Tech: whose line is it anyway? Crisis management lessons from event disasters
When an event crisis strikes, is the problem caused by technology or planning? That was the challenge at Tech: Whose Line Is It Anyway?, an interactive game show where three event professionals were asked to solve real-world event disasters live on stage.
Moderator Tess Vimale, iSocialx, welcomed panelists Tyra Dyson, TDC Events & Hospitality; Heather O'Shea, OEC and Brandt Krueger, EventMobi. Each were presented with scenarios they'd never seen before. Their task was to decide whether each disaster stemmed from a technology failure or a planning failure while the audience voted on their answers.
The scenarios became progressively more complex as the session unfolded.
Brandt's first challenge centered on an incentive trip that ended with $94,000 in unexpected bar charges, including four bottles of $2,000 tequila ordered by the client's own CFO. He identified the issue as a planning failure, highlighting the importance of setting spending limits and establishing clear tracking processes for open bar arrangements.
Next, Heather and Tyra tackled an accommodation crisis that left 23 crew members without hotel rooms on the eve of a convention load-in. The problem stemmed from confusion over European and US date formats between international teams. Both agreed the root cause was inadequate planning, particularly a lack of verification and quality-control checks when working across multiple markets and vendors.
The panel then faced the session's most complicated scenario. An AI note-taking tool mistakenly distributed a confidential board meeting summary to all participants, including the CEO. Among the listed actions was a sentence stating: "Action item 1, start the search for a new CEO."
The situation escalated further when participants learned that some board members had joined remotely due to airline system disruptions, the note-taking tool belonged to the board chair and a separate data breach had also been discovered.
Unlike the earlier examples, the panel unanimously classified this incident as a technology failure. The audience agreed, concluding that the AI error and subsequent breach were primarily caused by the tool rather than deficiencies in the planning process.
To close the session, each panelist shared a personal rule for managing crises.
Tyra encouraged planners to pause before reacting, using a countdown technique to create space for clear thinking and maintain rapport during difficult conversations.
Heather emphasized the importance of educating teams rather than blaming technology. Technology, she noted, only operates within the parameters it has been given, making planning, governance and guardrails essential.
Brandt offered two principles: focus first on solving the problem rather than assigning blame, and remember that work-life balance is less about perfect equilibrium and more about managing changing priorities over time.
The session reinforced the view that successful crisis management depends less on technical manuals and more on experience, relationships, communication and the ability to stay calm under pressure.
Explore what’s on at IMEX
Back to IMEXscoop
This report was produced with the help of Snapsight.
.svg)
