Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Welcoming 2021: The Year of Resiliency
Happy New Year to all — may 2021 be a better and brighter year for everyone. It has been just over a year since I came to Japan Society as President and CEO, with a mandate to take the Society into the future while preserving its 113-year-old mission of building bridges between the U.S. and Japan. The pandemic has accelerated the pace of change for everyone, globally, nationally, locally, and within our own workplaces and households. Change is hard, but it is also necessary. In a recent email, my friend Parag Khanna wrote, “Our global system evolves the way humanity does, not through grand design or random accident but by adaptation to changing realities. The faster we react to an accelerating world, the better our chances of shaping the future to our benefit.” I’d like to speak to Parag’s point personally rather than geopolitically. The experience of leading a New York nonprofit during this time — an institution that is both deeply and historically embedded in onsite programming and tradition — has both clarified and strengthened my vision for Japan Society’s future. Bending Adversity If 2020 has forced us to prioritize, 2021 will be the year of resiliency. 2021 represents the year of the Ox in Japan, where the ox is considered an industrious, cautious, and faithful friend that is always glad to offer help. After the 2020 we’ve all had, we could use more faithful friends like the ox in 2021. We are looking toward 2021 as a year in which we as a society ultimately overcome COVID-19 through the efforts of scientists, frontline workers, and governments around the globe. We hope to see the world come together in a big way for the first time at the rescheduled Summer Olympics in Tokyo. In some ways, we have already seen the future in Japan and in Asia more broadly, with its successful response to the COVID pandemic. Japan also represents a recent example of how to bend adversity and bounce back, as it did from the Great East Japan Earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disaster of 3/11/2011. The entire country came together in solidarity to support the affected Tohoku region, including concrete measures such as limiting electricity usage at a national level to avoid rolling regional blackouts. A decade on, Japan still remembers, with the Olympic flame set to depart from Fukushima Prefecture in the torch relay that will cross the country before arriving in Tokyo for the Opening Ceremony. Out of Crisis: Opportunity Optimism and positivity are necessary to move forward. I’m optimistic not because I’m naïve about the challenges ahead as we continue to navigate these wild currents, but I am confident that we will find safe passage because of what we have learned collectively and adapted to over the past months. Japan Society’s Language Center had a record year in 2020 despite the pandemic as our teachers reached beyond our physical classrooms to virtual ones; more people joined us than ever before for our first-ever digital JAPAN CUTS, the largest festival of Japanese cinema in North America. We have opened possibilities far beyond our physical building, the original Japan House, designed by Japanese modernist architect Junzo Yoshimura 50 years ago, and named New York City’s youngest landmark in 2011. In crisis comes opportunity, and from opportunity come the possibilities for our collective future. While we are hurting without our physical programs and admissions revenue, we’ve literally been able to connect across the world, and even beyond — from Japanese astronaut Soichi Noguchi, who is currently on the International Space Station, to countless leading voices in Japan such as Olympics Director Nomura Mansai — to create unique experiences for our members. In this time, I return to the Japanese concept of kaizen (改善), continual self-improvement and change for the better. Regardless of the next challenges on the horizon, I’m committed to ensuring that we continuously improve and adapt in this spirit. I believe that our mission has never been more critical than in 2021 as we strengthen U.S.-Japan relations with new administrations in both capitals and seek opportunities to engage, explore, and educate our societies about our collective resiliency as we welcome the new year. Joshua Walker (@drjwalk) is president and CEO of Japan Society. Follow @japansociety. The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own.
