Risk Insider: Jack Hampton

Help Wanted: Cyber Security Neurologist

By: | January 10, 2017 • 2 min read
John (Jack) Hampton is a Professor of Business at St. Peter’s University, a core faculty member at the International School of Management (Paris), and a Risk Insider at Risk and Insurance magazine where he was named a 2018 All Star. He was Executive Director of the Risk and Insurance Management Society (RIMS), dean of the schools of business at Seton Hall and Connecticut State universities, and provost of the College of Insurance and SUNY Maritime College in New York City.

When we think about how some companies protect their electronic assets, it brings to mind “leech therapy.” This method has been used since ancient times to treat illness and disease. Many cyber security efforts resemble it. We perform a procedure and the patient improves. We don’t know if it was our treatment or just luck. We take credit for the success either way.

Medical advancement recognized that the human body is constantly under attack by unseen aggressors. At a basic level, antibiotics kill bacteria. We prevent heart attacks by reducing cholesterol and high blood pressure. Surgeons eliminate cancer by exorcising tumors.

At more complex levels, doctors move past a single remedy.  Pharmaceutical cocktails treat HIV, and cancer and holistic medicine helps us understand the need to make lifestyle changes.

These lessons are needed in cyber risk management. Information technology specialists build firewalls and insist upon complex passwords. They work at one level but fall short in the face of constantly mutating electronic pathogens.

To start, we need agreement on cyber security goals. The risk manager seeks to avoid damage to assets, interruption to operations and liability lawsuits. The underwriter wants to identify and insure named perils and avoid all-risk policies that cannot identify black swans. The CFO wants insurance to protect big losses but balks at incurring high costs without assurance that massive cyber damage will be reimbursed by the coverage.

These individual viewpoints can be reconciled by a “cyber security neurologist,” an individual with the knowledge and training to protect the total cyber body.

A neurological disorder is an abnormality in the brain, spinal cord or nervous system. Damage includes paralysis, seizures, confusion and pain.

A cyber neurological disorder can affect the (1) “brain” (computers, servers, and knowledge of work force), (2) electronic “central nervous system” (business disruption and liability) and (3) “peripheral nervous system” (liability exposures with customers, suppliers, partners and regulators).

There are many medical neurological disorders, some relatively common, but many quite rare. They may be treated by different specialists using preventative measures, lifestyle changes, physiotherapy, pain management and surgery.

Cyber neurological disorders are often treated differently. Organizations build firewalls without changing practices, processes and cultural lifestyles that leave doorways open. If this is your perspective, the next step is likely to be pain management.

Advertisement




What if we treat cyber risk like a peanut disorder, a type of hypersensitivity provoked by an allergen? A medical study just turned treatment on its head. Previously, doctors diagnosed the allergy and told us to keep totally away from any food with even a trace of peanut content. Teenage and adult peanut intolerance soared with this guidance.

A new study shows allergen immunotherapy or desensitization dramatically increases tolerance. Small doses of peanut butter starting with infants greatly reduces the likelihood of the disorder later on.

Cyber immunotherapy could treat the whole system. We can sensitize authorized users and correct behaviors that are careless or unmindful. We can separate data that needs the highest security from routine information available all over the internet. We can recognize that cyber risk is not a disease that needs an IT brain surgeon when the real problem is we are not protecting the entire electronic neurological system.

In conclusion, you may ask, “Why does everyone pick on poor leech therapy?” To comply with the Equal Time Rule, you are directed to Mehdi, a self-described Leech Therapist in Australia. He points out bloodletting “is still thriving today.”

Sony Pictures, Yahoo and the Democratic National Committee are victims of recent cyber attacks. Maybe they needed more than electronic “bloodletting.”

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

4 Companies That Rocked It by Treating Injured Workers as Equals; Not Adversaries

The 2018 Teddy Award winners built their programs around people, not claims, and offer proof that a worker-centric approach is a smarter way to operate.
By: | October 30, 2018 • 3 min read

Across the workers’ compensation industry, the concept of a worker advocacy model has been around for a while, but has only seen notable adoption in recent years.

Even among those not adopting a formal advocacy approach, mindsets are shifting. Formerly claims-centric programs are becoming worker-centric and it’s a win all around: better outcomes; greater productivity; safer, healthier employees and a stronger bottom line.

Advertisement




That’s what you’ll see in this month’s issue of Risk & Insurance® when you read the profiles of the four recipients of the 2018 Theodore Roosevelt Workers’ Compensation and Disability Management Award, sponsored by PMA Companies. These four programs put workers front and center in everything they do.

“We were focused on building up a program with an eye on our partner experience. Cost was at the bottom of the list. Doing a better job by our partners was at the top,” said Steve Legg, director of risk management for Starbucks.

Starbucks put claims reporting in the hands of its partners, an exemplary act of trust. The coffee company also put itself in workers’ shoes to identify and remove points of friction.

That led to a call center run by Starbucks’ TPA and a dedicated telephonic case management team so that partners can speak to a live person without the frustration of ‘phone tag’ and unanswered questions.

“We were focused on building up a program with an eye on our partner experience. Cost was at the bottom of the list. Doing a better job by our partners was at the top.” — Steve Legg, director of risk management, Starbucks

Starbucks also implemented direct deposit for lost-time pay, eliminating stressful wait times for injured partners, and allowing them to focus on healing.

For Starbucks, as for all of the 2018 Teddy Award winners, the approach is netting measurable results. With higher partner satisfaction, it has seen a 50 percent decrease in litigation.

Teddy winner Main Line Health (MLH) adopted worker advocacy in a way that goes far beyond claims.

Employees who identify and report safety hazards can take credit for their actions by sending out a formal “Employee Safety Message” to nearly 11,000 mailboxes across the organization.

“The recognition is pretty cool,” said Steve Besack, system director, claims management and workers’ compensation for the health system.

MLH also takes a non-adversarial approach to workers with repeat injuries, seeing them as a resource for identifying areas of improvement.

“When you look at ‘repeat offenders’ in an unconventional way, they’re a great asset to the program, not a liability,” said Mike Miller, manager, workers’ compensation and employee safety for MLH.

Teddy winner Monmouth County, N.J. utilizes high-tech motion capture technology to reduce the chance of placing new hires in jobs that are likely to hurt them.

Monmouth County also adopted numerous wellness initiatives that help workers manage their weight and improve their wellbeing overall.

“You should see the looks on their faces when their cholesterol is down, they’ve lost weight and their blood sugar is better. We’ve had people lose 30 and 40 pounds,” said William McGuane, the county’s manager of benefits and workers’ compensation.

Advertisement




Do these sound like minor program elements? The math says otherwise: Claims severity has plunged from $5.5 million in 2009 to $1.3 million in 2017.

At the University of Pennsylvania, putting workers first means getting out from behind the desk and finding out what each one of them is tasked with, day in, day out — and looking for ways to make each of those tasks safer.

Regular observations across the sprawling campus have resulted in a phenomenal number of process and equipment changes that seem simple on their own, but in combination have created a substantially safer, healthier campus and improved employee morale.

UPenn’s workers’ comp costs, in the seven-digit figures in 2009, have been virtually cut in half.

Risk & Insurance® is proud to honor the work of these four organizations. We hope their stories inspire other organizations to be true partners with the employees they depend on. &

Michelle Kerr is associate editor of Risk & Insurance. She can be reached at [email protected]