Technical ReportPDF Available

2020 Events Industry Survey Report: Risk, Readiness & Resilience

Authors:
  • University of Leceister

Abstract

How resilient is your team, organization and event in the face of uncertainty in today’s global risk society? The aim of the research was to gain a deeper insight into the current risk management practices adopted by event organizers and how they prepared their organizations and teams to manage adversity and uncertainty in today's global risk society. The 2020 Event Preparedness and Resilience Survey Report co-authored by Peter Ashwin (Event Risk Management Solutions) and Melanie Wilson (Blerter). The report was based on the analysis of of the data-set (responses) from over 160 industry leaders across 11 countries.
ERMS +
Insights into concerns and risk
management in the events industry.
Event Preparedness
and Resilience
Survey Report 2020
Foreword 2
Executive Summary 4
Key findings 5
Survey summary 7
Trends in event risk management 8
Survey Findings 10
Risk management 10
Spotlight | Risk management 12
Security 14
Incidents 15
Governance 17
Spotlight | Getting the weather decision right 18
The event workforce 20
Workforce management 21
Communication 22
Technology 23
Spotlight | Collaboration and technology 25
Insurance 27
Financial and legal matters 28
Final Thoughts | Thought Leaders in Risk Management & Technology 29
Peter Ashwin | Director & Founder, Event Risk Management Solutions 29
Richard Gill | CEO & Co-Founder, Blerter 29
References 30
Contents
Copyright © 2020 Event Risk Management Solutions and Cloud M Limited, trading as Blerter.
All rights reserved. No parts of this report may be reproduced or used in any manner without proper attribution
or the written permission of the copyright owners.
Blerter and Event Risk Management Solutions
are pleased to present the inaugural edition
of the Event Preparedness and Resilience
Survey, a comprehensive assessment of the
state of risk management and preparedness
in the live events industry. The survey ndings
are based on the responses of 160 plus Event
Directors, Owners, Security and Operations
Directors from eleven countries around the
world and represent thousands of events.
We would like to thank all of the survey
participants for their time and insights.
Overall, the survey found that members
of the events industry are becoming
increasingly aware of the requirement to
have risk management plans and risk-based
safety and security protocols. There is
little standardization across the events
industry or individual events in the way that
those risk-based plans are developed or
implemented. Governance and ownership
of risk management varies markedly from
organization to organization, as does
responsibility for operational security and
decision-making.
Awareness of event risk management
is undeniably growing; we are seeing a
transition from being insurance-led to
proactive engagement by event leadership,
but it is clear that the events industry faces a
Dear peers, partners, colleagues and event gurus,
significant number of challenges in achieving
a more mature level of preparedness and
capability to manage adverse results.
In the current global climate of biological,
environmental, economic and social
uncertainty, a heightened awareness of risk
means that event managers should conduct
an honest review of their understanding
and management of risk. This should be
carried out with their core teams, and where
practicable, with the guidance of an events
risk expert. With webinars, presentations
and workshops at association conferences,
online templates and guides, and a growing
software segment focused on event risk
management, the tools and support are
there to drive evolution in this area.
We hope that this assessment of risk
awareness and preparedness provides you
with useful insights as you improve your
understanding and effectiveness in event
risk management.
PETER ASHWIN RICHARD GILL
ERMS BLERTER
Foreword
Peter A.
R. Gill
2© BLERTER + ERMS
Blerter is a simple, easy-to-use event
delivery platform that helps you centralize
your communications, operations and,
safety processes - connecting your entire
team in one place. Reduce risk, streamline
delivery and increase engagement at your
next event.
HI@BLERTER.COM
Melanie Wilson
SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER, BLERTER
Melanie is a member of the Blerter leadership
team. She combines the discipline of an
MBA with experience in endurance sports,
education, and health & safety, to carry out
research and business projects for Blerter
and its partners.
Event Risk Management Solutions is a
consulting practice committed to supporting
event committees and cities plan and deliver
safe and secure events and festivals though
industry leading risk management practices
and integrated security design solutions for
today’s uncertain world.
PETER.ASHWIN@ERMSGLOBAL.COM
Peter Ashwin
PRINCIPAL AND FOUNDER, ERMS
Peter is recognized as an industry leader for
developing strategies and pragmatic solutions
to integrate event organizing committees with
Government Security Authorities, Police and
the private security sector within complex event
environments. Over the last twenty years, he
has led and managed multi-national, major
event teams in Australia, USA, Azerbaijan,
Canada, Greece, Italy and the UK.
Blerter and ERMS are committed to conducting research that adds value and
keeps people safe. 2019 saw the inaugural survey on event preparedness and
resilience, with the aim of measuring progress and highlighting opportunities for
improvement. We look forward to your feedback and thoughts!
The Event Preparedness
& Resilience Survey
ERMS
3© BLERTER + ERMS
The live entertainment industry is going
through a period of growth. A 2014 Nielsen
study reported that 102 million people
attend at least one festival each year in
the US, with over 34 million individuals
attending music festivals. In 2018, the
Financial Times reported a 12% increase
from 2016 to 2017 in live music attendees,
and 14 million people attending festivals in
the United Kingdom annually.
An already busy events calendar is becoming
even more crowded as organizers and new
entrants respond to growing demand. This
being the case, competition is increasing for
workers and volunteers, security and city
services, as well as for funding. Competition
for attendees has also created a trend for
more and more “unique” event experiences.
Unique experiences and exotic locations
add levels of complexity to an already
complicated planning and risk management
process. One such event that failed to
manage its complexity was the 2017 Fyre
Festival. The organizer’s promise of an
exotic, luxurious experience in a remote
location has been discussed at length in
the media, and examined in at least two
documentaries. Public infamy and legal
consequences followed the organizer’s
failure to identify risks, plan adequately
or manage adverse weather and supply
chain hurdles, and the whole sorry saga is
a reminder that a failed event can affect the
economic and environmental wellbeing of a
local region and its residents.
