A.V.E.R.T vs. Nonviolent Crisis Intervention (NCI): Which Model is Best for Security Guards?
- Mike Byrne
- Feb 2
- 3 min read
Updated: Apr 7
Training security guards for crisis situations often comes down to two main models: the A.V.E.R.T Security Training System and the Nonviolent Crisis Intervention (NCI/CPI) model. Each has its own strengths and challenges, especially in real-world security work. In this post, we’ll look at the pros and cons of both to help you choose the best option for your team.
Understanding A.V.E.R.T (Applied Verifiable Environmental Response Tactics)
A.V.E.R.T is a modular training system designed specifically for the security industry. Its main component is the AVERT Foundations course, a two-day session that teaches how to interact with the public, understand public perception, show empathy, and respond to aggression versus crisis. It also covers tactical skills and frameworks. Organizations can add “Booster Sessions” to customize training for different teams and adapt to changing needs.
Nonviolent Crisis Intervention (CPI)
Nonviolent Crisis Intervention (NCI), also called CPI (Crisis Prevention Institute), is a well-known training program that focuses on safely preventing and de-escalating crises. Its main goals are to encourage empathy, build rapport, and keep everyone safe during conflicts. The program teaches how to recognize triggers, respect dignity, and use clear communication to build trust. NCI offers a step-by-step approach to de-escalation, starting with verbal and nonverbal methods, then moving to disengagement, and using physical intervention only as a last resort. It is widely used where security teams work with healthcare, education, and social services, giving everyone a common approach. NCI is also designed to support teamwork between security staff and other professionals.
A.V.E.R.T Model: Tactical Flexibility for Security Professionals
Pros:
Dynamic and Flexible: A.V.E.R.T’s wedge system helps guards adapt quickly, using only the strategies that fit each situation. This is ideal for unpredictable security environments.
Tactical Positioning: Emphasizes physical safety, team roles (Contact & Cover), and environmental management (containment, radius factors).
Holistic Awareness: Integrates six factors (heuristics, geographies, proxemics, biometrics, atmospherics, kinesics), giving guards a comprehensive toolkit for observation.
Clear Escalation Ladder: Explains detailed use-of-force options, keeping open-hand tactics and physical restraint as last resorts to support legal compliance.
Debrief and Learning: Built-in after-action reflection helps teams improve and reduce future incidents.
Security-Specific Focus: All aspects are tailored for security personnel, not general care staff.
Modular Booster Sessions: Offers mini-training sessions for ongoing refreshers and specialized topics, from marginalized populations to frontline mental resilience.
Cons:
Requires Extensive Training: The different frameworks, such as radius, wedges, and six factors, can be overwhelming for new or high-turnover teams. This means frequent booster sessions may be needed for some teams.
Less Standardized: Program elements vary between organizations, as A.V.E.R.T adapts to each location's unique risks.
Heavy on Tactics: Focusing strongly on containment and positioning can sometimes take attention away from building emotional rapport.
Limited External Recognition: A.V.E.R.T is not as well known outside the security field, which can complicate multi-disciplinary incidents.
Nonviolent Crisis Intervention (NCI/CPI): Empathy and Recognition
Pros:
Widely Recognized: NCI/CPI is a global standard, giving guards credibility and a common language with police, healthcare, and social services.
Focus on Empathy: Puts respect, rapport-building, and understanding triggers first, which is crucial for working in diverse settings.
Step-by-Step De-escalation: The clear progression—verbal, nonverbal, disengagement, and physical intervention—makes it easy for new staff to follow.
Comprehensive Ethical Coverage: Detailed policies ensure best practices and ethical conduct.
Good for Mixed Teams: Well-suited for environments where security works alongside educators, clinicians, or social workers.
Cons:
Less Security-Specific: Not designed for physical threats such as tactical positioning, team containment, or quick threat assessment.
Overly Generalized: Some techniques may not cover property protection or crowd control.
Can Be Rigid: The step-by-step method may not be flexible enough in high-risk or fast-changing situations.
Resource Intensive: Training and recertification can be expensive and time-consuming.
Which Model Should You Choose?
Choosing the right training model is crucial for your security team.
A.V.E.R.T works best for security teams that need tactical flexibility, strong situational awareness, and a team-based approach.
NCI/CPI is a good choice when guards work closely with non-security staff, need broad recognition, and must focus on empathy and clear communication.
Both systems offer useful tools. The best choice depends on your team’s needs, your work environment, and the specific risks you face.
Choose carefully and keep your team ready for whatever comes next.
Conclusion: Empowering Your Security Team for the Future
In conclusion, the choice between A.V.E.R.T and NCI should align with your organization's unique challenges and goals. As we approach 2025, it's essential to focus on enhancing staff safety through specialized training and essential safety gear.
By investing in the right training program, you can drastically reduce workplace violence and ensure a safer environment for everyone involved. Remember, the right training not only equips your team with the necessary skills but also fosters a culture of safety and preparedness.
Let’s work together to create a safer future for all.
Comments