Lockdown teleworking impacts productivity of women more than men
When the COVID-19 pandemic led countries all over the world to lock down their economies in early 2020, there was an unprecedented global shift to teleworking in white collar sectors. A trend that had been gathering traction was suddenly and exponentially accelerated and many of the world’s largest corporations, Google and Facebook among them, have announced plans allowing employees to work from home well into 2021 or indefinitely. Remote working not only appears to work, but it appears to have a number of advantages—savings in office maintenance costs and time spent commuting, not to mention enabling organizations to safeguard productivity when there’s a major shock or crisis. But is it all good news? Or good news for all? A new paper by Ruomeng Cui, assistant professor of information systems and operations management at Emory’s Goizueta Business School, reveals an important drop in the productivity of female academics around the world in the wake of the COVID-19 lockdowns. In fact, in the ten weeks following the initial lockdown in the United States, their productivity fell by a stunning 13.9 percent relative to that of male colleagues. And it’s likely to do with the disproportionate burden of responsibility for household needs and childcare that persistently falls on women, Cui said. “We know that gender inequality persists both in the workplace and at home, and we were curious to see how the lockdown scenario would attenuate or exacerbate the situation for women,” Cui said. Anecdotal evidence from her own field—academia—showed that in the weeks following the stay at home mandate in March, there was an upswing of around 20 to 30 percent of papers submitted to journals. However, the overwhelming majority of these were being authored by men. Intrigued, Cui teamed up with Goizueta doctoral student Hao Ding and Feng Zhu from Harvard Business School to conduct a systematic study of female academics’ productivity and output during this period. “We knew that the lockdown had disrupted life for everyone, including academics. With schools and kindergartens closed and people taking care of work and household obligations at home, we intuited that women would be affected more than men as they are disproportionately burdened with domestic and childcare duties,” Cui said. For female academics this would theoretically be particularly acute, as the critical thinking that goes into research calls for quiet, interruption-free environments. To put this to the test, Cui and her co-authors created a large data set covering all the new social science research papers produced by men and women, across 18 disciplines and submitted to SSRN, a research repository, between December 2018 to May 2019 and then from December 2019 to May 2020. From this set, they were able to extract information on titles, authors’ names, affiliations, and addresses to identify their countries and institutions, as well as faculty pages to distinguish between men and women. In total they collected just under 43,000 papers written by more than 76,000 authors in 25 countries. Looking at the data, Cui and her colleagues were able to compute the total number of papers produced by male and female academics each week and then compare the productivity of both before and after the start of the lockdown. Prior to the pandemic, the 2019 period showed no significant changes in productivity in either gender. But in the 10 weeks following the shock of lockdown, a clear gap emerges between men and women, with female academics’ productivity falling by just under 14 percent in comparison to their male colleagues. Interestingly the effect was more pronounced in top-ranked research universities. This is likely because top schools require faculty to publish research as the primary requisite for promotion, so men would be motivated to continue authoring papers before and after the lockdown. These findings lend solid, empirical clout to the notion that women do take a hit to productivity when care and work time are reorganized, Cui noted. “We see clearly that women are producing less work as a consequence of working from home. In the field of academia, that has huge implications as achieving a permanent position, or tenure, is generally linked to your research output,” she said. “So, there is a serious fairness issue there. If women are producing less because the burden of household responsibility is greater for them than for men, then you’re likely to see fewer female academics get tenure through no fault of their own.” Indeed, one of the other findings of the study shows that while productivity fell, the quality of female-authored research measured by downloads and citations did not. Then there’s the issue of teleworking and gender. With a significant proportion of the world’s white-collar organizations still working from home and unlikely to head back to the office any time soon—and as many schools and childcare facilities remain closed due to the pandemic—Cui is concerned that productivity as a measure of value and a marker of success might mean the odds are further stacked against women. And not just in academia. “We looked at universities in particular, but our findings can really be externalized to any other industry because the underlying issues here are universal. So, with remote working becoming normalized, I think there’s a real onus on organizations of every type to think about how to mitigate these unintended consequences,” she said. “There needs to be more thought about how we measure value or potential of employees.” Cui calls for organizations and institutions to consider these factors when they evaluate male and female workers in the present context and looking to the future. Among the kinds of proactive moves they might consider are to make training programs for male and female employees that explore fairness and encourage a more even distribution of responsibility in the home and for children. “There’s nothing to be gained in prioritizing productivity as a tool for evaluation and just giving women more time, say, to produce as much,” Cui warned. “You’re just left with the same scenario of women doing more than their fair share. Solving this issue is really much more about being aware of it, getting educated about it, and changing your mindset.” If you are a journalist looking to cover this research or speak with Professor Ciu about the subjects of telework and productivity, simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Are vaccine passports legal in a post-COVID-19 era? Let our experts explain