There are millions of events held each year,
the majority without a Fyre-like failure
or major incident. However, the area of
risk management is not implemented in
a standardized way. Results from the
ERMS+Blerter 2019 Event Preparedness
and Resilience Survey suggest that event
organizers rely on insurance and contracted
security, whether police or private, to
manage incidents and their impact, rather
than in conjunction with a comprehensive
risk management strategy. This is underlined
by a disparity between survey respondents’
self-assessment of mission-readiness and
risk maturity, and the relatively low numbers
who have up-to-date plans and suitable
training strategies.
The ERMS+Blerter 2019 Event Preparedness
and Resilience Survey assesses the events
industry’s risk management practices and the
challenges it faces in the current environment.
The survey was conducted in the second half
of 2019 and includes responses from 160
industry members from eleven countries.
The questions were designed by Peter
Ashwin, a recognized thought leader in
Event Risk Management, and the survey
was conducted by Blerter, a market leader
in event communications, operations and
safety management software.
Executive Summary
4© BLERTER + ERMS
A little dose of reality.
While 86% of survey respondents assessed their risk
management processes as “Mature” or “Emerging”,
75% said that they do no onsite emergency response
training with their workers. 59% said that they never
conduct evacuation drills or training, and 37% that
they do no incident management training with their
teams at all.
Mission-readiness is an area where confidence levels
are more representative of the evidence. Only 16.6%
of respondents rate themselves as “Mission-ready”
while 61.1% consider themselves “Somewhat ready”.
One size does not fit all.
Each event has its own particular shape and
challenges. In spite of this, the survey tells us that
most event organizers rely on annual or one-off risk
management and safety planning. Only 18% have a
risk management plan that is less than 12 months old,
21% say that they do not have a plan at all, and 14%
don’t know whether they have a plan or not.
When it comes to cleaning up, should something
go wrong, respondents are consistent. 100% have
at least one insurance policy. 94% have general
liability cover, 23% for event cancellation, and 8%
for rain cover. 6% indicate that their insurance cover
is not event-specific.
Roles, responsibilities and
decision-making.
While 85% of respondents have a Board or Executive,
only 27% are fully engaged in risk management.
Roles and responsibility for risk and safety are spread
across the event team and workforce, offering the
potential for confusion. 37% consider the Operations
Director responsible for risk management, and 22%
believe that it sits with the CEO or Executive Director.
Another 22% believe that the Police or EMS services
are responsible for risk management at their events.
Crowd management is another area where there is
little uniformity. 35% believe that volunteers and
event workers are responsible, 32% private security,
and 32% the police.
The decision to evacuate an event has significant
financial and reputational ramifications. While 23%
assign that responsibility to the Police, 27% say that
the Event Director makes the decision, and 18% the
CEO or Executive Director. Only 17% said that their
Operations Director or Manager was responsible for
deciding to evacuate an event.
Key findings
5© BLERTER + ERMS
How do you know what you don’t know?
95% of respondents have experienced an incident at
their event in the past five years. However, only 31%
have a system for reporting near misses, meaning
that over two-thirds of organizers do not have the
full picture.
Visibility over the wider event team is managed in a
variety of ways, although 19% of respondents say that
they do not track their workforce. Workers’ access
to safety guides and event information is generally
managed through point-in-time documents distributed
by email (89%), as hard copies (85%), by text message
(58%) and through social media (40%). Only 18% use
a mobile application, and 37% another tech platform.
Communication methods are dominated
by old technology.
Hand-held radios remain the go-to communication
tool for events, whether for operational (87%) or
emergency communications (89%). The use of text
messages (89% and 71% respectively) is also common,
although a surprising 27% of respondents use email
for emergency communications. 13% use social media.
The use of mobile apps is not yet commonplace.
29% of those surveyed use them for operational
communications and 22% for emergencies. However,
as 92% of respondents said that most people use a
smartphone at their events, the use of apps is likely to
increase over time, as it offers both cost efficiencies
and wider reach for important communications.
Concerns about rising costs for security
have proved to be true.
42% of respondents consider increases in safety and
security costs as one of their top five concerns, the
second most common concern after severe weather
(58%). 53% say that they have experienced significant
cost increases for security over the past five years.
The recovery of costs for police and public services is
likely to become even more of an urgent topic between
event organizers and municipalities. The majority of
organizers (51%) have a budget of less than $100,000
but require both private security (55% always and
another 15% depending on the event) and police in
attendance (65% always, and 26% sometimes).
Event security and screening measures
are not as universal as you might think.
While most respondents (81%) use multiple measures
to screen and monitor people and safety at their events,
a surprising 19% do not use any security controls at
all. Exactly half (50%) do not conduct any form of
attendee screening measures, such as bag checks, pat
downs or metal detectors.
42% of respondents
consider increases in
safety and security
costs as one of the
top five concerns...
Find out more
If you haven’t used an event delivery platform
before, get a quick overview of Blerter.
WATCH OVERVIEW
6© BLERTER + ERMS
2019 EVENTS INDUSTRY
78% of Event Directors / Managers
consider themselves “Mission-ready
or “Somewhat ready
yet...
59% don’t conduct evacuation drills
and 37% admit that they don’t have an
evacuation plan.
45% consider their risk management
processes to be “Mature
yet...
Only 18% have up-to-date risk
management plans.
21% admit that they don’t have a plan at all
(and 14% aren’t sure)
61%
22%
17%
MISSION READY SOMEWHAT READY NOT READY
56%
have had slips and
falls causing injury
29%
have had a weather
related evacuation
17%
have had a crowd
safety incident
15%
have had a death
or serious injury
11%
have had a temporary
structure collapse
MATURE EMERGING AD HOC
45%41%14%
But.. 75% don’t do any emergency
response training with their event
workers or volunteers
and 37% don’t do incident
management training with their team.
1 2
3
Are you mission-ready?
Want to share the highlights?
