







































Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

 

 

Events and Tourism Review ________________                                    
 
December 2021                                                                                                                                            Volume 4 No. 2      

   

 

Applying Crowd Risk Mitigation Technologies in Urban Sport Events: 

A Case Analysis of the Collegiate Football Event in Indianapolis, IN 

 

 

 

 

Kennedy Weaver 

 

Becky Liu-Lastres 

 

Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis 

Correspondence: kenweaveiu@gmail.com (K. Weaver) 

 

 

 
 

 

 

For Authors 

Interested in submitting to this journal? We recommend that you review the About the Journal 

page for the journal's section policies, as well as the Author Guidelines. Authors need to register 

with the journal prior to submitting or, if already registered, can simply log in and begin the 

five-step process. 

For Reviewers 

If you are interested in serving as a peer reviewer, please register with the journal. Make sure to 

select that you would like to be contacted to review submissions for this journal. Also, be sure 

to include your reviewing interests, separated by a comma. 

About Events and Tourism Review (ETR) 

ETR aims to advance the delivery of events, tourism and hospitality products and services by 

stimulating the submission of papers from both industry and academic practitioners and 

researchers. For more information about ETR visit the Events and Tourism Review. 

Recommended Citation 

Weaver, K. & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021). Applying Crowd Risk Mitigation Technologies in 

Urban Sport Events: A Case Analysis of the Collegiate Football Event in Indianapolis, IN., 

Events and Tourism Review, 4(2), 14-27.  

http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/jet/about
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/jet/about/submissions#authorGuidelines
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/jet/about/submissions#authorGuidelines
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/jet/user/register
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/jet/user/register
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/jet/user/register
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/index/login
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/index/login
https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/ETR/user/register
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/ETR


Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            15  

 

 
 

 

 

  Abstract 

 

In recent years, the need for advanced precautions for mitigating the risks imposed by events, 

which involve high volumes of people in shared spaces, has multiplied. The occurrence of 

COVID-19 pandemic has further altered event practices, spaces, and event attendees’ mindsets in 

large-scale events. Proper crowd management not only seeks to prevent acts of violence and 

injury, but in today’s event environments; efforts should be consciously applied to reduce the 

spread of respiratory infections such as COVID-19. As the events industry continues to evolve and 

face new limitations, ways in which event organizers respond must evolve as well. Smartphone 

technologies are opening new ways for event organizers to communicate with and monitor 

attendees. This case study explores current crowd management strategies, analyzes the gaps in 

widely used models, and finally proposes event management technologies trending in the field. 

 

 Keywords: Risk Management; Event Smart-phone Applications; Crowd Management; Mobile  

                   Sensing; Sport Events 
 

 

 

Introduction 

 

Crowd management has been a key challenge for event planners – they try to attract as many 

attendees as possible while ensuring the safety and quality of the event experiences (Mowen et al., 

2003). The onset of the pandemic has placed even more concentration on crowd management in 

events, given the essence of social distancing in preventing the spread of the infections. Therefore, 

effective crowd management practices directly impact the safety and satisfaction of event attendees, 

the credibility and trustworthiness of event organizers, and the overall health of the host destination.  

The importance of crowd management efforts must not be understated. In some cases, proper 

crowd management efforts in the pre-planning stage can be a matter of life or death for some 

attendees (Green, 2016). Some event organizers - even event brands, their major stakeholders, and 

entire host cities - have been shamed and tainted with ideas of death, irresponsibility, and 

incompetence because of failed crowd management efforts. In extreme cases, event operation plans 

erroneously fail to mention any sort of contingency for surging crowds (Macaya, 2021; Patel & 

Kasakove, 2021). Finally, situations of continual crowding such as overtourism, exacerbates 

environmental damage of the host destination from high levels of pollution (Johansson et al., 2012). 

Responses to failed crowd management practices expand beyond simply increasing security 

staffing at events. There is a list of technologies that have already been deployed in managing 

crowds: surveillance cameras, heat maps, drones, prediction modeling software; yet these 

technologies only offer pre-event insights, provide limited coverage and information, or have further 

risked attendee safety (Brown et al. 2013; Hirth et al., 2021; Martella, 2017; Mowen et al., 2003; 

Solmaz et al., 2014). Advancements in crowd management practices are absolutely necessary to 

prevent additional event tragedies from occurring. 
Accordingly, this study analyzes the case of the 2021 Collegiate Football Event in 

Indianapolis. IN, discusses the options, and develops an action plan for applying crowd risk 

mitigation technologies in urban sport events. In doing so, the findings of this study provide new 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            16  

 

insights into crowd management during the pandemic times and offer practical implications for 

event planners and other practitioners.  

