Safe feels like a hard wall on the outside and a clear map inside. If you think the walls are solid, you’ll invest heavily in locks, sensors, and redundancy. If you trust the map, you focus on training, protocols, and rapid response. In practice, perception drives allocation: a client who feels exposed will accept a higher cost for absolute certainty; one who trusts the process may be fine with lighter layers and stronger human oversight. It’s all about aligning the strategy with the client’s mental model, not just the technical threat.

Exactly. A solid wall gives a false sense of invulnerability while hiding blind spots. A well‑drawn map lets you spot threats before they hit. The key is to calibrate the protection level to the client’s risk perception, not to an idealized sense of safety. That way the defenses stay effective without becoming an obstacle in themselves.

True, it’s about hitting the sweet spot—enough deterrent to keep threats out, but not so much that you blind the client to what’s actually happening. That balance is where the real value lies.