DOWNLOAD THE INFOGRAPHIC
7© BLERTER + ERMS
Trends in event
risk management
The regularity with which events are subject to disruption of one kind or another has
spawned a specific event risk management sector. As the sector grows in size, maturity
and visibility, a range of sources are making information, advice and resources more
widely available.
Workshops are commonplace at
industry meetings and conferences.
Risk management and health & safety have become
a compulsory part of many courses of study in event
planning and management. Sessions on security and
risk are well-attended, often crowded, at conventions
and it is common for law enforcement and/or local
bodies to have representatives contributing to panels
on safety and security.
Government and municipal agencies
are developing a wide range of free
resources.
The importance of events to cities and local communities
is illustrated by the resources that local and national
government bodies are committing to developing
materials, training courses, and in access to advisors.
In the United States, for example, the Department of
Homeland Security offers a range of guides, templates
and training on its website, and has advisors and
experts available regionally.
Smartphone penetration is changing the
way we seek information.
The days of paper tickets and event-worker
phonebook-width manuals are numbered, as both
attendees and event staff look to engage online,
using their personal mobile devices. As a result, the
event software market is booming, with over 80,000
companies developing solutions for all areas of event
management. Having access to up-to-the-minute
information is rapidly becoming an expectation
rather than a wishlist item, particularly among
Millennials and Gen Z.
Risk management practice is maturing
faster in some industries than in others.
There is growing interest worldwide in risk management
and preparedness, with some industries further along
the journey than others. The events industry is lagging
behind those with more predictable, measurable
environments, but there is growing awareness that
the very uncertainty inherent in high risk, outdoor or
multi-venue events must drive change.
8© BLERTER + ERMS
Cybersecurity and data protection laws
are here to stay.
The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
was implemented in May 2018 and is considered
to be the biggest change in privacy laws in the last
20 years. The way event organizers collect, store,
share and use people’s information has had to evolve
quickly to comply with requirements, and this has
meant relying heavily on software companies making
changes to their products.
The introduction of the California Consumer Privacy
Act (CCPA) on January 1st, 2020, is predicted to have
a similar impact on events in the United States to that
experienced by European Union members over the
past 18 months, and is expected to trigger adoption of
similar legislation across the country.
Increased awareness of sexual
assault in sport and at music festivals
is driving change.
In the wake of the #metoo movement, awareness of
inappropriate behavior around events has gathered
momentum as people, particularly young women, take
to social media and online forums to say “enough”.
A recent study commissioned by the Press Association
in the UK indicates that statistics on sexual incidents
at music festivals are just the tip of the iceberg. Only
2% of assaults are reported to the police, although
22% of festival attendees experience unwanted sexual
behavior, and 43% of women under forty.
Many festivals around the world deploy specially-trained
volunteers and responders around their events, to
engage with crowds and encourage supportive,
respectful behaviour. Some events have designated
safe spaces and reporting phone lines.
National sports agencies have implemented
education programs for coaches, medical staff, team
managers, athletes, and in some cases, volunteers.
Codes of conduct, such as SafeSport in the US, are
being used to address athlete safety and set out
behavioral expectations.
Only 2% of assaults
are reported to the
police, although 22%
of festival attendees
experience unwanted
sexual behavior...
9© BLERTER + ERMS
Survey findings
risk management
Risk management
45% of respondents consider their risk management processes to be “Mature”, and another
41% “Emerging”. Only 14% say that their risk management was “Ad Hoc”.
Responsibility for risk management most often sits with the Operations Director, the CEO
or the Police/EMS.
While 86% of participants believe their risk assessment maturity to be full or emerging, only
18% have a risk management plan that is less than 12 months old, and only 19% carry out
reviews more than once a year. 21% of respondents do not have a plan at all, and 44% do not
know how often there was a risk management review.
Less than a year ago 18%
In the past 5 years 33%
More than 5 years ago 14%
Don’t have one 21%
Don’t know 14%
Monthly 6%
Quarterly 4%
6-monthly 9%
Annually 37%
Don’t know 44%
REVIEWEDRISK MANAGEMENT PLAN DEVELOPED
MATURE EMERGING AD HOC
%%%
Operations Director/Manager
CEO/Executive Director
Police /EMS
CFO
Consultant
Insurance broker
Don’t know
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Responsibility for risk management
10© BLERTER + ERMS
Most participants indicate that their event(s) have a number of safety plans and procedures,
including 60% of people who say that they have a specific plan to respond to severe weather,
which correlates to the 58% who give weather as a top-5 concern, and the 43% who have had
a previous weather-related evacuation.
The challenges identified in developing appropriate risk management plans include a lack of
budget for external support, and a lack of time and expertise.
The importance of effective risk management was reflected in the number of participants that
have undertaken formal risk management training (72%). However, risk and related training
appears to be less consistent across the wider event workforce, with onsite emergency training
taking place for only 25% of events.
Lack of budget for external support 31%
Lack of time available 25%
Lack of buy-in from Board/Executive 8%
Limited / no experience 20%
CHALLENGES IN DEVELOPING A RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN ( % DON’T KNOW )
Emergency management plan 83%
Event security plan 69%
Evacuation plan 63%
Severe weather plan 60%
Site safety induction 45%
Active shooter plan 31%
Crowd management plan 34%
Safety policy for vehicle operations 32%
Shelter-in-place plans 26%
Emergency response training onsite
Tabletop training pre-event
Incident response training
%
%
%
%
%
%
Risk, emergency and incident management training undertaken
TRAINING CARRIED OUT NO ASSOCIATED TRAINING
11© BLERTER + ERMS
Spotlight:
Risk management
According to the Risk Management Institute of Australasia, risk is :
“[...] the loss (or gain) arising from people, systems or external
events which have the potential to cause the organization to
deviate from its objectives.”
Risk management is defined by the US Department of Homeland Security (2011 : Risk
Fundamentals) as :
“the identification, assessment, and prioritization of risks,
followed by coordinated and economical application of
resources to minimize, monitor, and control the probability
and/or impact of unfortunate events.”