 

Study Context 

 

On January 7, 2022, over 110,000 fans, 2,000 volunteers, football teams, training crews, 

media crews, venue staff, and event operations staff will flock to the center of Circle City to mingle 

with Indianapolis’s 857,642 residents (nearly 30,000 residents in the city’s Mile Square alone) to 

kick off the National College Football Playoffs (Kollar, 2021). Although fans will have activities 

spread throughout the city at iconic spaces like Bankers Life Fieldhouse, Georgia Street, Pan-Am 

Plaza, Lucas Oil Stadium, Monument Circle,and the White River State Park; they will be met with 

the winds and temperatures of Indiana’s winter, pushing the majority indoors. While events such as 

the College Football Playoffs are necessary to the economic and tourism development goals of cities 

like Indianapolis, the crowds they bring pose a long list of risks to everyone involved. Attendee 

safety, event and venue owner liability, resident quality of life, and the destination’s environment 

must be accounted for when planning the event’s crowd risk mitigation plan.  

 

Conceptual Background 

 

Crowd Management in Events 
Riskful crowding can occur when the volume of people is too high, or movement of people 

is too slow for the adequate flow through the physical space. This type of crowding poses safety 

risks. Inconvenient crowding occurs when queue lines for vendors, services, or attractions exceed 

the expected wait time of visitors. Waiting times longer than 8 minutes pose negative impacts to 

event experience, attendee satisfaction, and income maximization (Alvarado-Valencia et al., 2017; 

Martella et al., 2017). Behaviors of individuals within crowds can further escalate crowd volumes or 

dangerous movement patterns. Besides the norms, a wide variety of elements need to be considered 

when developing crowd management strategies for major urban sport events such as the College 

Football Playoffs. These elements include both external factors such as the sporting environment, 

urban population growth, and the mega-event trend, as well as logistical factors like the different 

crowd management techniques. 
 

External Factors  

Sporting environment 

Each type of sporting event draws its own crowds. In the case of college football, fans are 

known to gather and party in large numbers. Team pride, alcohol, and social media play a role in 

advancing violence or unruliness at the games (Iboshi, 2017). In the 2016 season for college football 

alone, records show 3,778 fans were ejected and 1,102 fans were arrested. These numbers only 

account for 60 Football Bowl Subdivisions out of 128 that sent numbers into KGW for the 

investigation. Records further show that some games’ extent of crowd management was deploying 1 

state trooper for each 1,000 fans and the use of surveillance cameras in the control room. A quote 

from sport psychologist Brian Baxter captures the environment’s effect on fans well: “You just lose 

yourself to the group… Morals kind of erode, your individual responsibility erodes, and you are 

more likely to do something you would never do” (Iboshi, 2017). 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            17  

 

Urban Population growth 

According to the United Nations, nearly 55% of humanity (4.3 billion people) lives in cities 

today. By 2030, about 60% of the world’s population will live in urban areas, and 70% by 2050 

(United Nations, 2021). When the density of people becomes too high; crime, incidence of injury 

and illness, severe traffic delays, and pollution also increase often more than proportionately 

through the interaction of populations (Johansson et al., 2012). As urban populations grow, density 

of the event locations is already at high risk levels prior to the addition of tourists. Resident and 

visitor interactions grow negative as each competes for the space through crowding and traffic 

experience.  

The Mega-Event Trend 

As if urban cores are not overwhelmingly dense as is, the industry’s trend and push for mega 

events further exacerbates the issue. Maximizing event impacts through ancillary events brings more 

people for longer amounts of time. Additionally, city-wide events can bring large volumes of 

tourists who are unfamiliar with the host destination. Maneuvering around a small venue with 

adequate signage is feasible, but once the venues begin to grow in scale and the displays of signage 

become more difficult, tourists get lost or circulate in fewer areas. 
   

Logistical Factors 

Traditional Crowd Management Technologies 

The traditional crowd management strategies normally take place during an event and rely 

heavily on communication technologies that are pre-determined in the event planning process. For 

example, turnstiles count the numbers of people entering and exiting an event, but they have no 

control over in-event crowding behaviors. Barriers are used to mold crowds or block off access to 

unauthorized areas. Barriers sometimes are disregarded or become dangerous blockades in mass 

evacuations and unexpected crowd volumes (Martella et al., 2017). Once crowding occurs; 

megaphones, audio systems, and static screen displays are used to send communications to 

attendees. Noticeably, each of these technologies have some crowd dispersing power, but are not 

fully effective especially for city-wide events. Audio strategies only reach so far and can be 

drowned out by the nature of the event. Large screens, while at first thought seem like an effective 

way to communicate through changeable signage, actually draw crowds. Additionally, Sharma et al. 

(2016) recommend that a comprehensive crowd management system should include (1) planning 

and infrastructure support at the planning stage, (2) crowd monitoring and control during an event, 

and (3) data analysis for key decision-making. 

New layer to Crowds: COVID  

Events are now held to a new level of responsibility for crowd risk mitigation due to the 

COVID-19 pandemic. Events have been linked to the rise in cases for host destinations. A case in 

the Netherlands saw a drastic spike where there were 13,836 influenza-related hospitalizations in the 

2017/2018 influenza epidemic, and carnival fell about 1 week before the peak of these 

hospitalizations (LUMC-COVID-19 Research Group, 2020). For the well-being of the host 

destination and all visitors involved, new crowd risk mitigation technologies (CRMT) instead of 

“management” strategies may be the key to in-person event continuation by supplementing travel 

confidence. In many cases, CRMT could be the difference between life or death for at-risk 

populations.  

