One of the most frequent and difficult problems for all of us who work in executive protection is undoubtedly the fact that most of the protégés assume two different roles at the same time: one that corresponds naturally to them as protégés, and another, which does not correspond to them, as heads of their own escort.
It is important to point out that the executive, in most cases, is not qualified for either of the two roles; neither for the role of protégé, much less for the role of chief bodyguard, which he often tries to usurp. Needless to say, the fact of exercising an activity, but without having the relevant skills in a dangerous profession, implies a latent and constant risk that has already cost the lives of many bodyguards and protégés.
Executives usually occupy a very high hierarchical position within their organizations; they are used to giving orders and it is easy for them to start directing their protection agents without having the knowledge to do so, they even think that no knowledge is needed to do so. On the other hand, most of the time, escorts and protection service managers do not dare to contradict executives for the justified fear of losing their jobs or losing the client, if it is a security company that provides the protection service. So they let the user "play" with their security equipment, endangering their lives and the lives of their escorts.
The users often tell the escorts how far away they consider the protectors should be in different situations; they send the escorts with everything and vehicle to perform different tasks while they are in a restaurant; they divide the protection team by ordering the driver to perform some activities while ordering the escort to do others; they send the protectors to rest and leave them "free" before they finish their activities, or they send them to take care of their friends or relatives. All these impertinences have been the cause of several attacks and kidnappings.
The most recent example is the kidnapping of the candidate for mayor of Uruapan, Michoacán, Omar Plancarte Hernández, in May of this year, who was deprived of his freedom by a commando of criminals. Although he had a large group of bodyguards, they were not accompanying him, as he had ordered them to leave to attend to his wife. This is just one example of many where executives put themselves in grave danger and even lose their lives by "playing" at being the boss of their own bodyguards.
Imagine that the protégé is the owner of an airline and just because he is the owner, he gets on a plane and, without being trained, enters the cockpit and assumes the role of captain. Fortunately this does not happen, and neither would the pilots allow it, as it is a risk to everyone's life.
However, if in the executive protection In the same way, the lives of all those involved are in danger, why do executives take these attitudes, which would not occur to them if we take the example of the airplane or even if we take another type of profession as an example?
First of all, the executive is generally influenced by two fallacies:
The first: In executive protection no specialized knowledge is required other than knowing how to hit and shoot. So the executive can send his escort as he pleases.
The second: To have protection it is enough to have a couple of armed agents without any structure or protocol.
On the other hand, the escorts, security administrators, as well as the protection businessmen, do not oppose (as a pilot would) to the whims of the executive, sometimes out of ignorance, but, in most cases, out of fear of being left without a job (or without their profit, in the case of a security businessman). The result of all this chaos is dead or wounded bodyguards and kidnapped or murdered executives, sometimes even by their own protectors, as happened in the case of Mexican businessman Adolfo Lagos.