All Posts

An old Boss of mine used to have this ‘sin’ aphorism written on the white board in their office - this was the analogue and not the digital age. His point being, that having a good radar system and dashboard to understand reality, supported by a keen understanding of what you are seeking to achieve is a critical function of the command of any operation or event - you have to be on top of the detail. It is inevitable that subordinate commanders have to think very clearly befor

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" is a great proverb by the Spanish-American philosopher George Santayana. It warns that without an active awareness of past mistakes, humanity and societies are destined to experience the same follies, suffering, and societal breakdowns - I think the same rule applies to operational and event planning. Over my period of leadership, it would be fair to say that in many ways there has been fundamental change; but

Many organisations use ‘Red Teams’, challenge panels, subject matter experts and ‘champions’ to test their planning assumptions and critique delivery options and contingencies. I fully support this approach and have also extensively used peer reviewing, both to get a better plan and expose possible blind spots whilst binding key stakeholders into a preferred way forward. However, there is a step before this - choose your own team wisely in the first place! To use a sporting a

The adage that "No plan survives first contact with the enemy" is a timeless military truth famously attributed to the Prussian Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke the Elder or as Mike Tyson more pithily put it ‘ Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.’ I think these two quotes neatly set out the conundrum of operational planning and delivery: a plan is essential but somehow it becomes more challenging when the rubber hits the road and an event starts; in any op

In my view, this question is a key consideration as a theme or golden thread running through all operational planning. My basic rule of thumb for the strategic intentions for events are the 4s - Safe, Secure, Safeguarded and Spectacular! If you get the balance right between these 4 areas then you have an event where the public are not talking about security but about their what they have been privileged to witness and enjoy. Too many leaders end up with a security event where

When I have lectured and mentored colleagues with respect to developing strategic command skills, one of the most asked and discussed issues is “What is strategy?” Aspiring leaders seem to get hung up on the mythical ability to ‘be strategic’. I try and explain strategy using the car bonnet analogy. It goes like this: when you are driving a vehicle you look at what is right in front of you to navigate through the traffic but you also have planned the journey to your final des

Need I say more in terms of my planning philosophy? Many of my colleagues over the years have considered me a bit gloomy always seeing potential disasters round every corner. Some have suspected that my hero is Private Frazer for the British TV Series ‘Dad’s Army’ who would lugubriously intone “Doomed! We are all doomed’ on occasions of challenge. I think in Event Management 101 Manual, it is axiomatic that there there is no risk free, completely safe operation - all event

Duke of Wellington's Desk - Whitehall This might seem a rather baffling statement, in the context of event planning; but, in my experience ‘feeding the beast’ means making sure you are communicating in a timely and effective manner with the media, the public, senior leadership, stakeholders and your staff with respect to operational progress and major developments (whether adverse or positive). The voracious and ever evolving communications environment , with the growth of so

Kensington Oval Barbados 2024 As I reflect on my 35 years in event and operational leadership, a number of clear lessons have become apparent to me. I was once talking to a senior colleague, who related a story that has always stuck with me. Post a very serious incident, the responsible police commander was being cross examined within an adversarial judicial forum. The questioning was becoming somewhat testy, as cross examinations normally do! In response to a particularly