Event organizers are constantly forced to redesign current risk management procedures to 

ensure the safety of attendees, and ultimately, the longevity of events and host destinations. As host 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            18  

 

cities evolve, new types of risks emerge, and technology advances; the types of crowd management 

strategies deployed must change accordingly. To achieve this, the root causes behind current 

ineffective crowd management practices must be identified. These findings will then shed light on 

the key features new technologies will need to have to perform more efficiently. 

 

Applying Crowd Risk Mitigation Technologies (CRMT) 

Not all types of crowding are bad. Studies find that crowds in event settings often indicates 

the popularity of the event and can be perceived positively (Mowen et al., 2003). Well managed 

crowds in meticulously planned events are acceptable. In fact, in the right environments, stable 

crowds are integral parts of the sense of community for event goers. Therefore, crowds are not the 

problem; how well their behavior and potential negative impacts are planned for is. Pre-event 

planning is the key to maximizing the economic and social benefits of crowds where appropriate. 

Pre-event planning is also the first to be blamed when damage or inconvenience actualizes during 

events. In fact, a qualitative study with 55 crowd management experts found that effective crowd 

management takes place 90% pre-event and 10% during an event. Figure 1 illustrates the makeup of 

an effective crowd management plan (Martella et al., 2017). 

 
Figure 1: On Current Crowd Management Practices and the Need for Increased Situation Awareness, 

Prediction, and Intervention (Martella et al., 2017) 

Event Design and Communication are critical elements that can determine the success of a 

crowd management plan in events (Martella et al., 2017; Van Winkle & Bueddefeld, 2020). Failures 

in event design can include inadequate amounts of signage, poor traffic flow, under-planned vendor 

mapping, and dangerous structure placement. Additionally, event design can be challenged by 

complex host environments like outdoor urban cores for unexpected high volumes of people, tall 

buildings/structures blocking routes and views, vehicular traffic, and weather. For communication, 

failures in current crowd management strategies can be traced back to absence of reliable 

communication methods between event staff and attendees, poorly designed signage, and the nature 

of interventions for violence and riskful crowding. These two critical components of crowd 

management strategies are echoed in industry studies on crowd management professionals’ samples 

and event attendee samples.  

Risk Mitigation Technologies is a term to refer to electronical resources used to prevent, 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            19  

 

rather than manage, unfavorable outcomes from the nature of the labor and working environments in 

fields like healthcare, energy sourcing, and the construction industry (Wilson, 2004). For example, 

health and safety risk mitigation technologies such as visualization cameras augmented with 

artificial intelligence pattern recognition software to detect inanimate objects and people obstructing 

the safe movement of machinery at construction sites (Edwards et al. 2021). By applying this 

concept to event design and crowd management, the term Crowd Risk Mitigation Technologies 

(CRMT) is uniquely specified.  

Adapting advanced Crowd Risk Mitigation Technologies to align with the needs of all 

parties involved is the only way to ensure the safety of attendees and the longevity of events and 

host destinations. Based on the root causes of crowding identified from the two main actors (event 

staff and attendees), the most effective crowd risk mitigation strategy would be one that dives down 

to the root causes of riskful crowding by improving organizer-attendee communications, advancing 

real-time crowd monitoring, and assisting the timing and nature of current intervention methods.  

Examples of CRMT 

While risk management has been an integral part of event design; 2021 has added new layers to 

the challenge, as well as new technologies to event designers’ tool belts. Below are options for 

CRMT and a comparison of their ability to execute crucial tasks for advancing crowd management 

practices. 

1. Develop a Location-based App (Mobile Crowdsensing) 

a. Develop an event brand specific smartphone application with Mobile Sensing 

through location-based Software Development Kits (SDKs) for real-time crowd risk 

mitigation from attendee and event management sides (Ewen, 2021). Access real-

time maps illustrating movement and crowd densities, prioritize personnel dispersion 

based on most dense areas, coordinate live wait times for activations based on the 

location’s density, send real-time updates to attendees in specific areas for less 

crowded service alternatives.  

b. Cons of this option include time and funds needed for its development. Development 

could last anywhere from 4-9 months and developers charge 20 to 30 an hour 

(Duong, 2021).  

2. Last Years’ Lessons + Pre-developed Event App Purchase 

a. Continue the use of traditional crowd risk management strategies. Deploy security 

personnel to address violence and place physical structures to ease traffic flow based 

on observations of the prior year’s event. Purchase plans from pre-developed apps 

like Whova, CrowdCompass, or EventMobi to mitigate some areas of crowd-

imposed risks. The app could ease entering and exiting crowd volumes by timed 

entry notifications and updates, provide manual updates on parking availability, 

feature a static map for vendor and activity locating.  

b. Cons for this option include lack of real-time, location-based services, and lack of 

personalization and control. 

