How Leadership Shapes Safer Organizations By Building a Culture of Security

Most organizations treat security as a compliance obligation – annual training sessions, policy acknowledgments, checkbox exercises. High-performing companies embed security into organizational culture through leadership commitment, employee engagement, and transparent communication. Organizations who work on developing positive cultures have stronger defenses, fewer incidents, and workforces that view security as shared responsibility.

Leadership Sets the Tone for Security Programs in Organizations

Based on a study by the Department of Energy (DOE), leadership behavior determines whether organizations develop strong security cultures or superficial compliance programs. This research examined eight major facilities and found that workers mirror leadership commitment when leaders demonstrate genuine priority-setting and resource allocation, not just policy statements.​

Sites with strong cultures operated under “shared governance” models where:

• Leadership and workforce maintain close relationships built on trust.

• Management spends time in operational areas.

• Employees feel empowered to raise concerns without retaliation.

• Security issues take precedence over schedule pressures.

Research on culture in special operations units found that organizations whose leaders set a positive, tight-knit group focused, mission-oriented culture showed significantly higher performance than those treating it as secondary responsibility.​ Just as in elite military units, private security leaders must resist overconfidence, encourage humility and learning, and reinforce ethical norms through stories, incentives, and oversight.

Why Traditional Security Awareness Training Falls Short

Annual security training is nearly universal. NIST research measuring federal security programs found that 84 percent rely on training completion rates as their primary effectiveness measure. Yet University of Chicago research found no correlation between recent training completion and ability to avoid phishing attacks.​

The problem isn’t necessarily training, it is how the security training is deployed.:

• Interactive methods outperform static presentations.

• Most organizations default to the easiest, least effective approaches

• When security becomes something employees passively endure, behavioral change doesn’t occur.

Effective Organizational Security Culture

Effective security cultures share common characteristics:

Visible leadership commitment to security

When executives demonstrate security is a high priority through actions, not words, employees follow. Budget allocation, time investment, and leadership participation signal whether security actually matters.

Empowered employees to be security-minded

Organizations where employees felt safe raising concerns, trusted management would address issues, and believed “stop work” authority would be honored developed stronger security cultures. Fear of retribution destroys security culture faster than any external threat.​

Continuous engagement 

Regular leader interaction with frontline staff correlates with better safety climate and lower burnout. Security isn’t a set-and-forget initiative; it requires ongoing communication.​

Meaningful measurement

Organizations tracking behavioral change, incident trends, and employee engagement gain insight into cultural strength. Measure participation in security committees, frequency of employee-reported concerns, and employee-led discussions.

Working With Security Consultants Who Understand the Importance of Organizational Culture

Security consultants who understand organizational culture bring value beyond technical assessments. They help organizational leadership develop sustainable programs that employees embrace rather than resent. They identify gaps between stated priorities and actual behaviors. They provide frameworks for meaningful measurement that reveal cultural strengths and weaknesses.

Organizations serious about security culture recognize it requires dedicated focus, leadership accountability, and continuous reinforcement. The difference between checking compliance boxes and building resilient organizations lies in whether leadership treats security as something done to employees or something built with them. At Convoy Group, we always approach our security consulting from the latter perspective.