As America and the world look to slowly round the corner of the safety measures enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic, the new coronavirus vaccines are giving hope of an eventual return to normal. However, with an active anti-vaccination movement afoot and many still skeptical of getting that essential poke in the arm, the World Health Organization said some government officials are suggesting the idea of vaccine passports. A simple piece of identification would end the uncertainty that comes with travel, work and the much sought-after leisure that often means crowded places and smaller spaces. The idea has already caught on in countries in Europe and South America. It may be the safety blanket many seek, but are vaccine passports actually legal? It is a question that’s beginning to get serious coverage. “Having proof of vaccination can be essential for a number of sectors other than health, but we cannot overlook the potential discriminatory consequences that may arise,” said Dr. William Hatcher, an expert in public policy and interim chair of the Department of Social Sciences at Augusta University. Another idea being floated is immunity passports, but Hatcher suggests¬ allowing only people with immunity to work might disadvantage those who haven’t gotten sick or those without the antibodies to prove it. It’s as if, in the eyes of their employer, their lack of infection constitutes a disability. The inequality that immunity passports could foster in these situations may be illegal under the Americans with Disabilities Act. There are also other ethical, practical, and cultural aspects to consider as well. If you are covering this emerging topic and are looking to know more, our experts can help. Dr. Hatcher is a professor of political science and interim chair of Augusta University’s Department of Social Sciences. He is an expert in the areas of public administration and social, economic, and political institutions in local communities. Hatcher is available to speak with media regarding the concept of vaccination and immunity passports. To arrange an interview, simply click on his name.
The initial doses of the first approved COVID-19 vaccine are here, and health care workers are part of the group that’s getting it first. One of them is Dr. David Banach, UConn Health infectious diseases physician and hospital epidemiologist, who sees the vaccine not only as a major breakthrough in the fight to end the pandemic, but also as an opportunity for his clinical colleagues to lead that effort and set the tone for the rest of the world. Here are some key facts about the COVID-19 vaccine, with Dr. Banach providing explanations of each: The COVID-19 vaccine won’t infect you with COVID-19. “There is no live virus in this vaccine, so you can’t actually get infected with SARS-CoV-2 from the vaccine. What this vaccine has is messenger RNA, which is a little bit of genetic code that allows the body’s natural machinery to make the protein that will generate an immune response." You may actually want some side effects from the COVID-19 vaccine. “You might get some soreness at the injection site, maybe some fatigue for a day or two, but that can be a good thing, a sign your body is making that immune response. That’s what is going to protect you in the future if you get exposed to the virus. The data from the clinical trials show the side effects – the soreness, fatigue, in some cases a short-lived fever – occur the first few days afterwards, and the rate of serious side effects is extraordinarily low for this vaccine.” The vaccine was developed relatively quickly, but not by compromising the scientific process. “When you look at Operation Warp Speed and how this process moved really quickly, that was really focused on the research and development piece and the manufacturing piece. Importantly, the phase 3 clinical trial was not rushed. This is the same type of clinical trial that we would do for any other vaccine. We followed people for at least two months. The clinical trials were huge, and they had diverse populations. So that part of the whole process wasn’t rushed at all, and that’s the most important part.” Don’t throw out those masks just yet. “We know this vaccine prevents people from developing symptomatic and severe COVID infection. I think what we don’t know is the effect it’s going to have on viral transmission, including asymptomatic shedding of virus. For instance, people who get the vaccine might still potentially shed virus, potentially at a lower level. The vaccine will prevent them from actually becoming ill, but vaccinated individuals might still be able to have virus in their nose and their respiratory system. Immunity from the vaccine is not instantaneous. “The COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials using the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines were designed using a two-dose series in order to generate the optimal level of protection from the vaccine. That’s why getting both doses of the vaccine is essential. Although there is likely some individual variability, immunity may not be optimal until several days after the second dose. The phase 3 clinical trials used a period of at least one-to-two weeks after the second dose as a marker of immunity during which they were able to demonstrate the efficacy of the vaccines in protecting against COVID-19 infection.” Dr. David Banach is one of the lead experts on COVID-19 in America. He is available to speak with media regarding the vaccination and what the future holds with regards to COVID-19. To book an interview – simply click on his icon and arrange a time now.