3. Heat Mapping (Static Crowdsensing) 

a. Invest in Static Sensing like Heat Mapping from companies such as GES. The smart 

phone tracking system is made up of floor sensors throughout the exhibit hall to 

detect MAC addresses from attendees' smartphone devices. The video tracking 

system is a series of temporary overhead cameras in exhibit hall ceilings, or on poles 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            20  

 

in lobby areas. This could yield 2D models at less expensive price points and 3D 

models at higher price points (GES, 2021). 

b. Cons: 

i. Static sensing suffers from several problems, such as insufficient node 

coverage, high installation/ maintenance cost, and lack of scalability. Physical 

equipment is subject to becoming outdated (Solmaz, 2014). 

ii. Must be reinstalled if the event moves to a new location next year.   

iii. Cameras only provide limited view (Martella, 2017).  

4. Simulation Software 

a. Simulators such as FlexSim and SimWalk use computer-based modeling of any real-

world environment and its interactions or processes. Simulations allow organizations 

in the industry to analyze and experiment with their processes or schedules in a 

virtual setting for fine-tuning real-world environments (FlexSim, 2021; SIMWALK, 

2021).  

b. Simulations have been used in a broad range of environments from airports to sport 

event stadiums for their ability to illustrate possible scenarios pre-event for event 

teams to consider. They have been used to plan stadium evacuation plans, as well as 

help designers weigh logistical decisions for wait times, safety, and customer 

satisfaction. Unlike spreadsheet-based analysis and forecasting, simulation offers a 

quick and efficient way to adjust parameters and re-simulate, saving valuable time 

with quicker results. However, cons of this option include lack of real-time 

monitoring for mid-event crowd interventions. Investments in this technology would 

be solely utilized pre and post events. 

Developing an Action Plan for the Collegiate Kickoff Event 

In the case of the College Football Playoffs, investments in crowd risk mitigation 

technologies are necessary and timely. Hosting this specific city-wide sporting event for the first 

time in harsh weather conditions amidst a pandemic and tense social atmosphere at a time when 

sustainability is at the forefront of competitive edge conversations for events; emphasizes the need 

for streamlined organizer-attendee communications, fast event information access, and effective, 

holistic crowd monitoring technologies. Therefore, the development of a location-based app is the 

primary suggestion for organizers and destinations to invest in advanced crowd risk mitigation 

technologies.  

Referring to the suggestions from crowd experts and event attendees for developing the ideal 

crowd risk mitigation technologies, a location-based app sufficiently meets all desirable features and 

much more. Brown et al. (2013) found that CRMTs such as geo-tracked mobile devices mitigate the 

crowding problem, and even increase visitor satisfaction and intent to visit and revisit. Dane et al. 

(2020) found that geo-location data revealed intra-event participation was limited by temporal 

restraints by tracking the flow and visitation levels of attendees; allowing event organizers to 

redesign event spaces for maximized profits while enhancing the attendees’ event experience. 

Bustard et al. (2019) found that attendees demonstrate an increasing demand for real-time event 

integrative information, with more immersive and augmented experiences.  

Backend management of a location-based app will increase awareness and reliable real-time 

crowd monitoring, improve communication channels between event organizers and attendee 

populations, collect advanced and real-time crowd behavior data, and assist in preventing accidents 

and enabling intervention without force. The front-end features of the app itself can be seen as 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            21  

 

mobile, interactive, and personalizable form of signage. It’s adaptable, versatile, innovative, and 

attractive. Continued use will lead to a wealth of knowledge for improving event facilities, attendee 

experiences, and crowd flow design.  

Aside from the support from research, the idea of developing a location-based app may seem 

unattainable for some event organizers and cities due to current funding structures and education 

gaps in leading technology. A location-based smartphone application not only will advance the 

event planners’ crowd management strategies to crowd risk mitigation strategies; but it speaks to the 

desirable themes such as health, convenience, connection, innovation, and sustainability. Because of 

this, investments in the app can be funded through grants relating to public health, regional 

development, sustainable tourism development, technology for humanities, and innovation. 

Additionally, research and actual implementation for mobile sensing in tourism is rapidly 

expanding. Applications of Mobile Sensing can be seen in theme parks, festivals, and sports events 

for advancement in crowd mitigation and attendee experience (Brown et al., 2013; Bustard et al., 

2019; Dane et al., 2020). Through these studies, a list of features and suggestions for app 

implementation is featured below.  

