Mind The Gap - NFPS Ltd

When is someone too close?

When you anticipate danger from what you can see, hear and/or feel from the other person.

Increasingly personal safety has become a paramount concern.

One of the fundamental principles in ensuring personal safety is maintaining a safe distance from potential threats.

This approach not only allows individuals to assess situations more accurately but also provides the necessary time to react appropriately if a threat materialises.

This practice is deeply rooted in the concept of situational awareness and is closely related to the principles of proxemics and maintaining a safe reactionary gap.

Situational Awareness

Situational awareness is the ability to perceive, understand, and respond to the environment around us.

It involves being constantly aware of one’s surroundings and recognising potential threats before they escalate.

This heightened state of awareness allows individuals to make informed decisions that can prevent dangerous situations.

Situational awareness includes:

Observation – continuously scanning the environment to detect unusual or suspicious behaviour.
Orientation – understanding the context of the surroundings and the possible threats within it.
Decision-making – evaluating potential threats and deciding on the best course of action.
Action – immediately implementing the chosen course of action effectively.

Proxemics and Personal Safety

Proxemics, a term coined by anthropologist Edward T. Hall, refers to the study of personal space and the physical distance maintained between individuals in different social and environmental contexts.

It plays a crucial role in personal safety as it helps determine the appropriate distance to maintain from others, especially in situations where a potential threat is perceived.

Hall identified four distinct zones of personal space:

Intimate Distance
Personal Distance
Social Distance
Public Distance

In terms of personal safety, maintaining a distance that falls within the social or public distance zones is often advisable when dealing with unknown or potentially threatening individuals.

This distance not only respects personal boundaries but also provides a buffer zone that enhances situational awareness.

A Safe Reactionary Gap

The safe reactionary gap refers to the minimum distance required to effectively respond to a potential threat.

This concept is particularly relevant across enforcement roles and self-defence scenarios, but it is equally applicable to everyday personal safety.

A safe reactionary gap ensures that an individual has enough time to:

Assess the threat – determine if the person poses an actual danger.
Plan a response – decide whether to escape, de-escalate or defend the situation.
Take action – execute the planned response effectively.

For example, in self-defence training, individuals are often taught to maintain a minimum distance of between 3-10 feet from a potential threat.

This distance is considered sufficient to recognise challenging and/or aggressive behaviour, draw attention to oneself for help, or physically defend oneself if necessary.

Safe Operating Zones and Distances

Understanding and applying the concept of safe operating zones and distances can significantly enhance personal safety.

Here are a few practical tips:

Stay aware of your surroundings
Keep a safe distance
Trust your instincts
Be prepared to act

Why have my instincts have been right 100% of the time?’

Because I have never stayed around long enough to find out what and/or why I was feeling fearful for my safety and therefore anticipating danger towards me.

In summary

Proxemics (a safe distance) – can be described as the distance between oneself and the perceived threat!

So, maintaining a safe distance from potential threats is a fundamental aspect of personal safety.

By incorporating situational awareness, understanding proxemics, and adhering to the principles of the safe reactionary gap, individuals can significantly reduce their risk of harm.

In unpredictable times or situations, these strategies provide a critical buffer that allows for better threat assessment and more effective responses, ultimately ensuring one’s safety and peace of mind.

Who are NFPS Ltd?

NFPS Ltd has been operating as a training company since 1998 and provides training and consultancy in conflict prevention, management and resolution; along with physical intervention and risk management and assessment.

Over the years NFPS Ltd has provided training and consultancy to a wide range of industry sectors including NHS, care, education (schools and colleges), local authorities, security agencies, housing associations, probations service area, charities and police and prison personnel.

All training is delivered to National Awarding Body Standards and as a Pearson Centre of many years standing NFPS Ltd delivers specific BTEC qualifications in physical intervention, conflict resolution and risk management and assessment, which allow us to deliver a structured approach to learning and development which provides good evidence for audit and investigative purposes if required.

Legal Compliance

NFPS Ltd’s training was initially legally audited by Earnly Money, Barrister at Law and legal input has also been provided by: Michael Mansfield QC, Professor Gary Slapper LLB (London), LLM (London), PGCE (Manchester), PhD (London), John Wadham: Solicitor and Human Rights expert, Chair of the UK’s NPM and Associate at Doughty Street Chambers and Eric Baskind – LLB (Hons), LLM, MCIArb, FRSA, FHEA.

Mark Dawes (the former owner and founder of NFPS Ltd) was also an Expert Witness on the use of physical force and all training provided is contextualised within UK statute and common law and there is regular input from legal professionals.

Trevel Henry and Robert Landells the current owners of NFPS Ltd, use their extensive knowledge, understanding and experience to continue improving standards and processes to prevent, manage and resolve challenging, aggressive and violent behaviours

All training is also compliant with current relevant industry sector-specific guidance. For example, The DoH Positive and Proactive Care Guidance, DfEE Guidance for Schools, Skills for Care and Skills for Health guidelines and NICE guidance to name a few.

Our training is also Human Rights Compliant.