Intrinsic to the concept of risk, therefore, are the ideas of likelihood (the chance of
something happening, the potential probability that a given risk will occur), and
consequence (the impact outcome of an event, which has an effect on objectives).
The unavoidable fact is that all organizations and endeavors face a range of risks.
“All organizations work in an environment characterized by
risk. Successful organizations not only understand these
risks but use an understanding of these risks to make risk
informed decisions.”
ISO  () RISK MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
The need for effective risk management is particularly relevant for the events
industry, as organizers and host cities are operating in a complex, multi-stakeholder
landscape, and facing challenges from the economic to the environmental,
behavioural to digital and beyond.
Competition for sponsorship, talent, venues, attendees, security personnel and calendar
space are familiar and consistent “known” risks (the “known knowns”, as Donald Rumsfeld
would say ), but what about the “known unknowns”, or even the “unknown unknowns”?
Opportunity and risk
come in pairs.
BANGAMBIKI HABYARIMANA
12© BLERTER + ERMS
Most event organizers are actively managing known risks, but many have not yet
implemented a structured approach to ensure that foreseeable risks are identified,
assessed, evaluated and documented. The survey results suggest that, while a small
percentage of organizers have an up-to-date plan, most are not carrying out regular
reviews, or being effective in deploying the plan across the wider workforce.
One method for approaching risk management is to work with a recognized framework,
setting out the stages in developing a risk strategy. The ISO 31000 diagram below
illustrates a series of steps, shows the linkages and ongoing requirements for
monitoring and reviews, and the requirement for communication and consultation
throughout the journey.
There are also three proven concepts that a team can work through, to enhance their
resilience and build knowledge and capability for addressing the known, and the
unknown risks to their organization and event. These are :
1. Risk-based event planning and decision-making
2. “Secure by design” principles for enhancing safe and secure guest experiences
3. Operational-readiness exercises, education and training.
By taking a structured approach to developing a proactive risk management
strategy, and by sharing the learning journey with event workers, volunteers,
sponsors, vendors, exhibitors, medical teams and the wider events community,
event organizers have the opportunity to influence the events industry culture as
a whole, as well as empower their people to be ready and able to respond if, or
when, the moment calls.
© 2019 Event Risk Management Solutions LLC. All Rights Reserved.
E.R.M. - Enterprise Risk Management
. ESTABLISH THE CONTENT
. RISK IDENTIFICATION
. RISK ANALYSIS
. RISK EVALUATION
. RISK TREATMENT
. MONITORING & REVIEW
COMMUNICATION &
CONSULTATION
RISK ASSESSMENT
13© BLERTER + ERMS
Security
The types and number of security measures in place at events varies widely. While
59% of respondents say that they have a game-day security command and control
center, an even 50% say that they carry out no security screening of participants.
Combined with only 41% having a physical check-in for the wider event workforce, this
area warrants further attention. The indications point to a yawning gap in preventing
dangerous or contraband items being brought onto event sites.
Security command & control center
Perimeter security fence
Security video surveilance system
Hostile vehicle mitigation (blocking vehicles)
Pre-event sweep by K9 explosive detector dogs
Hostile vehicle mitigation (temporary or mechanical bollards)
Police SWAT teams
Hostile vehicle mitigation (permanent bollards)
Walk-through metal detectors (“mags”)
Vehicle inspections/search
Drone detection systems
None
Bag checks only
Bag checks and handheld metal detectors
K9 explosive detection dogs
Bag checks and “pat downs”
Walk-through metal detectors and x-rays
Don’t know
None
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Security measures in place during the event
Screening measures at the event
14© BLERTER + ERMS
Incidents
Severe weather, rising security costs, active shooters and crowd safety are the
most common concerns. Among those, the increased cost of security was most
commonly experienced in the past five years, and second only to slips and falls
across all respondents.
Event evacuation has affected almost half of the respondents, with weather the most common
cause. However, although 46% have had at least one evacuation, 32% never carry out
evacuation drills and 22% say that they carry them out just prior to their event.
%
%
%
%
CONCERNS (IN TOP ) INCIDENTS (PAST  YEARS)
Incidents and concerns over the past 5 years
None
Weather
Bomb threat
Suspicious package
Structural failure
Terrorist act or threat
Wildfire
Active shooter
Other
Never
Just prior to the event
Annually
Unsure when the last one was
Once in the last 2 years
Once in the last 5 years
Slips or falls
Vehicle ramming crowd
Temporary infrastructure failure
Lost child
Terrorism
Data breach/cyber security
Bomb threat
Drone intrusion
Golf cart incidents
Sexual assault
Fraud/embezzlement
Other
Death or serious injury
Event cancellation
Crowd safety incidents
Severe weather
Security & safety costs
Active shooter
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Causes of event evacuations Evacuation training & drills
15© BLERTER + ERMS
When it comes to building a risk profile, there are likely to be gaps in awareness, as the tracking
of ‘near misses’ is not widespread, only 31% of respondents carrying out Near Miss reporting.
A further 14% are not aware of whether there was a system for reporting near misses or not.
The responsibility for making evacuation decisions is an area of inconsistency, while
management of crowd behaviour and incidents is spread across frontline workforce groups.
Incident management training methods and responsibility vary. While some employ a number of
methods to deliver training, over a third do not carry out incident response training at all.
Event Director/Event Manager
Police Commander/other Officer
CEO/Executive Director
Event Operations Manager/Director
Venue Owner/Facilities Manager
Safety Officer
Other
Event Director/Manager
Security officer or Director
External consultant
Event Coordinator
Police
Other
Event staff & volunteers
Private security
Police Commander/other
Officer
Don’t know
Other
Tabletop exercises
Internal workshops
Onlinebriefings/training
External trainer-led
workshop
Public training courses
Other
None
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Person responsible for deciding
whether to evacuate an event
Person responsible for
delivering training
Group responsible for crowd
management
Method for delivering training
Near miss reporting system
NEAR MISS RECORDING NO SYSTEM DON’T KNOW
%%%
16© BLERTER + ERMS
Governance
85% of respondents indicate that their typical events have a Board of Directors or
Executive. However, engagement in risk management at that level has room for
improvement, with only 27% saying that their Board members are fully engaged.