App Features, Integrations, and Implementation Strategy Recommendations Deep Dive: 

I. App Features 

A. Privacy Notice Page: what is used and what is not 

B. Share Location Feature: “Find my Friend” 

C. Live vendor queues and wait times for attendees (Similar to Google business live) 

D. Itinerary Planner with GPS guidance 

E. Live queue updates through notifications to attendees for internal ticketed events 

F. Crisis report feature/hotline 

G. Worker Chat Feature: log-in secured, backend feature for solutions and crowd control 

communications 

H. Location-based notifications for incidents reported in attendees’ nearby area 

I. Live parking map 

J. What’s Happening Page: public feed for photo sharing 

K. Front end display of highly populated areas (Crowdmapping feature) 

1. For attendees concerned about COVID and wanting to avoid crowds 

2. For those looking to find large gatherings and increase sociability  

II. Implementation Strategies 

A. Feature in registration email for convenient tick access, early event map access, 

vendor deals, or share for early ticketed event registration access if downloaded to 

promote app use 

B. Host team and city merchandise on commerce page of app to promote use and ease 

of sales 

C. Market to destination residents as tool for wayfinding daily life around events to 

increase crowd density accuracy  

D. Send location-based recommendations to attendees in large queues for alternative 

attraction or vendor options with location provided to encourage event traffic flow 

and sales 

 

The following implementation plan is a sample of time-organized tasks that the event organization 

committee will execute to successfully develop and implement a location-based event app.  

 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            22  

 

Time to 

Event 

Task 

Duration 

Task Notes 

PRE-EVENT 

2-3 years out  Secure Event Bid Event Organizing Committee and DMO 

  App Developer RFQ and 

Quote 

Committee outlines desired features for app on front 

and back ends 

 (2-3 months) Funding Development Committee Finance locates grants. Duration depends 

on the close dates of open grant cycles of interest. 

Use quote and design plan from app developer in 

grant. 

1 year out 

 

(4-9 months) Location-based App 

Development Process 

Committee works alongside developers during the 

multi-phased process. Includes app prototyping, 

designing, coding, and testing. 

8 months out Ongoing up 

to event 

Event Announcement and 

Marketing 

Marketing dept. will begin communications of the 

event. App downloading is encouraged by early 

ticket access or experience discounts/packages. 

2 months out (1-3 weeks) App training  Developers train event staff on usage and processes. 

Training will cover front end (user side) of app 

(10%), and back-end monitoring of crowd 

management dashboard and dispatch methods (90%) 

DAY OF EVENT 

  Command Center 

Implementation 

Command center (CC) monitors real-time dashboard 

of movement and densities at points of interest 

 As identified 

 

Density control CC identifies high volumes of people in high-risk 

areas. Dispatches additional security team members 

and sends mobile communications to attendees in the 

form of attraction suggestions. 

 As identified 

 

Flow Control CC identifies slow movement in queues for services 

or vendors. Event team contacts vendors to assess 

needs and plan of action. 

 As reported Crisis Response If risks fail to be mitigated, situations reported in the 

app will be identified and linked to report location 

for event security in the area to easily locate and 

address. 

 Ongoing Satisfaction Reporting Attendees tag locations in event and leave reviews 

POST EVENT 

  Sentiment Surveys Committee will distribute post event 

communications with surveys on technology use  



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            23  

 

 (2-3 months) Data configuration App developers will create a report based on location 

data and content analysis of attendee posts on app 

 

Evaluation of the Plan 
To ensure the benefits of implementing a location-based app is being maximized, event 

owners should set specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely goals. These goals will serve 

as metrics of success and prerequisites for further investments.   

Goal YR

1 

YR

2 

YR 

3 

YR 

4 

YR 

5 

Effectiveness Analyses:      

Numbers, locations, and environmental factors of all reported incidents of injury 

or violence will be documented post event on a yearly basis for comparison to 

succeeding years to track app’s crowd risk mitigation success.  

X X X X X 

Attendee Sentiment Analyses:      

Each year, post event, surveys will be distributed to attendees to evaluate each 

user-based feature of the event’s location-based app. Results will be configured 

into scores, which will be used to assess the direct of app related investments 

and updates. 

X X X X X 

After impact is realized, benefits are maximized, and new investments in other 

interactions or technologies become optional; event owners and researchers will 

perform content analysis across social media and review sites for location-based 

app and projected technologies to contrast and compare investment options. 

   (X) X 

Event Industry Development:      

After impact is realized, every two years, event owners will provide researchers 

to mine location and attendee behavior specific data from the app to develop 

cases for additional event industry fields of research and innovations. 

  X  X 

 

Other Considerations  

Privacy 

The concern for app user privacy is one that arises in every location-based app discussion. 

This area is under heavy research and debate. Enabling location data can be temporary, and personal 

identifying information can be left untouched. With the correct privacy protection measures, brand 

trustworthiness and loyalty, and technical planning; privacy concerns of app users may rest assured 

(Wang et al., 2020). Due to privacy concerns and the educational gaps for technology use in older 

generations, event designers may be hesitant to invest in location-based apps. If large amounts of 

attendees do not utilize the event’s location-based app, numbers and data for crowd risk mitigation 

displays can be skewed or ineffective. This can be overcome through the event design process. User 

interface design, prototype design, app trial periods with populations that represent the target 

attendee audience are crucial to successful implementation. Educational gaps for collegiate target 

populations may be of less concern because of their general acceptance of technology (Talantis et 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            24  

 

al., 2020).  