A Highly Skilled Healthcare Workforce Could Be in Jeopardy From COVID-19
While all healthcare professionals have stepped up during the COVID-19 pandemic and are essential to providing quality care, registered nurses are with patients 24/7 and provide essential, consistent surveillance, often being the first to take immediate action and alert colleagues in order to save patients. “I cannot stress enough that it is not about beds and space, it is about having a high-quality and properly educated workforce to care for the patients in those beds and spaces,” says Donna Havens, PhD, RN, FAAN, Connelly Endowed Dean and Professor of the M. Louise Fitzpatrick College of Nursing, who adds that the process depends on a highly skilled workforce. Though in some cases, because of the growing shortage across the nation during the pandemic, members of the workforce may not have the skills or experience to care for patients in the settings in which they may have been placed during the pandemic. Nurses who typically work in one particular clinical setting, e.g., pediatrics, may now be asked to provide care to adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with very little education, if any, regarding the particulars of caring for this population. This may impact the quality of care—as well as increase distress and burnout among the workforce. The number of hospitalized patients is growing exponentially each day, and the healthcare workforce is expressing growing concern, distress, disappointment and anger about the numerous issues and challenges within the healthcare settings—as well as in regard to the general population disregarding healthcare experts’ and scientists’ guidance to adhere to practices that will mitigate the spread of the virus. Media coverage is articulating the workforce’s dismay and their calls for help—because they are tired, burned out and facing a struggle to go to work. While some traveling healthcare professionals, who practice by accepting assignments as temporary reinforcements across the country, were being sent to hot spots earlier in the pandemic, there are so many hot spots across the country today that this may no longer be a solution to ameliorate the shortage of quality care providers. Havens and colleagues at Villanova’s M. Louise Fitzpatrick College of Nursing launched a national 20-year study in May—the CHAMPS study—to explore the emotional and physical wellbeing of the healthcare workforce and those who support care. Their early findings document high levels of depression, stress and sleep issues. “Not only is the healthcare workforce growing tired, distressed and burned out, but many are also becoming ill themselves—many dying of COVID-19. This is demoralizing and severely impacts the number available to provide care. Some of the respondents from the CHAMPS study describe caring for healthcare colleagues who died from COVID while they were caring for them.” The World Health Organization designated 2020 as the Year of the Nurse and Midwife, and 2020 is also the 200th birthday of Florence Nightingale, who founded the nursing profession. “How ironic that during this time, nurses find themselves working in surge hospitals in tents, basketball arenas, parking garages and so forth, just as Nightingale’s early career was spent implementing processes to improve sanitation and hygiene,” says Havens.
Top Germicidal UV Lighting Questions Answered
Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, germicidal lighting has been eyed for indoor disinfection. Bob Karlicek, the director of the Lighting Enabled Systems and Applications (LESA) Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute led a team of engineers who designed and built a UVC system to disinfect masks for reuse. In addition, he has been answering some of the biggest questions people have surrounding this potential tool in the current global public health crisis. These are a few examples: 1. Can UVC radiation kill SARS CoV 2? Yes, several groups have demonstrated that UVC radiation can quickly deactivate the SARS CoV 2 virus that causes COVID-19. To be effective, however, the delivery dose needs to be high enough and the required dose depends on several environmental factors (surface or airborne, relative humidity, and other environmental factors) that impact the delivery of UVC radiation to the virus’ RNA. The higher the dose, the faster the process, and the greater the percentage of virus deactivated. 2. Can UVC LEDs be used for germicidal applications? Absolutely, and there is considerable published evidence for the effectiveness of UVC LEDs in germicidal applications including SARS CoV 2. Also, the output power, reliability and cost-effectiveness of UVC LED solutions are continually improving with continuing research on the design and manufacturing of UVC LEDs. Note that both UVC mercury lamps (254 nm) and UVC LEDs have lifetimes that are considerably shorter than LEDs used in solid-state lighting, so that should be factored into the design of GUV systems using either technology. 3. How can UVC sources be used safely around people? So long as humans are not in the direct line for exposure to the UVC radiation there should be no issues. Ordinarily, UVC systems are used only when people are not present or in disinfecting air (either inside of ductwork of HVAC systems or with specially designed optics to irradiate the upper portions of room-air) with little or no radiation to the people below. Some UVC lamps come with presence detection systems that turn off when persons approach, but these systems will have to have very low false-negative error rates (turning on when the system falsely thinks that people are not present). You can read more questions and answers here. If you'd like to interview Robert Karlicek, please click on his ExpertFile profile.
