In high-risk television production, risk management is often discussed as process: documentation, sign-off, compliance. In reality, it is something far more dynamic. Risk decisions are made in live environments, shaped by people, geography, time pressure and creative ambition. No two productions are the same, and no framework can fully anticipate how conditions will evolve once filming begins.
Recent work supporting the production of Long Way Home offered a clear reminder of this. The project involved extended travel across multiple countries, changing environments and a creative ambition that relied on flexibility and responsiveness. It highlighted not just the importance of planning, but the central role of professional judgement once a production is underway.
Experience changes the risk conversation
One of the most striking elements of complex, long-running productions is how experience reshapes attitudes to risk. Teams with decades of combined experience are not less ambitious, but they approach decision-making differently. They tend to be more conscious of consequence, reputation and responsibility, both personal and organisational.
This does not result in more conservative productions. Instead, it leads to clearer prioritisation. Experienced teams are often better at distinguishing between acceptable risk and unnecessary exposure, and at recognising when a situation requires adaptation rather than adherence to precedent.
For senior production leaders, this is an important distinction. Risk maturity is not about reducing creative scope. It is about improving the quality of decisions under pressure.
Responsibility cannot be delegated away
On high-risk productions, responsibility ultimately sits with senior production leadership. While safety advisors and specialists provide essential expertise and guidance, the decision to proceed, pause or change course rests with those carrying editorial and production accountability.
This is often understated. There can be an assumption that the presence of a safety professional transfers responsibility. It does not. It informs it.
The most effective productions recognise this clearly. They treat risk management as a shared discipline, where advisors enable better decisions rather than absorb liability. That clarity strengthens trust across the team and leads to more coherent decision-making when pressure increases.
Engagement beats compliance
Another consistent lesson from complex productions is that engagement matters more than enforcement. Teams are far more likely to act safely when they understand why decisions are made, what the real risks are, and how those risks affect not just the production but the people involved.
Involving crew and contributors in risk thinking builds shared ownership. It turns risk assessment from a compliance exercise into a practical tool. This is particularly important on productions where individuals may be working independently, in remote locations or without immediate access to support.
People protect what they understand.
What production leaders should take from this
For production leaders operating in high-risk environments, a few principles consistently hold true:
- Recognise that experience improves risk decisions, it does not limit ambition
- Treat responsibility as something that can be informed, not outsourced
- Invest in shared risk literacy across teams, not just documentation
- Design safety approaches that flex with the production, rather than constrain it
As productions become more complex and tools continue to evolve, the importance of human judgement does not diminish. It becomes more central. Risk management, at its best, is not about controlling creativity. It is about enabling it, responsibly.
As production workflows evolve, tools can help draw out and structure information, but responsibility, judgement and sign-off remain firmly human. Anya Keatley explores how AI can support that process without replacing it.
For more production risk insights, follow Secret Compass on LinkedIn.