Funding 

Because of the large-scale investment needed for advanced apps, event organizers will need 

to develop project funding. Grants for USA Nonprofits, Agencies, Tribes, and IHEs for Digital 

Projects in the Humanities, and federal grants for risk mitigation, innovation, or sustainability 

should be considered in the funding model.  

 

Conclusions 

 

Through a review of the potential application of CRMT and an analysis of the scenario, this 

conceptual paper develops an action plan for applying CRMTs in collegiate events. First and 

foremost, a location-based app would serve as an event’s multifunctional competitive advantage. A 

location-based event app would reduce the chances of risks actualizing at the event. This would 

build brand trustworthiness and brand loyalty as event owners demonstrate active measures for 

attendee wellbeing and safety. It would also reduce the possible out-of-pocket costs for legal 

settlements. Direct organizer-attendee communications would increase attendance confidence, 

increasing sales and revenue. Adopting modern technology into event practices engages and attracts 

audiences because of their conveniences, especially those of younger generations. Extensive 

CRMTs demonstrate an event owner’s proactive commitment to attendee safety, increasing their 

chances for competitive venue securement. Participating in the app development and large project 

funding processes are valuable additions to the CV’s and success metrics of event organizers.  

Additionally, the implementation of a location-based app at College Football Playoffs will 

provide attendees with a large range of value. Most importantly, their health and safety will be 

positively impacted with assistance from the app’s well-planned features. A live crowd map will 

enable attendees with compromised immunities to locate crowds and avoid them by accessing 

alternative routes when possible. Attendees looking for more ways to engage at the event can locate 

happenings in the live event map. If riskful crowding or dangerous situations do occur, attendees 

will receive immediate information directly to their personal devices through notifications from the 

Command Center.  

Aside from value in health and safety, attendees’ sense of convenience will increase with the 

implementation of a location-based app. The “Find my Friend” feature will allow attendees to locate 

their communities better in the challenging urban environment. While some smart devices (i.e., 

Apple products) already enable this feature, locations based on temporary event structure and 

updates on closed roads will be accurately displayed. Additionally, density configurations can be 

used to create displays for vendor wait times and locations so that attendees can plan their own 

unique itinerary based off of real-time data.  

 Furthermore, the role of event operations staff in an event can make or break the attendee 

experience. Advancements in the quality and depth of organizer-staff communications would result 

in better directed efforts of the front-line staff. The power of radios was revolutionary. Imagine the 

power of an app that includes direct communications alongside live environmental updates for 

improved mitigation efforts. Experience in technology use is a hard skill that would supplement 

portfolios of event operation professionals.  

 Lastly, vendors reap the consequences of event crowding at direct levels through attendee 

frustration and revenue impacts. The power of an app to send notifications to attendees on current 

queue times will decrease the negative impacts of crowding on vendors, as well as promote more 



Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            25  

 

opportunities for sales during dead times. When attendees begin to recirculate in a few areas, cutting 

off sales opportunities for vendors outside of the area, Common Center can send notifications to 

attendees for specific vendor promotions to increase flow and revenue generated.  

 

References 

 

Abkarian, H., Tahlyan, D., Mahmassani, H., & Smilowitz, K. (2022). Characterizing visitor  

engagement behavior at large-scale events: Activity sequence clustering and ranking using GPS 

tracking data. Tourism Management, 88, 104421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104421 

      Alvarado-Valencia, J. A., Tueti Silva, G. C., & Montoya-Torres, J. R. (2017). Modeling and  

simulation of customer dissatisfaction in waiting lines and its effects. The Society for Modeling 

and Simulation International, 93(2), 91–101. https://doi-

org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1177/0037549716678477 

Boo, S., & Kim, M. (2019). Tourists’ online reviews of convention centers. Journal of Convention  

& Event Tourism, 20(2), 135–162. https://doi-

org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1080/15470148.2019.1582390 

Brown, A., Kappes, J., & Marks, J. (2013). Mitigating Theme Park Crowding with Incentives and  

Information on Mobile Devices. Journal of Travel Research, 52(4), 426–436. https://doi-

org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1177/0047287512475216 

Bustard, J.R.T., Bolan, P., Devine, A. and Hutchinson, K. (2019), "The emerging smart event  

experience: an interpretative phenomenological analysis". Tourism Review, Vol. 74 No. 1, pp. 

116-128. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-10-2017-0156. 

Dane, G., Borgers, A., Kaya, D. I., & Feng, T. (2020). Visitor flows at a large-scale cultural event:  

GPS tracking at Dutch Design Week. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(11), 

661. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9110661. 

Duong, V. (2021, April 22). Location Based App Development: Types, features and costs. 

Savvycom. Retrieved October 20, 2021, from https://savvycomsoftware.com/blog/location-

based-app-development/. 

Edwards, D. J., Akhtar, J., Rillie, I., Chileshe, N., Lai, J. H. K., Roberts, C. J., & Ejohwomu, O. 

(2021). Systematic analysis of driverless technologies. Journal of Engineering, Design and 

Technology, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/jedt-02-2021-0101 

Ewen, J. (2021, June 22). Best guide to location data 2021 - All you need to know. Tamoco. 