Finding Joy Through the Holiday Season - Ways for families to feel the familiar in unfamiliar times
Sandra M. Chafouleas, Ph.D. recently wrote a piece for Psychology Today that aims to help families as we enter the holiday season: The typical holiday season can bring forth any number of emotions, from anger and sadness to joy and awe. Family traditions – those repeated and symbolically meaningful holiday rituals – play a big role in shaping your feelings throughout the season. Families traditions can buffer conflicts, boost positive feelings, and bring people closer together. The pandemic is bringing an atypical holiday season this year, presenting change in the things we do, the way we do them, and who we do them with. We may miss out on getting together in person with family and friends, traveling to cherished places, or taking part in our traditional celebrations. Forced upon us, these unfamiliar changes can evoke feelings of loss and frustration. As a very unfamiliar holiday season approaches, we can still find ways to bring familiarity and predictability — and the sense of comfort that goes with that — with some adaptations to our family traditions. In her piece, Dr. Chafouleas, a licensed psychologist and Board of Trustees Distinguished Professor in the Neag School of Education at the University of Connecticut, offers advice for ways to adapt family traditions and help restore a sense of well-being while embracing the unfamiliar — and uncomfortable —differences in the holidays this year. Dr. Chafouleas is available to speak with media regarding this subject - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Lann Le, a senior in the Betty Foy Sanders Department of Art at Georgia Southern University, is drawing inspiration from public response to the COVID-19 pandemic for her senior thesis exhibition, “Good Without.” The interactive exhibition will explore what items people can live without, a choice many people have had to make due to the pandemic. Oct. 20th, a panel discussion related to the project took place over Zoom, featuring Professor of Art Rachel Green, Associate Professor of Education Katie Brkich, Ph.D., and Professor of Economics Richard McGrath, Ph.D. Audio from the discussion will be recorded and played throughout the exhibition. Le said she got the idea for the exhibition after seeing how society reacted to COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic in the U.S. “In March, I was told to stock up all necessities and saw shelves being emptied in hours,” she said. “I heard stories of struggles and issues associated with stores being closed, businesses paused, unemployment, stress, food shortage and boredom to name a few. I also saw some drop-off items at donation centers and also more online shopping. Here I question what we need and what we’re conditioned to need.” After getting approval from her professor, Bridget Conn, Le wanted to showcase items people believe they can live without. She approached students, professors and strangers on the internet and in person to ask what their choices would be. She also made a website and Instagram account to keep a log of images of the items. Both will continue to be updated until next August. Le’s exhibition, which will run from Nov. 9 to Dec. 4 in the Fine Arts Gallery on the Armstrong Campus, will feature physical items, photographs, audio and collages installed in an interactive environment. It has also been getting the attention of local media and was recently profiled in the Savannah Morning News. “Lann’s project is unique in that she is really embracing the practices of conceptual and interactive art,” Conn said. “This means that unlike traditional art media, where the artist is in control of making their own paintings or sculptures or the like, she is inviting strangers to direct the project by asking them to submit photographs or items that they have learned they are good without.” To learn more about the exhibition - simply visit the site below: If you are a journalist looking to learn more about this project or if you would like to arrange an interview - simply reach out to Georgia Southern Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to set and time and date.
