Elizabeth Rupert
For many event and venue teams, risk planning happens in waves. It intensifies after an incident, spikes just before a major event, and then quietly fades as day to day operations take over. The challenge is that many of the risks that create the biggest problems do not announce themselves loudly or suddenly. They build slowly, often in plain sight.
These are not theoretical risks but rather issues that tend to complicate responses, strain teams, and draw scrutiny when something goes wrong.
Trend one: Operational complexity is outpacing planning
Events are more layered than they used to be. Multiple vendors, temporary staff, third party partners, and overlapping responsibilities are now the norm. When roles and decision making authority are not clearly defined ahead of time, confusion emerges quickly during an incident. Teams often discover gaps only after they are already under pressure.
Planning that focuses only on written procedures without addressing how decisions are actually made on site leaves organizations vulnerable. Clear command structures, escalation thresholds, and shared expectations across partners matter more than ever.
Trend two: Crowd behavior is less predictable
Crowds are influenced by more than just attendance numbers. Social dynamics, alcohol use, weather, external events, and online activity all shape how people move and react. Even experienced teams are finding that crowd flow assumptions no longer hold in the same way they once did.
Venues that rely on historical patterns without reassessing entry points, egress routes, and high energy zones can find themselves reacting rather than managing. Crowd related incidents often escalate quickly because early warning signs are missed or dismissed.
Trend three: Communication systems are assumed, not tested
Many teams believe their communication systems will work because they exist. Radios are issued, messaging platforms are selected, and emergency notifications are configured. Too often, those systems have not been tested under realistic conditions or with the staff who will actually use them.
During incidents, breakdowns tend to occur around message clarity, message authority, and timing. Teams may communicate too late, to the wrong audience, or with conflicting information. The risk extends beyond technical failure to human and procedural gaps.
Trend four: Staff readiness varies widely
Turnover, seasonal hiring, and reliance on part time staff continue to challenge preparedness. Many staff members have never experienced a serious incident on site. Others may have training that is outdated or inconsistent with current plans.
When expectations are unclear, it’s understandable that staff will default to instinct. Sometimes that instinct helps but other times it creates additional risk. Training that focuses on decision making and role clarity, rather than memorization, better prepares teams for real world conditions.
Trend five: Documentation and follow through lag behind reality
Plans exist, but they are often outdated, fragmented, or disconnected from actual operations. After action reviews are completed but not revisited. Lessons learned are identified but not integrated into future planning.
This creates a slow drift between what is documented and what is practiced. Over time, that drift increases exposure and makes it harder to demonstrate due diligence after an incident.
Addressing these trends early requires honesty and dedicated time. The most effective teams use slower periods to pressure test assumptions, clarify expectations, and make small adjustments that prevent larger problems later. After all, risk planning is about creating conditions where teams can make good decisions under stress. That work is far easier to do before the season is in full swing.