Retrieved October 20, 2021, from https://www.tamoco.com/blog/location-data-info-faq-guide/. 

Filingeri, V., Eason, K., Waterson, P., & Haslam, R. (2017). Factors influencing experience in 

crowds - The participant perspective. Applied Ergonomics, 431–441. https://doi-

org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.09.009. 

Flex Sim. (2021, April 1). Airport simulation. FlexSim. Retrieved October 10, 2021, from 

https://www.flexsim.com/airport-simulation/. 

GES. (2021). Event management company: Trade show & exhibition company. GES. Retrieved 

October 10, 2021, from https://www.ges.com/. 

Gramling, C. (2012). Satellites could be used to detect nuclear tests. SciTechDaily. Retrieved 

October 20, 2021, from https://scitechdaily.com/satellites-could-be-used-to-detect-nuclear-tests/. 

Green, L. (2016). Sports event management and security: Legal issues, strategies. NFHS. Retrieved 

October 29, 2021, from https://www.nfhs.org/articles/sports-event-management-and-security-

legal-issues-strategies/. 

Guo, B., Calabrese, F., Miluzzo, E., & Musolesi, M. (2014). Mobile crowd sensing: Part 1 [guest 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104421
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1177/0037549716678477
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1177/0037549716678477
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1080/15470148.2019.1582390
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1080/15470148.2019.1582390
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1177/0047287512475216
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1177/0047287512475216
https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-10-2017-0156
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9110661
https://savvycomsoftware.com/blog/location-based-app-development/
https://savvycomsoftware.com/blog/location-based-app-development/
https://doi.org/10.1108/jedt-02-2021-0101
https://www.tamoco.com/blog/location-data-info-faq-guide/
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.09.009
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.09.009
https://www.flexsim.com/airport-simulation/
https://www.ges.com/
https://scitechdaily.com/satellites-could-be-used-to-detect-nuclear-tests/
https://www.nfhs.org/articles/sports-event-management-and-security-legal-issues-strategies/
https://www.nfhs.org/articles/sports-event-management-and-security-legal-issues-strategies/


Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            26  

 

editorial]. IEEE Communications Magazine, 52(8), 20–21. 

https://doi.org/10.1109/mcom.2014.6871664. 

Hirth, M., Seufert, M., Lange, S., Meixner, M., & Tran-Gia, P. (2021). Performance Evaluation of 

Hybrid Crowdsensing and Fixed Sensor Systems for Event Detection in Urban Environments. 

Sensors (14248220), 21(17), 5880. https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.3390/s21175880. 

Iboshi, K. (2017). Beer, fights and bad behavior: Are college football fans getting too rowdy?. 

Channel 9News. https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/beer-fights-and-bad-

behavior-are-college-football-fans-getting-too-rowdy/283-

486339923?backhttps://www.9news.com/error/404s%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch

%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26as_qdr%3Dall%26as_occt%3Dany%26safe%3Dactive%26as_q%3Dth

e+correlation+between+college+football+games+in+fights%26channel%3Daplab%26source%3

Da-app1%26hl%3Den 

Johansson, A., Batty, M., Hayashi, K., Al Bar, O., Marcozzi, D., & Memish, Z. A. (2012). Crowd 

and environmental management during mass gatherings. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 12(2), 

150–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(11)70287-0. 

Kollar, J. (2021, September 3). Indianapolis prepares to host national championship as college 

football kicks off. Fox 59. Retrieved October 18, 2021, from 

https://fox59.com/sports/indianapolis-prepares-to-host-national-championship-as-college-

football-kicks-off/. 

LUMC-COVID-19 Research Group, Chen, Q., Toorop, M. M., de Boer, M. G., Rosendaal, F. R., & 

Lijfering, W. M. (2020). Why crowding matters in the time of covid-19 pandemic? - a lesson 

from the carnival effect on the 2017/2018 influenza epidemic in the Netherlands. BMC Public 

Health, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09612-6 

Macaya, M. (2021, November 9). November 8 2021: Deadly Astroworld crowd surge. CNN. 

Retrieved November 24, 2021, from https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/astroworld-houston-

crowd-surge-travis-scott-11-08-21/index.html. 

Martella, C., Li, J., Conrado, C., & Vermeeren, A. (2017). On current crowd management practices 

and the need for increased situation awareness, prediction, and intervention. Safety Science, 91, 

381–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.09.006. 

MOWEN, A. J., VOGELSONG, H. G., & GRAEFE, A. R. (2003). Perceived crowding and its 

relationship to crowd management practices at park and recreation events. Event Management, 

8(2), 63-72. https://doi.org/10.3727/152599503108751711. 

Patel, V., &amp; Kasakove, S. (2021, November 7). What to know about the Houston astroworld 

tragedy. The New York Times. Retrieved November 24, 2021, from 

https://www.nytimes.com/article/astroworld-festival-what-to-know.html. 

Sharma, D., Bhondekar, A. P., Shukla, A. K., & Ghanshyam, C. (2018). A review on technological 

advancements in crowd management. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized 

Computing, 9(3), 485-495. 