COVID-19 has raised the stakes for boards, argues Brunswick’s Paddy McGuinness, former UK Deputy National Security Adviser. We now live with COVID-19. Fewer business leaders are making the mistake of talking about “post-COVID” or “when this is over.” The better of them have factored in COVID-19 related constraints to their medium-term plans and are even thinking about how the world may change in the long-term. They are building capacity to take advantage of an early recovery within months, yet they are modeling and encouraging grit for current and indeed harder conditions to last much longer. In the past, when health emergencies—say the Spanish Flu pandemic of a century ago—subsided, there was a greater return to economic normality than had been expected during the crisis. Extreme events often heighten or even distort our perception of wider risks. That old journalistic cliché “one thing is certain, nothing will be the same again” is rarely true. But the pandemic has created the expectation that businesses will be resilient—that they will be able to respond to an event and recover to the state prior to the event, incorporating the lessons learned into business practice. Many business leaders feel they have not done too badly responding to a once-in-a-hundred-years event. Business Continuity Plans (BCPs), which were understandably sketchy for pandemics, were pulled out of second-line risk management and owned and improved in real-time by executive committees. The transition to remote working and, at least in Asia and some of Europe, the gradual return to offices again, has been managed. Services and even vital production have been maintained. Leaders have absorbed the personal and collective strain of this. Good reason then for some satisfaction as they delegate certain COVID-19 responses and focus on the economic tsunami that follows the pandemic. The public seems to largely agree with business leaders’ assessments. While many national and scientific leaders find themselves beset by “blamestorming,” corporate executives have been given more slack. They weren’t expected to have foreseen a pandemic. Their sometimes scrabbling responses are understood. However, behind this lucky pass lurks an expectation that businesses will now be more prepared for crises and foreseeable risks. Resilience cannot be relegated to BCPs and traditional risk-management structures. It is categorically a board issue—regulators, lawyers, politicians and the public say so. The reputations of individual board members and the collective are at stake. Think how fast leaders have been expected to respond to the issues raised by the Black Lives Matter movement. Alacrity will be required. The speed and scale of decisions in response to the pandemic leaves board committees playing catch up to assure themselves that risks have been managed. The move to working from home has been rapid, so too the digitization of the business. Some see these as new, streamlined ways of working, yet the negative consequences are not yet fully apparent. Working from home, for instance, is attractive to some employees as well as chief financial officers, who may relish the chance to reduce fixed costs. Concerns about the impact on the coherence of the business’s culture, its productivity and innovation, the security of data held at home, hardships for those in difficult home conditions, and, indeed, the needs of the younger demographic who seem to favor a return to the office, need to be given due consideration. It may be a case of “decide in haste, repent at leisure.” Resilience is categorically a board issue—regulators, lawyers, politicians and the public say so. The reputations of individual board members and the collective are at stake. Boards also need assurance that the business has regained its balance and can manage parallel or interrelated crises. In recent weeks we have been helping several clients respond to major cyber events unrelated to the COVID-19 outbreak. They have probably needed more external support than otherwise because their leadership capacity was inevitably denuded by pandemic response. And they have benefitted from us already knowing each other and having experience of how to work together in crisis. After the Great Financial Crash there was a heavy focus on balance-sheet resilience and having the requisite finance skills on boards. Business leaders are now beset by advice on the heightened obligation to be resilient in much a broader sense of the word. Regulators, lawyers and risk consultants are sharing checklists of factors for executive committees to take into account when managing risks and for boards to oversee. The challenge here is defining what changes your specific business needs and how to actually bring those about. Shareholders will be expecting a judicious move away from “just in time” systems to ones that can endure foreseeable risks. This isn’t just about potential legal liability or reputational risk. This is about setting your business culture for success. Undermanage risks and the business is wide open to damage from foreseeable shocks with all the loss of confidence and capability that follows. Overmanage and the business losses its competitive edge just when there is opportunity in the recovery. In order to track broader resilience, boards and their committees will need access to a wider set of skills and insight. Board membership emerges as an obvious area of focus. Yet each board will take more time and belonging to too many—“over boarding”—may well be unacceptable. Risk methodology and information flows will also have to be reviewed, alongside how to strengthen board members’ awareness and skills. Before the pandemic, chairs and CEOs were already wrestling with this for their difficult-to-price risks, such as data, technology risks and cyber. Individual experts on boards created siloed responsibility for what should have been a shared risk. A focus on process and method often led to a focus on the management, rather than genuine oversight of, risks. External advice didn’t always help (as we have learned from the plethora of competing advice around COVID-19). No single intervention will meet the new standard for resilience. Nor will simple prescription. A broader and more articulated approach is required if governance is to maintain stakeholder confidence and corporate reputation.
