Analyzing Active Threat Response Models: A Comparative Study

Executive Summary

Purpose and Key Findings: This white paper provides an in-depth comparative analysis of active threat response models, focusing on the RUN, HIDE, FIGHT methodology, the A.L.I.C.E. response model, the A.D.D. (Avoid, Deny, Defend) approach, and the Strategos 3-OUT (Lock Out, Get Out, Take Out) Response Model. The objective analysis—grounded in research and real-world outcomes—evaluates each model’s effectiveness, flexibility, and applicability across varied situations. Key findings highlight differences in approach, training requirements, and situational responsiveness, underscoring the need for adaptable, comprehensive strategies to enhance safety and preparedness.

Introduction to the Response Models

• RUN, HIDE, FIGHT: A linear model emphasizing sequential actions starting with evacuation as the preferred option.
• A.L.I.C.E.: Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate—proactive, information-driven strategies.
• A.D.D. (Avoid, Deny, Defend): Avoid the attacker, deny access, defend as last resort.
• Strategos 3-OUT: Principle-based, non-linear; Lock Out, Get Out, Take Out for dynamic, situational decision-making.

Recommendation: After thorough analysis, Strategos recommends the 3-OUT Response Model as the most effective and versatile strategy due to its flexibility, non-linear structure, and validation through extensive training and real-world application.

Introduction

The Rising Need for Active Threat Response Training. Increasing active threat incidents demand effective, comprehensive training and rapid, decisive action.

Evolution of Response Models

Response models have progressed from RUN, HIDE, FIGHT to more adaptable frameworks like A.L.I.C.E. and A.D.D., recognizing the complex dynamics of active threats. At the forefront is Strategos’ 3-OUT, a principle-based, non-linear approach supporting swift, context-informed decisions.

Objectives of the White Paper

To conduct a thorough comparative analysis of the above models, evaluating critical selection criteria to illuminate strengths and weaknesses—supporting organizations in choosing the best-fit model for optimal preparedness and safety.

Imperative for Continuous Evaluation

Organizations should continually reassess models using lessons learned and research on physiological/psychological responses under stress, evolving strategies based on experience and insights—not merely reacting but proactively improving outcomes.

Selection Criteria for Active Threat Response Models

1. ≤ 3 Response Options: Simpler choices speed decisions (Hick’s Law); 3-OUT’s three options support quick recall and action.
2. Non-Ambiguous Options: Clear, straightforward choices outperform ambiguous terms found in some models.
3. Evacuation Not Always Primary: Due to vulnerabilities during evacuation, Lock Out is often prioritized to reduce exposure.
4. Non-Linear Model: Decisions must adapt to location and environment; 3-OUT supports out-of-order selection.
5. Principle-Based: Universally applicable across diverse settings.
6. Tested & Evaluated: Evidence-based validation in training and real-world events.

Section 1: The 3-OUT Model Explained

Developed by Strategos International in 2007, the 3-OUT model is an evolutionary, principle-based, non-linear methodology designed to enhance decision-making in high-stress scenarios.

Detailed Description

• LOCK OUT: Secure yourself by locking or barricading; especially effective when evacuation isn’t safe/feasible.
• GET OUT: Evacuate quickly and safely if you have a clear, accessible route to minimize exposure.
• TAKE OUT: As a last resort, actively counter/disrupt the attacker if you cannot safely Lock Out or Get Out.

Pros of the 3-OUT Model

• Flexibility & Situational Responsiveness: Choose the most appropriate option for your circumstances; not bound to a fixed sequence.
• Non-Linear Decision-Making: Decisions reflect proximity to the threat and environmental factors.
• Emphasis on Proactive Planning: Encourages a quick, “15-Second 3-OUT Assessment” to evaluate Lock Out, Get Out, or Take Out.
• Universally Applicable: Indoor/outdoor—workplace, home, shopping centers, restaurants, houses of worship, and large events.

Comparative Analysis: 3-OUT vs. Other Models

Adaptability to Contemporary Threats: The 3-OUT framework enables rapid, real-time decisions and avoids the rigidity of sequential models.

Proactive Planning & Preparedness: Emphasizes situational awareness, critical thinking, and regular drills so responses become reflexive under stress.

Comprehensive, Flexible Strategies: By encompassing Lock Out, Get Out, Take Out, 3-OUT provides a toolkit that fits schools, workplaces, public venues, and events—without forcing a prescribed sequence.

Conclusion of the Comparative Analysis: Across RUN, HIDE, FIGHT; A.L.I.C.E.; A.D.D.; and 3-OUT, the analysis identifies 3-OUT as best aligned with modern needs for adaptability, planning, and flexibility.

Recommendations for Implementation

Strategic Considerations

1. Assess Preparedness: Evaluate current plans, communications, and readiness.
2. Customize to Your Environment: Apply 3-OUT to your layout, occupancy, and unique risks.
3. Engage Stakeholders: Secure buy-in across staff, leadership, security, and local law enforcement.

Training Program Development

1. Comprehensive Curriculum: Cover all 3-OUT strategies with theory, practice, and simulations.
2. Regular Drills & Simulations: Vary scenario complexity; build “second-nature” responses.
3. Continuous Learning: Use quick “chalk-talk” scenarios and feedback loops.

Addressing Challenges

1. Overcoming Resistance: Communicate transparently; emphasize individual/collective safety and preparedness gains.
2. Resource Allocation: Plan time, budget, and staffing to support a sustained program.
3. Maintaining Readiness: Schedule refreshers and update training to reflect best practices and real-world learning.

Pilot Course & Feedback Mechanisms

• Start with a Pilot: Represent a cross-section of your population.
• Scored Feedback: Use pre/post assessments on fear, preparedness, and confidence; compare with existing trainings; iterate on results.

Choosing a Delivery Model

1. In-Person (End Users): Direct interaction and hands-on practice.
2. Train-the-Trainer: Build internal champions for ongoing, tailored delivery.
3. E-Learning: Flexible, interactive modules, quizzes, and scenarios for distributed teams.
4. Virtual Reality (VR): Immersive, high-fidelity scenario practice in a safe environment.

Integrating the Comparisons

Each model has merits; however, 3-OUT’s adaptability, comprehensive training focus, and demonstrated effectiveness make it a strong candidate for organizations prioritizing flexibility and thorough preparedness—especially where individuals are dispersed across complex environments.

Conclusion

The successful implementation of the 3-OUT Response Model requires careful planning, strategic alignment, a comprehensive training program, and proactive change management. Pilot the program, collect and analyze participant feedback, and select the best delivery model to enhance preparedness while aligning with broader safety objectives. Commit to ongoing evaluation and adaptation to remain at the forefront of active-threat readiness.

About Strategos International

Founded in 2002, Strategos International has trained and served 400,000+ individuals across military, government, law enforcement, corporate, education, healthcare, and faith-based sectors—providing training and consulting in 15 countries and all 50 U.S. states. Core offerings include the innovative 3-OUT Active Threat Response Model. Strategos is recognized for rigorous training, high-caliber instructors, and tailored protection solutions.

Contact: [email protected] · www.strategosintl.com
300 N. Osage Street, Independence, MO 64050 · 816-795-3768.