes possible. Most negotiators think that they are effective communicators. Some are, many are not. Communications must be practiced over and over again to assure proficiency. This article provides the rudiments of the skills needed for success in the field. Hostage Crises: The statistics – The facts & fiction Fewer than 20 percent of law enforcement critical incidents deal with actual hostage taking, and most crises are successfully resolved without the loss of life. In fact, containment and negotiation strategies yield a 95 percent success rate in terms of resolving a hostage crisis without fatalities to either hostages or hostage-takers (HTs), which is a remarkable statistic for any form of lifesaving crisis intervention strategy. There are three especially dangerous periods during a hostage crisis. The first is the initial 15-45 minutes when confusion and panic are likely to be greatest. The second is during the surrender of the HTs, when strong emotions, ambivalence, and lack of coordination among HTs and crisis team members can cause an otherwise successful resolution to go bad. Finally, tactical assault to rescue the hostages carries the highest casualty rate, probably for two interrelated reasons. First, the very fact that tactical intervention is necessary indicates that all reasonable attempts to resolve the crisis by negotiation have failed, and that violence against the hostages has already taken place, or is imminent. Second, if a firefight ensues, the resulting panic and confusion may result in hostages being inadvertently killed or injured. Phases through which Hostage situations moves Initial phase: This phase is violent and brief and lasts as long as it takes for the hostage-takers to make their assault and subdue the hostages. The end of this phase is often marked by the presentation of the hostage-taker’s demands. Negotiation phase: At this point, law-enforcement officials are on the scene, and the demands have probably been received. This phase can last hours, days or months and could also be referred to as ‘the standoff phase.’ Physically, nothing about the situation changes greatly. The hostages and the hostage-takers stay in the same place. However, a lot is happening during this phase in terms of the relationships developing between everyone involved. The negotiator’s job boils down to manipulating those relationships in a way that results in a peaceful ending. Termination phase: This is the brief, sometimes violent final phase. This phase has one of three results – the hostage-takers surrender peacefully and are arrested, police assault the hostage-takers and kill or arrest them, or the hostage-takers’ demands are granted and they escape. The fate of the hostages does not necessarily depend on what happens during the termination phase. Even when the hostage-takers give up, they may kill hostages during the negotiations. Often, hostages are killed either accidentally by police or intentionally by their captors during an assault. There have even been cases in which the hostage-takers were granted their demands, but they killed the hostage anyway. Post-incident stage: In this the effects of the incident play themselves out. These effects can include changes in the status of the groups responsible, shifts in the relationships between world governments or increases in security. Negotiation &…