Criminals are opportunists, and the COVID-19 global onslaught has brought with it not just health threats but cybersecurity risks, too. Within weeks of the COVID-19 outbreak, hackers have already commandeered the virus to unleash cyberattacks, sending emails purporting to provide coronavirus guidance laced with cyberattack software. In one more alarming case, they appear to have attacked a hospital and forced it to cancel operations and take key systems offline. As the outbreak continues to intensify, the UK National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) warned that the volume of these attacks will likely increase, pointing to the increased registration of coronavirus-related webpages. Criminals are opportunists, and the COVID-19 global onslaught has brought with it not just health threats but cybersecurity risks, too. As companies move to protect the health of their workforce, it’s also important to protect the systems they’re using to run their businesses. It’s especially important for hospitals to shore-up their cyber defenses. If they don’t, just as they are racing to respond to COVID-19, they could face situations like University Hospital Brno in the Czech Republic, which earlier this month was forced to divert patients and cancel planned operations while it worked to address an attack. The most likely cyber threats are email “phishing” campaigns that use the coronavirus as a lure to get the recipient to open an attachment that contains malware. According to the NCSC, such “phishing” attempts are happening on a global scale in multiple countries, which has led to both a theft of money and sensitive data. Similarly, known hacker groups have been launching websites purporting to sell masks or other safety-related measures for coronavirus, possibly to use them as another vector for cyberattacks. The NCSC has also cautioned that these attacks are “versatile and can be conducted through various media, adapted to different sectors and monetized via multiple means, including ransomware, credential theft, bitcoin or fraud.” The cybersecurity firm ProofPoint has seen a rise in these cyberattack emails with COVID-19 themes since January. Both ProofPoint and IBM’s X-Force cybersecurity unit identified a campaign that targeted users in Japan with an email masquerading as a coronavirus information email that carries with it a potent type of cybercrime software. In the US, the Secret Service recently warned of scams from online criminals posing as sellers of high-demand medical supplies to prevent coronavirus. They’ll require payment upfront and not send the products. Cyber criminals have also been posing as the World Health Organization and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), sending fraudulent emails from the former and “creating domain names similar to the CDC’s web address to request passwords and even bitcoin donations to fund a vaccine” for the latter. In addition to the use of the coronavirus as a cyberattack vector, the growing need for working remotely to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 has increased companies’ exposure to cyber threats. The increase in remote work creates more opportunities for hackers to make inroads from less secure locations. Companies should also ensure they can provide adequate security when their whole workforce is remote. They should quickly work through the security implications of workers choosing to switch to insecure personal devices. With national-level pressures on home broadband, staff will also resort to mobile hotspots, which are often less secure. And enabling remote connectivity at scale, with the right security configurations, can be a challenge even with months of preparation time. A recent US Department of Homeland Security COVID-19 cybersecurity notice pointed to the importance of making sure that security measures are up to date for companies’ remote access systems. Additional measures to consider include enabling multifactor authentication—which can require two or more steps to verify a user’s identity before granting access to corporate networks. The NCSC is also working to identify malicious sites responsible for phishing and cyberattack software. A final looming cyberthreat related to Covid-19 is disinformation. The World Health Organization and other agencies have for months been combatting disinformation campaigns spreading false information about the origins of and treatments for COVID-19—reports that seed more confusion and increase risks to society. All of that means that computer virus risks are emerging as the biological virus spreads—and both are a threat to business. Cyber risk mitigation efforts should account for the different ways that a company can be affected, including impacts on the technical, operational, legal and reputational aspects of a business. Often, the reputational effects of a cyberattack are more significant than direct the business or technical impact. To mitigate all of the potential impacts of cyberattacks taking advantage of the Covid-19 outbreak, companies should: Review and update crisis and cybersecurity response plans, and ensure internal and external communications response plans are robust. Confirm that members of the crisis management team understand their roles and responsibilities. Make sure all communications channels have the latest security patches. Review and update access controls, particularly when remote access is used heavily, to make sure that only those who require access to sensitive systems to do their jobs have it. Take extra care when handling medical information. For companies managing employees who have contracted Covid-19, it’s important that personal health information is handled with strong security measures, including encryption. Educate employees about the cyber risks that may attempt to capitalize on fear of the Covid-19 virus—whether it be phishing email or disinformation. Covid-19 poses a number of short- and long-term challenges to business resilience, and the virus’s trajectory is quick and unpredictable. But it’s possible to anticipate and mitigate a number of the cyber threats that will try to ride the virus’s coattails. The companies that do will be more resilient and better positioned to withstand the direct health and operational effects of the virus.