SIMWALK. (2021) Sports stadium. simulation of normal operations ... - SIMWALK. SIMWALK. 

(n.d.). Retrieved October 10, 2021, from 

https://www.simwalk.com/downloads/simwalk_casestudy_lucerne_e.pdf. 

Solmaz, G., & Turgut, D. (2014). Optimizing event coverage in theme parks. Wireless Networks 

(10220038), 20(6), 1445–1459. https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1007/s11276-014-0688-

z. 

Talantis, S., Shin, Y. H., & Severt, K. (2020). Conference mobile application: Participant 

acceptance and the correlation with overall event satisfaction utilizing the technology acceptance 

https://doi.org/10.1109/mcom.2014.6871664
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.3390/s21175880
https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/beer-fights-and-bad-behavior-are-college-football-fans-getting-too-rowdy/283-486339923?backhttps://www.9news.com/error/404s%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26as_qdr%3Dall%26as_occt%3Dany%26safe%3Dactive%26as_q%3Dthe+correlation+between+college+football+games+in+fights%26channel%3Daplab%26source%3Da-app1%26hl%3Den
https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/beer-fights-and-bad-behavior-are-college-football-fans-getting-too-rowdy/283-486339923?backhttps://www.9news.com/error/404s%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26as_qdr%3Dall%26as_occt%3Dany%26safe%3Dactive%26as_q%3Dthe+correlation+between+college+football+games+in+fights%26channel%3Daplab%26source%3Da-app1%26hl%3Den
https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/beer-fights-and-bad-behavior-are-college-football-fans-getting-too-rowdy/283-486339923?backhttps://www.9news.com/error/404s%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26as_qdr%3Dall%26as_occt%3Dany%26safe%3Dactive%26as_q%3Dthe+correlation+between+college+football+games+in+fights%26channel%3Daplab%26source%3Da-app1%26hl%3Den
https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/beer-fights-and-bad-behavior-are-college-football-fans-getting-too-rowdy/283-486339923?backhttps://www.9news.com/error/404s%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26as_qdr%3Dall%26as_occt%3Dany%26safe%3Dactive%26as_q%3Dthe+correlation+between+college+football+games+in+fights%26channel%3Daplab%26source%3Da-app1%26hl%3Den
https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/beer-fights-and-bad-behavior-are-college-football-fans-getting-too-rowdy/283-486339923?backhttps://www.9news.com/error/404s%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26as_qdr%3Dall%26as_occt%3Dany%26safe%3Dactive%26as_q%3Dthe+correlation+between+college+football+games+in+fights%26channel%3Daplab%26source%3Da-app1%26hl%3Den
https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/beer-fights-and-bad-behavior-are-college-football-fans-getting-too-rowdy/283-486339923?backhttps://www.9news.com/error/404s%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26as_qdr%3Dall%26as_occt%3Dany%26safe%3Dactive%26as_q%3Dthe+correlation+between+college+football+games+in+fights%26channel%3Daplab%26source%3Da-app1%26hl%3Den
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(11)70287-0
https://fox59.com/sports/indianapolis-prepares-to-host-national-championship-as-college-football-kicks-off/
https://fox59.com/sports/indianapolis-prepares-to-host-national-championship-as-college-football-kicks-off/
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09612-6
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/astroworld-houston-crowd-surge-travis-scott-11-08-21/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/astroworld-houston-crowd-surge-travis-scott-11-08-21/index.html
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.09.006
https://doi.org/10.3727/152599503108751711
https://www.nytimes.com/article/astroworld-festival-what-to-know.html
https://www.simwalk.com/downloads/simwalk_casestudy_lucerne_e.pdf
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1007/s11276-014-0688-z
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1007/s11276-014-0688-z


Weaver, K & Liu-Lastres, B. (2021) / Events and Tourism Review, 4(2) 

Events and Tourism Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), 14-27, DOI: 10.18060/25839 
Copyright © 2021 Kennedy Weaver and Becky Liu-Lastres 

  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

                                                                                                                                                                            27  

 

model (TAM). Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 21(2), 100–122. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/15470148.2020.1719949 

United Nations. (2021). Goal 11: Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. United 

Nations. Retrieved October 18, 2021, from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/cities/. 

Van Winkle, C., & Bueddefeld, J. (2020). Information and communication technology in event 

management. Handbook of e-Tourism, 1-22. 

Wang, Y., Yan, Z., Feng, W., & Liu, S. (2020). Privacy protection in mobile crowd sensing: a 

survey. World Wide Web, 23(1), 421–452. https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1007/s11280-

019-00745-2 

Wilson, J. W. (2004). Emerging radiation health-risk mitigation technologies. AIP Conference 

Proceedings, 699(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1649656 

 
 

https://doi.org/10.1080/15470148.2020.1719949
https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/cities/
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1007/s11280-019-00745-2
https://doi-org.proxy.ulib.uits.iu.edu/10.1007/s11280-019-00745-2
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1649656

