Why “Pre‑formance”?
When analysing the topic of Crises and Control Rooms an internal typo frames the work we can do to prepare individuals and teams for crises and control rooms.
Similar to a chef’s preparation, ingredients, restaurant design and team structure, a successful team relies on the items prepared in advance as well as the performance of personnel on the day. The preparation, mindset, skills, character, and team conditions all ultimately determine how we perform when the pressure is on.
Whether you’re running an event control room, an emergency operation, or a corporate crisis cell—the work starts long before the incident.
1. The Human Challenge Inside Control Rooms
Across events, venues, and incidents, we consistently observe:
Temporary Teams
Control rooms often bring together people who have never worked together, may be unfamiliar with the environment, and may bring completely different organisational cultures and expectations.
Assumed Knowledge
There is no universal entry‑level qualification for control rooms. Baselines vary wildly—from ACT/CT-aware teams to people who’ve had no structured training at all.
Varying Tempo & Cognitive Load
Periods of lull followed by spikes in demand create emotional whiplash. How teams use their quiet time influences their resilience when the critical moments arrive.
Siloed Information & Conflicting Agendas
Even the best processes can be undermined by unclear aims, misaligned priorities, or poor handover.
Fight‑or‑Flight in a Small Room
Stress responses trigger inward‑focus, heightened threat perception, and reduced ability to think relationally or creatively.
In short?
Control rooms magnify human factors. And unless we understand and manage this, our technical plans can only take us so far.
2. What’s Going on in the Human Brain Under Pressure?
Kate offered a clear, practical breakdown of how the brain processes a situation under stress:
Threat System → Emotion → Logic
Stimuli are first filtered for threat (physical or social).
Then interpreted via emotional memory.
Only then can we engage logic, language, and analysis.
But under stress:
- Fight/flight dominates
- Logic and learning are suppressed
- Emotional processing jams
- Irritability, tunnel vision, and defensiveness increase
A simple, powerful intervention:
The Physiological Sigh
Inhale.
Inhale again, deeper.
Slow exhale.
This resets the parasympathetic system and restores cognitive control in seconds.
3. The Character We Bring Into a Crisis
Uplift introduced the HeartStyles Compass—a practical model of “above the line” and “below the line” behaviours.
Above the Line (what helps us perform)
- Humility – purpose beyond self, willingness to learn
- Courage – speaking truth, staying present, admitting uncertainty
- Love & Respect – professional regard even when under strain
Below the Line (what harms performance)
- Fear – withdrawal, appeasing, avoidance
- Pride/Ego – over-assertion, control, self-protection
Under pressure we all dip below the line at times.
But understanding these patterns allows teams to:
- recognise triggers
- normalise defensiveness
- reset quickly
- reduce negative ripple effects
Character isn’t a nice-to-have in control rooms—it’s critical risk management.
4. Case Studies: What Real Incidents Tell Us About Human Factors
Route 91 Harvest Festival (Las Vegas)
Lessons highlighted:
- Lack of capabilities and plans
- Over 20 false active shooter reports from staff and public
- Unforeseen scenario (sniper off site)
- Overloaded control rooms
- Lack of interoperability between control rooms/agencies (situational awareness)
- Proactive information gathering and resourcing to verify/clarify
Manchester Arena Inquiry
Lessons highlighted:
- Failure of risk information (from public) to be escalated by Security staff to Control
- No full scale Multi agency exercising progamme
- Lack of equipment and resources
- Insufficient training
- Poor multi agency communications
- Internal coordination between Security and operator
Astroworld
Lessons highlighted:
- Lack of capabilities and plans
- Risk indicators and factors across the event day (breach, capacities, crowd loading, audience analysis)
- Poor training
- Decision making – not visible, co-located, clear roles, Show Stop.
- Communications failures – protocols, radios in the right hands,
- Time delays on casualty reporting and confusion over locations
- Lack of pre-event messaging and real time crow communications (including artist led comms)
5. Five Foundations for Effective Human Pre‑formance
Dave laid out five areas teams should explicitly clarify—every time, even with experienced groups:
1. People
Who is in the room?
What are their roles, fears, expectations, and experience levels?
2. Objectives
What problem are we solving?
What sits inside—and outside—our remit?
3. Roles
Boundaries, interactions, dependencies.
Avoid “I thought you were doing that.”
4. Culture
Communication discipline, psychological safety, breaks, escalations, language, respect.
5. Decision Making
Thresholds, protocols, authority levels, and when/how to escalate.
A lack of clarity in any one of these areas breeds anxiety, frustration, and performance loss.