FULLY ENGAGED SOMEWHAT ENGAGED
NOT ENGAGED DON’T KNOW NO BOARD
Board / Executive engagement in risk management
%
%
%
%
%
17© BLERTER + ERMS
Spotlight:
Getting the weather
decision right
The past decade has seen an increase in the frequency and the impact of weather
events, as well as higher rates of climate-related illness and, particularly when
combined with drug use, death. So, it is no surprise that 58% of the event managers
surveyed consider severe weather to be a key concern. With the best will in the world
to predict, understand and act on meteorological forecasts, the weather remains one
of the most difficult considerations in the outdoor events game.
As the weather is a known but not necessarily predictable hazard, and carries a
high potential risk to revenue, attendee experience, safety and event success,
event organizers are exploring ways to have better weather information and better
response plans. Designated meteorologists or meteorology consultancy services
are becoming more common, as are mobile app and monitoring technology, although
delays in information updates are still a concern.
Having access to the right meteorological information, and having practised and
practical protocols for responding to different types of weather are essential for a safe
event cancellation, venue evacuation or shelter-in-place solution. However, there are
two more considerations that are also essential to a safe, timely outcome: who, how,
where and when is the decision made; and how quickly and effectively are the ow-on
measures enacted.
Having a clear, concise decision-making framework allows decision-makers to focus on
processing the information they have and on achieving the right outcome, rather than on
the mechanics of the decision itself. Familiarity with the framework, and with each other,
can be built by going through simulations, tabletop exercises, or other training.
Climate is what we expect,
weather is what we get.
MARK TWAIN
18© BLERTER + ERMS
One framework that has been successfully used for making decisions in uncertain
environments is the OODA loop. Following the OODA steps empowers the event team to
work quickly and methodically, and evaluate information rather than reacting prematurely
or panicking. It also ensures that the right person or people are involved in making the
decision, whether to meet city or facility requirements, or to satisfy an insurance policy.
The series of actions and their associated questions shown below also allow the
event team to make any updates or contextually-driven changes to relevant plans,
communication process, to deploy or redeploy resources as needed, and to get buy-in
from key stakeholders.
© 2019 Event Risk Management Solutions LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Weather is one hazard that can escalate dramatically in a short space of time,
and with relatively little warning. The decision to cancel an event can occur after
it has begun, and lead to a venue evacuation. For outdoor venues, there are two
international standards for evacuation time guidelines:
- The Event Safety Guide (2014) - 15 minutes
- UK Green Guide (1999, 2018, 2edn) - 8 minutes
An Egress (Evacuation) System is a critical control for any event, whether indoors or
outdoors, single venue or multiple venues. It should be well-designed and well-signaled,
and all members of the event workforce should know the planned system well, have
access to real-time, up-to-date information, and receive notication of changes.
“[The system should be] … designed to allow people to move
from a real or perceived location of hazard to a location of
relative safety during a hazard event.”
TUBBS & MEACHAM, , P.
.
OBSERVE
 .
ORIENT /
ASSESS
.
DECIDE
.
ACT
OODA LOOP
What has happened?
What do I know?
What is the mission impact?
Who needs to know and what?
What are the info gaps?
How much time do I have?
Am I empowered to act or
escalate to the decision maker?
Identify courses of action &
“wargame”
Select best course of action
Agree the plan (key
stakeholders)
Confirm support & resource
requirements
Execute the plan
Brief & communicate
Report & “close loops” -
upstream & down stream
19© BLERTER + ERMS
The event
workforce
Delivering an event often means a rapid, exponential increase in the number of people
working together. Typically small, permanent teams, the workforce for a particular event
may increase ten- or hundred-fold overnight, with temporary workers, contractors,
volunteers, security, police ofers and medical teams.
Police officers and private security are present at events for more than half of the respondents,
with both the cost and availability, particularly of city-supplied services, a concern. 59% have
a designated Safety Officer at a typical event.
The number of vendors, suppliers, employees and contractors was not explicitly queried in the
survey, and interviews with event, festival and fair managers suggest that volunteers sourced
through community groups, charities and sports clubs may well not have been included in the
numbers below.
-
POLICE
PRIVATE SECURITY
$-K
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
% %
% %%
%
%
%
%
%
-
$-$K
-
$-$K
-
$-$K
-
$-$K $K+
- - - +
FULLTIME / PERMANENT STAFF PAID WORKERS
POLICE/PUBLIC COSTS
VOLUNTEERS
PRIVATE SECURITY COSTS
Typical numbers of different types of event “worker”
ALWAYS AS NEEDED NEVER DON’T KNOW
%
%
%
%
%
%
20© BLERTER + ERMS
Workforce
management
A large, temporary workforce complicates people management processes, and has the
potential to create confusion. As well as providing relevant information to all concerned,
there are also challenges around maintaining visibility over workers and volunteers onsite,
and ensuring that updates and notications are reaching the right people in time.
Providing access to information is an area with little consistency across the industry. Hard copies
and point-in-time documents sent by email dominate, suggesting that there is room to improve
access to live (real-time) information using people’s smartphones and devices connected directly
with the event operations center.
The onboarding process for 32% of respondents is an SMS/text-message method. 31%
use email, and 26% meetings or paper manuals. When it comes to knowing who is onsite,
physical and face to face methods dominate, with 41% having a physical site check-in. 44% of
respondents do not have direct visibility over their game-day workforce.
