This post is about conflict management, personal safety, and Dynamis training. Vanessa O’Dea talks to coach-trainer Alex Hunter about a recent two-day personal safety course for Probation Housing Officers — and the everyday risks these community-based workers face.
Why provide personal safety training for housing staff?
Dynamis has provided personal safety training for housing and related teams all over the UK since 2006 — starting with Edinburgh City Council, then rolling out to Peterborough, Dundee, the London Borough of Hackney, and housing organisations across the country.
In this interview, Alex Hunter talks about recent training we delivered for a Probation Housing Officer team facing the challenges of conflict and personal safety in their work.
Introduction: who called Dynamis in, and why
Vanessa: Hi Alex — who called Dynamis in, and why?
Alex: I’ve just finished one of our two-day conflict and personal safety training courses for Probation Housing Officers. These officers deal with people out on probation from prison, facilitating their housing needs. They occupy a space in the middle between the Probation Service and the service user.
The Probation Housing Officer is not a Ministry of Justice role, unlike the Probation Service itself. Probation Housing Officers facilitate people coming back into the community after prison and having a safe place to live while they do. It’s a challenging job in itself — and the challenges are increasing. The Probation Service is stretched, so it can be hard to provide enough individual care. For this reason, and because service users often want to keep their contact with the Probation Service to a minimum, Probation Housing Officers find themselves bridging that gap more and more. That requires a more detailed and intense relationship with the service users.
Information is safety
Vanessa: Probation Housing Officers are having to do more, and are expected to have more detailed knowledge because services are stretched. Is that right?
Alex: Yes, exactly right. Probation Housing Officers look after service users in as many ways as they can — going shopping, organising access to food banks, looking at maintenance of properties. This is all part of their remit, but they’re having to go further because service users often want as little contact as possible with their Probation Officer — whether that’s because they don’t trust them, don’t feel they get the service they want, or because they’ve tried to contact them and not had replies.
That’s one of the common stories I heard on this course. Service users contact their Probation Officer and get no reply. Then they contact their Probation Housing Officer and make requests that sit at the boundary of their duty of care — “I need to contact social services” or “I need to contact the benefit office and I don’t know how.” Probation Housing Officers end up providing signposts that would normally be a Probation Officer’s role.
Another common story: arriving at sites where there’s conflict between service users living in the same building. There was an article in the BBC last year where a man on probation in a multiple-occupancy home told the Probation Service: “You need to get me back into prison or I will kill one of the other service users here.” He’d let slip to others in the home that he was a child sex offender and said: “I need to go back to prison for their safety and for mine.” Conflicts in multi-occupancy homes are very common.
Important information is not always shared by other organisations — for example the Ministry of Justice or mental health services — about the risks involved with a particular service user. Community-based staff can be going into a visit blind, not knowing if the service user has a violence marker against them.
Sometimes that’s because of data protection or patient confidentiality. With housing maintenance staff in particular, it’s quite common for risk indicators not to be known until after they’ve done the job. They arrive, do a risk assessment on what they have, do the task, and only afterwards are told: “That’s meant to be a two-person job. There are violence markers there.”
Housing staff tell stories about receiving new files for service users that don’t contain all the relevant information on previous offences and risks. They have to dig for it themselves — using Google and various news sites — to determine what level of personal safety risk they may encounter on a visit.
So it is really important to develop personal safety training for housing teams that helps them identify the questions they must ask prior to any visit, so they can satisfy themselves — before they walk in — that they’ve covered all the bases with regard to risk. Where information is lacking, we help them understand due-diligence processes and encourage the research that will help them keep themselves and others safe.
It may be necessary for individual officers to take that approach, but as an organisational approach (see the HSE video above) to keeping people safe, it’s really lacking. We challenge system leaders to review how sensitive information about service users is communicated within and between organisations, so the dignity and safety of staff is balanced proportionately alongside that of service users.
