Wednesday, December 11, 2019

Credit Risk Management A Review of the Management

Question: Discuss about the Credit Risk Management for A Review of the Management? Answer: Problems and risks do not come with prior announcement. At times, a joyous event can turn violent or lead to a stampede (A review of the management of crowd safety at outdoor street/special events 2010). Thus, it is important that the management takes necessary measures to handle the crowd. Many organizations do not give attention to the risk management techniques and keep risks management as a secondary topic in the organization (HKIB) 2012). The tragedy of the love parade at Berlin is one of the biggest examples showing that risks management should not be taken casually by any organization. When many revelers gathered for the 1989 love parade at Berlin to celebrate love, a huge stampede occurred at the ground that took the lives of many people. Many critics blamed the police and the management authorities for not taking necessary measures to control the crowd. The write-up will focus on the problems that were identified in the love parade which led to the mismanagement of the crowd , the evaluation of the problems and the justification of the problems. It is expected that the write-up will help in highlighting the issue of risk management in any set-up or in any organization. Background to the issue The original idea of love parade that started in Berlin is extended over the weekends. The visitors used to come to the parade, engage in clubbing, could stay for the weekends, eat, drink, dance and make merry (Diehl et al. 2010). The love parade that took place in Duisburg was a not similar to the original idea of love parade. The love parade of Duisburg took place in a well-fenced area where the visitors could reach through train station. Due to the fences, there were not enough places for the revelers to enjoy themselves (Diehl et al. 2010). In addition to this, the visitors were allowed to consume alcohol and dance. In a place where dancing is allowed, the management should have given enough spaces for the people. As the crowd got less space to celebrate, it affected the procession as well as the celebrations (Diehl et al. 2010). Moreover, there was only one opening that led to a tunnel from where the people could escape which was too small for 1 million people. It was even repor ted that when some of the people wanted to escape form an embankment, the police sent them through the route of the tunnel. The event highlights the mismanagement on the part of the police that led to the tragedy of the joyous love parade. The people who died in that tunnel are paid homage every year on the day of the parade. The government was hugely blamed for the tragedy of the love parade. Issues or problems Identification A huge crowd had gathered in the love parade that was held in Berlin in the year 1989. Firstly, the problem that was identified in the event was that the police kept only one entrance from where the crowd could enter or exit. Thus, the problem occurred when the revelers had only one entrance or exit to go out (Aven 2012). As the people panicked about the situation, they started running frantically for their lives and started huddling near the point of exit and near. Thus, the extreme confusion occurred, as everybody wanted to go from one single point. The stampede took place when the crowd was unable to exit out from a single tunnel and they tried to escape for life with the help of that single tunnel. Figure 1: the single tunnel that was open for the people to exit as well as entry (Source: BBC News 2014) The second problem that occurred is the panic that was created in the mind of the crowd. Everybody thought that they will die in the stampede and they wanted to escape. As they were panicking, they lost their cool and the stampede occurred (Barger 2014). Police could have tried to help the crowd to stop panicking, but could not do so. The main reason behind the panicking of the crowd was the presence of single outlet. Hence, they all wanted to go out but were unable to do so (Scordis et al. 2014). The third problem that was identified in the procession was the lack of police attention to the problems. The government was more interested in the publicity of the event rather than the safety of the people who took part in the celebration (Quinn 2013). The government was even tight-lipped about the happenings of the event as they did not want to tarnish the importance of the festival as well as the name that the festival has got in the different parts of the world. According toBild, a mass-circulation tabloid, to publication some positive headline, the government has remained tight-lipped about the happening of the events and the root cause behind the mismanagement that took place in the Berlin love parade (Diehl et al. 2010). Figure 2: mark of a victim of the stampede (Source: BBC News, 2014) Evaluation The three main problems that have been identified in the Berlin love parade were the panic among the crowd, a single tunnel that was kept open for the people of the parade and the mismanagement of the police to handle the crowd (Chapman, Ward and Chapman 2012). However, such a huge stampede could have been avoided if prior caution had been taken by the police The police should have first assessed the risks associated with the event. When the parade is already a success, the police should have kept two-entry points and two exit points for the people (Christoffersen 2012). A parade which celebrates love and homosexuality must have attracted a huge crowd and hence, prior assessment of the risks should have been done by the police. There was a lack of communication between the police and the crowd. Once the crowd panicked about the situation, it was the duty of the police to control the crowd and pacify the crowd that necessary measures will be taken by the police so that the mass could exit peacefully from the parade ground (Reic 2012). The lack of coordination among the police force resulted in the failure of the police which in turn resulted in the mismanagement of the crowd (Orchard and Orchard 2012). Had enough training been provided to the staffs of the police department, they would have been able to handle the crowd in a better manner. Justification There was only one point that was kept open for the revelers to get in or to go out to maintain the crowd. The police department thought that once only one door will be kept open, it would be easier for the management to maintain the crowd (Fruin 1993). The police never imagined that the tragedy would occur in a place where people were enjoying the love parade. There was a lack of tool that would have helped the police to communicate with the crowd. The absence of proper microphones using which the police could communicate with the crowd was lacking on part of the police (Gaudenzi and Borghesi 2012). The panic among the crowd went out of hand to such a serious level that they could not be managed by simple communication. Hence, after the crowd panicked, the police had nothing to do on the part of communication (Managing crowds safely: A guide for organizers at events and venues 2000). Finally, the police was blamed for being unable to manage the crowd or take proper actions when the crowd went out of hand (Girling 2013). The love parade of Berlin was a huge event that caught the attention of the media. There was a huge footfall of visitors celebrating the love parade. The government was proud that the event of love parade had brought Berlin on the global map. The government was proud that the event of love parade had brought Berlin on the global map. However, never thought that the situation would get serious and the love parade would become a place of death. Thus, the government was concentrating on the celebrations (Hussain 2013). Conclusion The tragic event of the love parade of Berlin is a revelation for many organizations and the event management organizations to implement various techniques for the risk management process. The crowd got stuck because the management authorities kept one single opening for the entry and the exit of the crowd. The management has taken the steps of keeping one opening for the crowd thinking that it will be easier for the staffs to manage the people. However, the single opening became the biggest problem as the crowd panicked when they saw that there is less space to exit out of the place. As a result, the crowd panicked and the police also failed to handle the crowd. The main reason that the police failed to handle the crowd was the lack of assessment of the risk that could have happened in the event. Had the police had taken prior measures to handle the crowd, the tragic event would not have occurred or could have been handled in better way. References (HKIB), H. (2012).Credit Risk Management. Hoboken: John Wiley Sons. A review of the management of crowd safety at outdoor street/special events. (2010). 1st ed. [ebook] Buckinghamshire New University. Available at: [Accessed 10 Mar. 2016]. Aven, T. (2012). Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management.Risk Analysis, 32(10), pp.1647-1656. Barger, D. (2014). Risk management revisited.Nursing Management (Springhouse), 45(5), pp.26-28. BBC News. (2014).Love Parade deaths: 10 charged over crush at festival - BBC News. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Mar. 2016]. Chapman, C., Ward, S. and Chapman, C. (2012).How to manage project opportunity and risk. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley. Christoffersen, P. (2012).Elements of financial risk management. Amsterdam: Academic Press. Diehl, J., Gathmann, F., Hans, B. and Jttner, J. (2010).The World from Berlin: Love Parade Stampede 'Was a Tragedy Waiting to Happen' - SPIEGEL ONLINE. [online] SPIEGEL ONLINE. Available at: [Accessed 10 Mar. 2016]. Fruin, J. (1993).THE CAUSES AND PREVENTION OF CROWD DISASTERS. 1st ed. [ebook] Available at: [Accessed 10 Mar. 2016]. Gaudenzi, B. and Borghesi, A. (2012).Risk management. Milan: Springer. Girling, P. (2013).Operational risk management. Hoboken: Wiley. Hopkin, P. (2012).Fundamentals of risk management. London: Kogan Page. Hussain, O. (2013).Risk assessment and management in the networked economy. Heidelberg: Springer. Managing crowds safely A guide for organisers at events and venues. (2000). 1st ed. [ebook] Available at: [Accessed 10 Mar. 2016]. Orchard, J. and Orchard, J. (2012). Risk management considerations for ultra-endurance events and solo attempts.Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 15, p.S155. Quinn, B. (2013).Key concepts in event management. London: SAGE. Reic, I. (2012). Events Management.Tourism Management, 33(5), pp.1289-1290. Scordis, N., Suzawa, Y., Zwick, A. and Ruckner, L. (2014). Principles for Sustainable Insurance: Risk Management and Value.Risk Management and Insurance Review, 17(2), pp.265-276.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.