1. Key facts.
This case study is unusual in the fact that it highlights the complete success of an event and examines the positives instead of focusing on the negatives. Instead of standing back and reacting to the events, a proactive approach was crucial to the success of the convention. This success stemmed from the desire of all agencies to highlight the city of Boston in a positive light. Assistance was generated by Governor Romney’s request to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to designate the DNC as a National Special Security Event (NSSE). With the NSSE designation there left no ambiguity as to who was in charge of security. However, even though a large government agency with virtually unlimited resources was taking the lead, it could not work alone and required the cooperation of eleven various federal, state and local agencies. Even though it appears that cooperation between all parties was evident it still took a point-person to ensure that everyone worked well together, no feathers were ruffled and tasks were maintained. Political issues also needed to be weighed, as Democratic Mayor Merino was heavily involved in the bidding process and any blunder or mismanagement would shine a negative light on his party. In spite of all these issues, the Secret Services mission was to secure the Fleet Center, its delegates, protestors, and attendees. This is where the leadership of Secret Service Special Agent Scott Sheafe was key in getting everyone on board with the project.
Sheafe had the foresight to see the potential issues that would arise once the security goals of the Secret Service and DNC came to light. He immediately made clear his goal of completely securing the fleet center by sweeping it clean and then allowing entry to those cleared individuals. Closing down I-93 was also needed to completely ensure the security of the venue. In the words of Sheafe, “I cannot be convinced that this wouldn’t be a target 24 hours a day for the four days.” However, Sheafe’s plan did not mesh with the goals of the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority (MBTA) operating North Station or the political and economic interests of the City of Boston. Getting the two sides to agree on a suitable outcome was the main objective.
2. Organizational Dynamics
Given the many agencies involved and the political skin in the game, organizational dynamics played a major role in this case. Getting everyone to communicate effectively was important. Unlike the Chicago Heat Wave case where the city, county and state governments were each doing their own thing and not communicating what was happening, this case exemplified the successes that a strong organizational structure can have on the outcome. Applying decision making model to this case is also rather interesting. Having never worked in Boston, Sheafe may have come into this job thinking it would be a nightmare to coordinate all the different agencies and play nice. Historically epic turf battles between agencies such as the FBI and local police are well known. If Sheafe used the rational, organizational process and government politics models, he may have initially placed this job under governmental politics based solely on the sheer number of governmental agencies involved. All of these agencies with their own vision and political agenda could be a nightmare. Boston, however, is a tight-knit community and operates on the belief that “our parts are greater than our whole.” Virtually everyone on the steering committee had skin in this game and desired to see this convention be a rousing success. Due to this attitude it likely made Sheafe’s job a bit easier and therefore reflected the rational decision model where alternatives were examined, pros and cons were weighed and value was maximized. This especially came to fruition during the debate on whether to shut down North Station and I-93. In the end both sides were willing to compromise and make sacrifices for a greater good.
3. Management Systems and Cultures
Bringing together different management systems and cultures can be a frustrating task.
In this case study it appeared that even though differences were evident, the participants were willing to accept and work with them. One example comes up with the Boston Police Department and their work during the bidding process to draw up their own security plans under the assumption that they would be spearheading this effort. When the convention was designated as a NSSA, it turned out to be a simple task of ‘cut-and-paste’ to implement the previous work into the new structure.
Another example can been seen with the Boston Fire Department’s evacuation plan of the Fleet Center. The criteria for them to evacuate the entire building stems from a ‘better be safe than sorry’ culture which, in their line of work where decisions need to made on a moment’s notice, can be difficult to deviate. However they likely never dealt with an evacuation of this scale where other risk factors need to be considered. Once the Secret Service and Fire Department saw the situation from each other’s management cultures they were able come to an amicable agreement that met everyone’s vision.
4. How does role perception and attribution affect the outcome?
We can assume that during the first steering committee meeting there were many pre-conceived notions about the various agencies involved, either through a direct working relationship or by second-hand involvement. As the new kid in town, Sheafe had no idea what the working history was of everyone involved but had no doubt heard rumors either positive or negative. Once the meeting started, he further realized everyone had the same goal which was to make this convention a huge success. In this example, what started out as a potentially negative perception turned positive rather quickly and allowed the entire committee to focus on the task at hand.
5. Lessons Learned
No doubt the security aspect of the DNC was a success due to the hard work of countless individuals. Even during success there are still lessons to learn whether they be positive or negative. It seems like Sheafe may have underestimated the political ramifications of shutting down North Station and I-93. He saw the security vulnerabilities of both and determined that the only way to ensure the complete safety of the convention was to shut everything down without taking into consideration the ripple effect it would have on the regional economy and daily commuters. Fortunately a compromise was struck to minimize the impact of these closures while ensuring security of the convention.