Costly examples of safety failures
Two recent prosecutions — Brent Council fined for a lone-worker policy failure, and a care company sentenced for failings that led to a lone worker being raped — illustrate what happens when organisations don’t get personal safety right.
How should lone workers assess personal safety risks?
Vanessa: A significant issue for staff is information sharing — lone workers don’t always have the information they need to prepare for visits and stay safe. What are Housing Officers to do if they don’t have all the relevant information? How do they accurately assess the risks?
Alex: The simplest way to assess personal safety risk — and this applies to any public-facing situation — is to ask who, what, where, when, why. When you get to risk assessment, you want to know: what’s the risk this service user poses to others, and what’s the risk they pose to me?
To unpack that, understanding risk starts with Housing Officers being able to answer these questions.
What has the service user done in the past?
Previous violence is an indicator of future violence.
Is there a health or infection risk?
We’ve just come out of COVID, so you’d expect people to be very hot on infection risks. But it’s important to know other ones too — if the service user has HIV or Hep C, for example. If the Housing Officer doesn’t know and there is an incident, there can be infection transmission issues. And from the organisation’s perspective, if they’re sending their staff in where there’s an infection risk and officers are not made aware, the organisation is liable.
What physical risks does the environment pose?
Most Housing Officers are aware of their housing stock and the associated risks of the built environment. But insert the human beings and things can change very quickly. In a multiple-occupancy house with four rooms and three service users already present, when a fourth moves in — what kind of risks exist for both the new service user and the old ones?
⚠️ Knives: The most common, most concerning risk in personal safety for housing teams. Anyone can buy a knife in a supermarket for a few pounds. The rules usually say knives stay in the kitchen — not bedrooms, not common areas. But Housing Officers arrive to do a check and there’s a knife on the sofa, on the bed, on the bedside stand. Context is key: choices always depend on the behaviour of the service user.
How should lone workers manage conflict?
Vanessa: So there’s (1) the communication issue within and between agencies, and (2) the assessment of the risks to self and to others, plus the risks posed by the environment. What did you teach Housing Officers about how to manage an encounter with a service user who may be unpredictable or dangerous? How are they to stay safe?
Alex: We covered the importance of the initial risk assessment. The next area of focus was dealing with the initial encounter.
When Housing Officers knock on a service user’s door, they need to knock and then give space. Otherwise they’re inside two to three feet when the door opens. It sounds like common sense, but it isn’t until folk practise it that they realise: it’s best for their safety not to stand in a doorway — because a service user with bad intent could open the door and grab them straight away.
Housing Officers should observe the service user’s behaviours in this first encounter and assess whether they match whatever negative condition the officer is there to address. MICE is a helpful acronym: someone who wants to groom another will Manipulate, Intimidate, Coerce, and Exploit. We get learners evaluating behaviours against this metric to support decision-making that keeps them and others safe.
One of the most common traps is the super-friendly service user. Why are they being extra polite? Are they really that kind of person, or is there a hidden agenda? If someone has just come out of prison and is in accommodation where the toilet is flooded, they’re unlikely to be happy — they’re more likely to be upset or concerned. If they come across super-friendly, Housing Officers need to be wary. The behaviour doesn’t match the situation.
That’s why the scenario-driven training came into its own during this course: learners ran these different behaviours for their colleagues and practised analysing the situation in the moment — picking up on the behavioural cues and adjusting their responses accordingly. This could be the difference between going home safely and there being an incident.
Alongside observing behavioural cues, we also taught how vital it is to listen to instincts. Most of the time we walk into public spaces and our instinct gives us a neutral or safe feeling. But if instinct fires the other way — “This is not right, I shouldn’t be here” — we need to respect that, and have practised the best and safest response: pay attention, take it seriously, and act on it to exit the situation. Look for an exit route. Have a polite, respectful excuse ready: “I have to make a call,” or “I have to do something on the tablet.”