6. Practical Tools for the Pre‑Event Phase
From the Controlled Events perspective, improving human performance begins well before event day:
- Clear role cards and information requirements
- Indexed plans designed for “users”, not planners
- Micro-drills, tabletop exercises, and scenario walk-throughs
- Early engagement with stakeholders and liaison roles
- Pre-mortems: writing tomorrow’s debrief today
- Shift patterns based on risk rhythms, not tradition
- Welfare built into the operating model, not “if time allows”
Human pre‑formance is a process, not a moment.
7. On-the-Day: Realities & Reminders
Some truths that resonated strongly during the session:
- Most friction in a control room stems from assumptions, not incidents.
- Teams must form, storm, and perform—fast.
- The people outside the control room (gate staff, medics, stewards) often carry the biggest burden yet receive the least training.
- Logging is seldom seen as “ours”, but it must be. It’s our collective narrative.
- You cannot manage what you cannot see: co-location still matters.
The on‑the‑day environment exposes every weakness of the pre‑event phase.
8. Training, Growth, and the Future of Human Performance Work
Human performance isn’t a soft skill—it’s a core operational capability.
The upcoming Advanced Control Room (ACROM) course, delivered with Uplift at the Coventry University Simulation Centre on 12-13th May, focuses on the human variables: stress processing, decision-making under pressure, character, communication discipline, and team dynamics.
It’s not about badges or qualifications—it’s about confidence, insight, and repeatable competence.
Types of team
Open source research and ideas within the Emergency Mind Project[1] provides a helpful analysis of the types of teams relating to control rooms and crises.
| Team Type | Stability | When Used | Strengths | Risks |
| Intact | High (same people long-term) | Routine + high-pressure operations | Trust, cohesion, predictable performance | Can become siloed; groupthink |
| Smash | Medium/Low (teams merged) | Emergencies requiring rapid joint effort | Diverse expertise, surge capacity | Misalignment, communication clashes |
| Swarm | Low (fluid, dynamic participation) | Immediate, urgent problem-solving | Fast, flexible, multi-disciplinary | Potential disorganisation without coordination |
1. Intact Teams
Summary
Intact teams are groups of people who work together consistently over time, building deep familiarity, trust, communication rhythm, and shared understanding. Because they rehearse, operate, and learn together, they develop strong relational bonds and predictable coordination, which leads to high performance in high‑pressure environments.
Key Characteristics
- Stable membership — same people train and operate together.
- Shared mental models — team members understand one another’s strengths, styles, and communication cues.
- Performance under pressure improves due to familiarity.
- Learning cycles are accelerated because the team reflects and grows together.
Why it fits Tuckman’s model
The video supports the idea that intact teams naturally move through Forming → Storming → Norming → Performing → Adjourning, because the stability of the group allows these developmental stages to occur meaningfully.
Strengths
- High trust and cohesion
- Efficient communication
- Strong resilience
- Well‑developed rituals and routines
Further information: What’s an Intact Team? Key team structures for performing under pressure [youtube.com]
2. Smash Teams
Summary
Smash teams form when two or more separate teams are rapidly combined to solve a problem or support a crisis. Unlike intact teams, smash teams involve members who may never have worked together before, bringing different cultures, processes, and communication styles.
Key Characteristics
- Rapid assembly of distinct, pre‑existing teams
- High variability in communication styles and norms
- Potential for synergy (“1 + 1 = 3”) or dysfunction (“1 + 1 = 0.5”)
- Used in emergencies or complex situations requiring sudden collaboration
Strengths
- Access to diverse skills and resources
- Increased capability to solve complex problems quickly
- Can bring together specialised units when needed
Challenges
- Miscommunication between teams
- Conflicting expectations or leadership styles
- Lack of shared mental models
- Requires deliberate coordination and strong leadership
Further information: What’s a Smash Team? Key team structures for performing under pressure [youtube.com]
3. Swarm Teams
Summary
Swarm teams are highly flexible, rapidly self‑organising groups that converge on a problem in real time. They do not rely on stable membership or predefined structure. Instead, members with the right availability and expertise “swarm” around a task until it is resolved.
Key Characteristics
- Fluid membership — people join/leave as needed
- Dynamic, fast mobilisation
- High adaptability
- Emphasis on real‑time cooperation rather than predefined roles
Strengths
- Very rapid response
- Efficient for time‑critical or complex problems
- Allows multi‑disciplinary inputs
- Scales up or down instantly
Challenges
- Requires strong communication to avoid chaos
- Can lack continuity
- Depends on member availability and situational awareness
Further information: What’s a Swarm Team? Key team structures for performing under pressure [youtube.com].
[1] https://www.emergencymind.com
Closing Reflection
The industry is increasingly recognising the psychological, relational, and behavioural demands placed on control room teams. We hold the responsibility to prepare our people—not just with tech and plans, but with resilience, clarity, confidence, and character.
Because when something goes wrong, the room doesn’t rise to the occasion.
It falls to the level of its preparation—its human pre‑formance.