Email
SMS
Meetings/
Face-to-face
Hard copies
Mobile app
Other tech platforms
Social media
Phycical check point
Team leader reports
We don’t
Digital checkin
GPS tracking
Other
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Onsite workforce visibilityOn-boarding and general comms
%
%
%
% %
%
% %
EMAILHARD COPY
(MEETING)
HARD COPY
IN SECURITY
OFFICE
OTHER HARD
COPY
OTHER
DOCUMENTS
ONLINE
INDUCTION
MOBILE APP OTHER
Access to safety information
21© BLERTER + ERMS
Communication
Communication during an event is dominated by the use of hand-held radios and text
messages/SMS. While there is consistent, commonplace use of both, 51% of event
managers change the way they communicate with their workers during an emergency.
While there is a growing range of AI-powered analytical tools for measuring and predicting
crowd flows through attendees’ social media activity, and through the deployment of drones,
beacons and other designated hardware, the crowd-sourcing of information from thousands
of workers’, contractors’, vendors’, volunteers’ and participants’ smartphones is predicted to
become commonplace in the near future, as penetration rates reach near-saturation.
65% of respondents say that their workers report suspicious behaviour or other concerns
through text messages versus 85% by radio. Rather than deploying more radios as events
grow, the ability to reach large groups of workers quickly, and to keep information secure is
likely to cause an increase in the use of mobile applications and online platforms.
Two-way radio
Text/SMS
Email
Mobile app
Runners
Social media
Other
Two-way radio
Text/SMS
Email
Mobile app
Runners
Social media
Other
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
% % % %
%
RADIOS TEXTS /
SMS
MOBILE
APP
OTHER
TECH
RUNNERS EMAILS SOCIAL
MEDIA
Methods for workers to report concerns
Emergency communication Operational communication
22© BLERTER + ERMS
Technology
The event software market is growing rapidly, with over 80,000 companies positioning
themselves as event solutions. The majority of these companies focus on customer-facing
activities such as registration, ticketing, advertising and attendee engagement. However,
the number of companies providing software for event delivery, operations and safety is
starting to grow, reecting increased demand for these tools by event organizers.
68% of respondents say that they are satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their use of
technology in risk management, while almost a third say that they are not satisfied. In the area
of risk management, hard copies (85%) and email (89%) are most commonly used across the planning
and managing of operations, in conjunction with growing levels of collaborative technology.
Effective collaboration during planning and real-time targeted communication are two areas
that have been found lacking in a number of incident investigations. With the growing use of
mobile phones for on-boarding and text messaging for communications, it seems likely that
the use of mobile phones to connect groups of workers will spread to include the planning,
operations and risk management functions.
With the implementation of the GDPR (Europe) in 2018, and the California Consumer Privacy Act
due to take effect in 2020, the use of mobile apps is predicted to replace text messaging, in order
for organizers to more easily control access to data, photos and sensitive information. The use of
a software platform, while it does not prevent screenshots or similar, does allow event managers
to track access, investigate breaches, and aggrege data to better protect information.
Satisfied
Somewhat satisfied
Not satisfied
Satisfaction with
current use of
technology to
manage risk
Email
89%
Texts/SMS
58%
Paper
85%
Social media
40%
Meetings
60%
Tech platform
37%
Mobile app
18%
%
%
%
23© BLERTER + ERMS
Spending on event software is difficult to analyze, without a deeper look at respondents
definition of “event technology”. Two-way radios, for example, may be considered “event tech”
by some organizers, but not by others. However, with 12% spending more than a quarter of
their event budget on technology, this will surely be a matter for more research in the future.
Hard copies and printed forms are also the commonly used for incident tracking and reporting,
with 77% of respondents using those formats and only 29% using Incident Management/Safety
Management Software.
Technology most commonly used for incident management
Hard copies
Excel, Word or other office software
IMS/SMS on-premise
IMS/SMS cloud-based
Mobile app
Other
Word of mouth
Referrals
Industry publications
Partners
Analyst reports
Online reviews
Vendor materials
Salespeople
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
-%
%
-%
%
-%
%
>%
%
DON’T
KNOW
Portion of budget spent on
event technology
Influences on choice of
technology supplier
24© BLERTER + ERMS
Spotlight:
Collaboration and
technology
The success of any operation relies on the timely transfer of relevant and up-to-date
information. For an event, organizers engage with different groups and individuals
at different stages in the event life-cycle, from planning, to set-up and pack-down, in
addition to “game-day” itself.
When it comes to risk management, communication and collaboration are as important
as the right plans, safety standards and processes. Hand-held radios remain the
default method for workforce communication at outdoor events, but the cost and
complexity involved are causing many event teams to supplement their radio strategy
with text messaging, email, online platforms, social media, and more recently, mobile
apps. With a mixture of communication media, there are certain aspects that event
teams need to keep top of mind.
Coverage: when the worst happens, instructions and updates need to reach as many of
the event workforce as possible. Relying on telephone trees and runners means delays,
and can lead to messages being diluted or “lost in translation”.
Security: data privacy regulations are tightening around the world, from the European
GDPR to the California Consumer Privacy Act and beyond. It is no longer acceptable to
send a photo of a missing child to event workers’ phones unless it can later be deleted
by the event manager, or to allow volunteers to access participants’ information unless
there are robust controls in place.
Consistency: the range of places to nd or submit information for a single event can
truly boggle the mind. A volunteer or vendor may have a physical check-in onsite, and
have been emailed the event safety manual. They may have a paper form to ll out to
report an incident, be required to join social media group or keep an eye on their text
messages for updates. Consistent, simple communication channels reduce confusion
across a temporary workforce, allow an event team better visibility over the different
groups, and make it easier to conduct investigations or audits post-event.
The single biggest problem in
communication is the illusion
that it has taken place.
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW
25© BLERTER + ERMS
Crowd-sourcing: most events have a small group of permanent members, but use an
expanded workforce to deliver events. Team leaders, security personnel and police
are connected to the command center, but there may be hundreds, even thousands,
of volunteers, suppliers and vendors around the venue throughout the event who are
involved in spotting and managing issues. Giving as many as possible an easy, direct
way to report concerns and actions, even when no damage has resulted, allows the
core team to align and manage their resources in a proactive rather than reactive
way to manage hazards and reduce risk.