The most challenging situations for lone-worker personal safety
Vanessa: What did you teach about managing conflict between service users?
Alex: Conflict between service users is a large part of the work. Officers get called to a property because two of their service users are causing each other problems and are arguing and/or fighting. The Housing Officers have to manage the property and the service users’ health, safety, and welfare — but they’re not police officers. Their role is not to prevent crime. It’s to make an assessment on whether the police need to be called.
Does the threat of calling the police work as a negotiation tool? It can sound like a threat, which is an issue. The debate we had was: at what point do Housing Officers bring calling the police into the conversation? If you bring it in too early, no room is left for other options. But if it’s brought in too late, service users might be so aroused they don’t care about that consequence any more.
Scenario training was key here. In some scenarios we made the decision to go to a consequence immediately, for everyone’s safety: get out, call the police, wait for them, facilitate police entry. Then it’s out of the Housing Officers’ hands and their focus is on looking after the property.
Conflict under the influence of drugs and alcohol
Vanessa: How should Housing Officers manage conflict with service users under the influence?
Alex: This is something Housing Officers have a lot of. For example, arriving at nine in the morning and the service user is already under the influence.
The key question remains the same: what’s the approach that is both compassionate and focused on maintaining the Housing Officer’s own safety first? If they have the relevant information about the risks, they can decide whether to back out and call an ambulance, call the police, or call the Probation Service — depending on context. It might be that there’s a no-alcohol or no-drugs condition on the person’s probation.
When other people are in the property
Vanessa: What’s an appropriate response if service users have other people in the property with them?
Alex: That’s a very common problem. Service users have just come out of prison and invite people round — sometimes against the rules of their probation and use of the property. So a Housing Officer knocks on the door and a stranger answers. Not their service user. They have to deal with that situation.
A common response in training was: “Oh, hi — you shouldn’t be here. I’ll give you ten minutes to make your way, and then I can talk to the service user.” But officers have also experienced people who refuse to leave. So we practised scenarios where things kept escalating and the priority shifted to keeping themselves safe while they de-escalated, or getting out of the building and calling for help.
Empathy at the core
Vanessa: It seems that empathy is at the core of the Dynamis approach — offering the service user dignity and respect by trying to see things through the eyes of a loved one. Using their own empathetic responses to refine and improve the training. Is that about right?
Alex: You’re absolutely right. By getting learners to repeat the exercise and look at it from different perspectives, they were empathising while they did the training. The more repetitions they do, the more they foster the skill set for when they go out operationally. Housing Officers are frequently in situations where they’re experiencing high adrenaline, things are unpredictable, and there are multiple points of information coming at them all at once.
Using scenario-based training to improve personal safety
Vanessa: How did the Housing Officers respond to the Dynamis training model — where they practised conflict and personal safety scenarios over and over, with you introducing new variables as training progressed?
Alex: A key part of our personal safety training is running a scenario until it comes to a successful conclusion. If you run a scenario and it fails, you can’t stop there — you have to reset and run it until it succeeds. We trainers have to be very clear, detailed, and positive in our briefings so learners have scope to play the part.
While some Housing Officers ran the scenario, their colleagues observed and were encouraged to give feedback during “hot debriefs” at the end of each iteration.
It was encouraging to see their confidence grow as they provided instant feedback to one another. First they gave their impressions as if they were a fly on the wall. Then they evaluated the scenario from the service user’s perspective, then from a legal perspective, then from a personal-safety perspective.
For example, in a hot debrief I might ask: “What would you think of this interaction if you were the service user’s mum who had just observed this? What is she feeling right now?” The response might be: “Oh, well, I was a bit harsh.” A follow-up question encourages reflection and empathy: “In what way were you harsh? In what way might you appear to not be meeting that service user’s needs?”
When officers evaluated scenarios from other perspectives, they were able to look at their own behaviours differently. They were more open to self-evaluation, and they started picking up on things they hadn’t noticed in the past.
This training approach is really helpful when many interactions are filmed. It’s common for service users to pull out their phones the moment Housing Officers arrive and record the whole interaction, just in case something happens they can use later. If officers aren’t aware of how they come across to different observers, that places them and the organisation open to all sorts of problems.
Key personal safety lessons for lone workers
Vanessa: Were there any inspiring, surprising, or challenging moments from your perspective as the trainer?
Alex: On every one- or two-day course for this organisation, there was always a story about challenging circumstances where one person had been placed in a significant risk situation. They coped with it, dealt with it, and came out safe — typically realising the risk level afterwards.
✅ A real win: Since we’ve been training this team and emphasising risk management, the organisation no longer dispatches officers on lone visits — they always go in pairs. That’s a win for everybody.
I always appreciate the honesty of learners about the risks they face. On this training, two of the Housing Officers had been to a service user — a woman with a very violent history. She tried to murder another service user while they were there. The Housing Officers did what they could, but in the end they had to withdraw and hide in their car while the service user struck the car window with a blade. They were very afraid.
When they shared the story, the fascinating part came when they started to talk about their own behaviour. Once they were in the car with the windows rolled up and the blade was hitting the window, they had started to laugh. One of them asked: “It’s really strange. Why did that happen?” That opened the door to thinking about the role of adrenaline and how it can affect our emotions and behaviours when in danger.
It also highlighted a danger that Housing Officers and their employers need to guard against: it is possible to become conditioned to high risk and then deny risks while you’re in a dangerous situation. It’s vital to consider the behaviours and look at your safety every time, in every situation.
Quick wins for organisations looking to keep lone workers safer
Vanessa: To close — what recommendations would you make to this organisation or others like it?
Alex: The Housing Officers all drive similar-coloured vehicles with consecutive number plates. When they arrive at a service user’s house, they’re in two cars — same make, same colour, consecutive plates. Add to this that they make calls at odd hours, say eleven at night. When they drive onto an estate, the first impression isn’t typically “That’s the Housing Officers arriving.” The first impression is: “That’s the police.”
If it’s easy for service users to know the cars arriving are Housing Officers, there’s less risk. But if they don’t, they’re going to go to the first thought, which is “The police are here.”
That has presented Housing Officers with problems — for example, someone who’s adrenalised because they think it’s the police at the door probably won’t read the work I.D. badge around the officer’s neck to clarify who they are and which organisation they’re with. The organisation has since changed the colour of the Housing Officer’s lanyard. When they were blue, it was easier for service users to mistake them for police lanyards.
It’s helping individuals and organisations identify these little things that make a difference that makes training for me.
The art of reflection — and a phrase I tend to use on every course — is: “The small things. There’s nothing bigger.”
— Alex Hunter, Senior Coach-Trainer, Dynamis
In short
The main recommendation we’re hearing is to pay attention to the “critical non-essentials” — the cars Housing Officers drive, the lanyards they wear, the first impression they make. Organisations should ask themselves how effective their Housing Officers are at putting themselves in the shoes of others — always reflecting on the response to the question: how can this issue or event be perceived?
HSE guidance on lone workers
The HSE’s INDG73 guidance explains how to keep lone workers healthy and safe. It applies to anyone who employs lone workers — or engages them as contractors — including self-employed people or those who work alone.
Lone workers face the same hazards at work as anyone else, but there is a greater risk of these hazards causing harm, as they may not have anyone to help or support them if things go wrong.
Our thanks to Senior Coach-Trainer Alex Hunter for his insights. Dynamis provides Lone Worker Personal Safety and Conflict Management training for organisations that field staff working in the community — including housing, social care, probation, utilities, and retail. If you’d like our expert team to help improve the safety of your community-based workers, please get in touch.
This guide on conflict management, personal safety, and Dynamis training is part of our ongoing work with schools and academies.