In a study into mortality at music festivals, Turris and Lund (2016, updated 2017))
identify the root causes of 924 fatalities from 1999 to 2014. The most common
root cause was stakeholder groups planning in isolation. The result of this was
fragmentation, gaps and overlap in information, in essential roles, and in complicated
and poorly understaood division of responsibilities. The authors propose the “Event
Chain of Survival” framework to connect essential groups throughout the event
life-cycle. Groups that they consider essential in planning, responding, managing
and reviewing are :
- Event producers - Police and security
- Ambulance services - On-site medical services
- Festival health teams - Off-site medical services
(drug-testing, etc.)
The framework is focused on preventing deaths at music festivals through connecting
security and medical groups, but highlights the importance of effective communication
and stakeholder engagement in risk management. The use of technology in event
management is providing ways for these, and other groups to collaborate more easily
and more efficiently, and is becoming an essential element in event planning and
delivery. It has been more fragmented and less effective in its use in emergency
response and incident management, but the growing number of companies focusing
on those capabilities indicates that the tools available for this will become more
sophisticated and more widely used in the near future.
As smartphone penetration rates approach saturation in most developed societies,
the use of secure online platforms and mobile app for event operations and safety
management will increase, with volunteers and the wider workforce using their own
devices over secure, designated wireless networks. This will allow organizers to
repurpose a portion of their event tech budget away from radios and towards secure,
event delivery and safety management software.
Learn more
If you haven’t used an event delivery
platform before, get a quick overview
of Blerter.
WATCH OVERVIEW
26© BLERTER + ERMS
Insurance
Insurance is the most consistently applied risk management method, with 100% having
cover of at least one type. Across the industry, insurance has long been regarded as
synonymous with ‘risk management’, but the focus on safety, planning, preparedness
and risk-related training at industry conferences over the past few years indicates
that this perspective is changing.
Financial and legal risk are areas that insurance cover can help to mitigate, should an event be
cancelled, or an incident cause damage to property, financial loss, injury or death. However,
having effective risk management and communication strategies allows organizers to eliminate
or control hazards, and minimize the impact of incidents. Doing this, in conjunction with the
right insurance, can mean the difference between an event surviving for another year or not.
General Liability 94%
Workers’ Compensation 49%
Directors & Officers 34%
Liquor Liability 35%
Event Cancellation 23%
Within 12 months 11%
Within 1-5 years 34%
5-10 years ago 9%
Never 45%
Vendor Insurance 22%
Rain Cover 8%
Headline Talent Cancellation 8%
Other 9%
Not event-specific 6%
1 claim 22%
2-4 claims 24%
5-10 claims 8%
None 46%
45% of events have never had to make an insurance claim. 11% indicate at least one claim
within the past 12 months.
INSURANCE POLICIES BY TYPE OF COVER
LAST INSURANCE CLAIM INSURANCE CLAIMS (PAST  YRS)
27© BLERTER + ERMS
Financial and
legal matters
More than half of those surveyed spend less than $20,000 USD on private security for a typical
event. 45% spend even less than that on police and public services. Among those who do
engage police or public services, 71% fully or partially recover the related costs.
When it came to questions relating to legal matters, response rates were low. Of those
respondents, 75% had reached a settlement for less than $50,000 USD, and 25% for between
$100,000 USD and $250,000 USD.
Yes 23%
No 52%
Don’t know 25%
Past 12 months 13%
Past 5 years 47%
Past 10 years 27%
N/A 13%
PREVIOUSLY NAMED AS A DEFENDANT MOST RECENT OCCASION
%
% %
%
%
%
%
> $K
> $K
FULL
$K-$K
$K-$K
PARTIAL
$K-K
$K-K
NO RECOVERY
$K-$K
$K-$K
DON’T KNOW
$K-$M
$K-$K
$M-$M
$K-$M+
$M-$M
DON’T KNOW
Total event budget (typical event)
Typical expense for private security and police/public services
Private Security
Cost recovery for
police/city serivces
Police/public
%
%
%
%
%
%
%%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Legal matters : Let’s not talk about it...
28© BLERTER + ERMS
Richard Gill
CEO & CO-FOUNDER
BLERTER
If you want to really get to know a culture,
participating in the festivals, sports and events
that matter to its people is one of the best
ways to do it. Events are where we connect
with each other, nd our social tribe, express
ourselves, and share experiences.
Making amazing events happen is no easy
task. From the Event Director through to the
volunteers, blood, sweat and sometimes tears
go into creating great experiences and keeping
people safe and sound. We, the Blerter team,
salute you and stand with you.
That’s why we are committed to carrying out
research and sharing our learnings with our
customers, partners and our whole industry.
If we all work together, the future of events is
bigger, brighter, and safer for us all.
Peter Ashwin
PRINCIPAL & FOUNDER
EVENT RISK MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
In today’s uncertain world, event organizers and
host cities nd themselves operating in complex,
multi-stakeholder environments. The challenges
faced are signicant and wide ranging.
Organizers generally view risk management
as a key responsibility, so it was surprising
that less than 33% of respondents have a
“risk management plan” or risk register. A risk
management plan is fundamental to ensuring
that your team is prepared for the “knowns”
and the “unknowns”.
We may not be able to predict when and
where a risk event may occur but both Blerter
and ERMS are committed to this journey with
you, and I’m confident that together, we can
support the events industry to deliver safer
and more secure events.
Final Thoughts:
Thought leaders in risk
management & technology
29© BLERTER + ERMS
Ashwin, P. (2019). Protecting Your Events and Preparing for Uncertainty. SportsTravel
Magazine : Oct 7, 2019. www.sportstravelmagazine.com.
Hanbury, Mary (2019). Fyre Festival Expectations vs Reality. Business Insider : Jan 20,
2019. www.businessinsider.com.
Lund, A. & Turris S. (2017). The Event Chain of Survival in the Context of Music Festivals: A
Framework for Improving Outcomes at Major Planned Events. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017
Aug: 32(4): 437-443.
Mumford, G. (2018). ‘Victims know they can call us’ - Cannes sexual harassment hotline up
and running. The Guardian : May 11, 2018. www.theguardian.com.
Sounds of Summer 2016: A Snapshot of Music Festival Fans. Nielsen. www.nielsen.com
Tubbs, J. and Meacham, B. (2007). Egress Design Systems : A Guide to Evacuation & Crowd
Management Planning. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Turris, S.A. & Lund, A. (2016). Mortality at Music Festivals: Academic and Grey Literature
for Case Finding. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017 Feb;32(1):58-63.
UK Music : Wish you were here 2017. www.ukmusic.org.
U.S. Department of Justice : Planning and Managing Security for Major Special Events
(Guidelines for Law Enforcement). www.hsdl.org.
Vanderbilt Industries : Examining security measures at major sporting events. June 14,
2018. www.vanderbiltindustries.com.
Wynn-Moylan (2018). Risk and Hazard Management for Festivals and Events. Routledge : UK.
YouGov / Press Association Survey Results. June 21, 2018. https://yougov.co.uk.
References
Copyright © 2020 Event Risk Management Solutions and Cloud M Limited, trading as Blerter.
All rights reserved. No parts of this report may be reproduced or used in any manner without proper attribution
or the written permission of the copyright owners.
30
Get advice
Every event is different, so expert
advice is essential. Talk to ERMS
about your next event.
Learn more
If you haven’t used an event
delivery platform before, get a
quick overview of Blerter.
Request a demo
Want to see Blerter in action?
Talk to us about the challenges
you’re facing.
CONNECT NOW WATCH OVERVIEW TALK TO US
+ ERMS
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Despite the best efforts of event producers and on-site medical teams, there are sometimes serious illnesses, life-threatening injuries, and fatalities related to music festival attendance. Producers, clinicians, and researchers are actively seeking ways to reduce the mortality and morbidity associated with these events. After analyzing the available literature on music festival health and safety, several major themes emerged. Principally, stakeholder groups planning in isolation from one another (ie, in silos) create fragmentation, gaps, and overlap in plans for major planned events (MPEs). The authors hypothesized that one approach to minimizing this fragmentation may be to create a framework to “connect the dots,” or join together the many silos of professionals responsible for safety, security, health, and emergency planning at MPEs. Adapted from the well-established literature regarding the management of cardiac arrests, both in and out of hospital, the “chain of survival” concept is applied to the disparate groups providing services that support event safety in the context of music festivals. The authors propose this framework for describing, understanding, coordinating and planning around the integration of safety, security, health, and emergency service for events. The adapted Event Chain of Survival contains six interdependent links, including: (1) event producers; (2) police and security; (3) festival health; (4) on-site medical services; (5) ambulance services; and (6) off-site medical services. The authors argue that adapting and applying this framework in the context of MPEs in general, and music festivals specifically, has the potential to break down the current disconnected approach to event safety, security, health, and emergency planning. It offers a means of shifting the focus from a purely reactive stance to a more proactive, collaborative, and integrated approach. Improving health outcomes for music festival attendees, reducing gaps in planning, promoting consistency, and improving efficiency by reducing duplication of services will ultimately require coordination and collaboration from the beginning of event production to post-event reporting. LundA , TurrisSA . The Event Chain of Survival in the context of music festivals: a framework for improving outcomes at major planned events . Prehosp Disaster Med . 2017 ; 32 ( 4 ): 1 – 7 .
Article
Full-text available
Objective: Deaths at music festivals are not infrequently reported in the media; however, the true mortality burden is difficult to determine as the deaths are not yet systematically documented in the academic literature. Methods: This was a literature search for case examples using academic and gray literature sources, employing both retrospective and prospective searches of media sources from 1999-2014. Results: The gray literature documents a total of 722 deaths, including traumatic (594/722; 82%) and non-traumatic (128/722; 18%) causes. Fatalities were caused by trampling (n=479), motor-vehicle-related (n=39), structural collapses (n=28), acts of terror (n=26), drowning (n=8), assaults (n=6), falls (n=5), hanging (n=2), and thermal injury (n=2). Non-traumatic deaths included overdoses (n=96/722; 13%), environmental causes (n=8/722; 1%), natural causes (n=10/722; 1%), and unknown/not reported (n=14/722; 2%). The majority of non-trauma-related deaths were related to overdose (75%). The academic literature documents trauma-related deaths (n=368) and overdose-related deaths (n=12). One hundred percent of the trauma-related deaths reported in the academic literature also were reported in the gray literature (n=368). Mortality rates cannot be reported as the total attendance at events is not known. Conclusions: The methodology presented in this manuscript confirms that deaths occur not uncommonly at music festivals, and it represents a starting point in the documentation and surveillance of mortality. Turris SA , Lund A . Mortality at music festivals: academic and grey literature for case finding. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017;32(1):1 6.
Book
The book examines egress solutions in terms of both prescriptive and performance-based code issues. A portion of the book focuses on techniques for providing egress design solutions and for coordinating egress systems with other critical life safety systems. Another part reviews historic and recent tragic life-loss fire events. As such, this is easily the most comprehensive take on the subject, written especially for architects.
Protecting Your Events and Preparing for Uncertainty
  • P Ashwin
Ashwin, P. (2019). Protecting Your Events and Preparing for Uncertainty. SportsTravel Magazine : Oct 7, 2019. www.sportstravelmagazine.com.
Fyre Festival Expectations vs Reality
  • Mary Hanbury
Hanbury, Mary (2019). Fyre Festival Expectations vs Reality. Business Insider : Jan 20, 2019. www.businessinsider.com.
Victims know they can call us' -Cannes sexual harassment hotline up and running. The Guardian
  • G Mumford
Mumford, G. (2018). 'Victims know they can call us' -Cannes sexual harassment hotline up and running. The Guardian : May 11, 2018. www.theguardian.com. Sounds of Summer 2016: A Snapshot of Music Festival Fans. Nielsen. www.nielsen.com