Lessons Learned from the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings

Leadership Exercise: Boston Marathon Bombings Analysis
On April 15, 2013, Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev two Kyrgyz-American brothers, detonated two homemade bombs at the annual running of the Boston Marathon, killing three people and injuring another estimated 264 attendees. Although this high-profile domestic terrorism attack claimed a number of casualties, most observers agree that the outcome could have been far more severe had it not been for the preparations and actions taken by law enforcement and first responders prior to and immediately after the incident. The purpose of this paper is to provide a review of the literature to Identify salient issues that relate to issues such as leadership, decision making, organizational culture, communication, politics and power, employee training, teams, and so forth to identify best practices and lessons learned from this horrific incident. Finally, a summary of the research and key findings concerning the security preparations for and responses to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings are provided in the conclusion.
Review and Analysis
Although Lasky (2014) emphasizes that the 26 miles covered by the Boston Marathon made the provision of security especially difficult, the impact of the terrorist bombings on the event would likely have been far worse had it not been for the extensive prior planning that was involved. Moreover, the civic leaders in Boston together with law enforcement authorities provided the overarching leadership that helped to develop the protocols that minimized the potentially devastating effects of the two homemade bombs. For instance, Lasky (2014) points out that, “One outcome of reviewing the incident discovered that the pre-positioning of medical first responders for the marathon greatly helped in the triage efforts for victims on the scene” (p. 2)
In fact, although this change appears intuitive on its face, it is important to note that previous marathon and other public events were handled far differently and first responders actually waited until law enforcement authorities arrived on the scene before taking action. In this regard, Lasky (2014) reports that, “In the past as a matter of emergency medical services protocols, medical first responders waited for law enforcement to clear arrival before they responded. The pre-staged medical services on the scene may become more standardized for security planning at future public events” (p. 2). Furthermore, the Boston mayor assumed an important leadership role by ensuring that planning for the re-opening of one of the most seriously affected streets was achieved in a timely fashion (After action report for the response to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, 2014).
The importance of this key lesson learned from the Boston Marathon bombings cannot be overstated since Lasky (2014) makes it clear that it required the careful coordination of police, emergency management teams, firefighters and medical personnel beforehand to ensure that the resources that were needed to respond to unforeseen eventualities such as this one were readily available. This coordination involved a number of local, state and federal agencies and an umbrella organizational culture that placed a high priority on intelligence gathering and a high state of preparedness (Lasky, 2014).
This coordination also underscored the need for a unified command that is characterized by strong relationships between key stakeholders. As the After action report for the response to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings (2014) pointed out in its executive summary of lessons learned from the incident, “Strong relationships created and maintained by key leaders were paramount to ensuring commanders, agency heads, and political leaders came together quickly to form Unified Command and facilitate collaborative decision-making after the bombings in Boston and during the manhunt” (p. 9).
Other important lessons learned from this domestic terrorist attack included the need for an all-hazards medical system to be in place preparatory to the running of the marathon staffed by appropriately trained and qualified first responders. In addition, there was a need for additional weapons training identified in the after action report, as well as the need for a joint information center to help coordinate responses to emergency incidents such as this as well as improved coordination and management of mutual aid personnel (After action report for the response to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, 2014). This latter finding was especially noteworthy because it hampered the deployment of the otherwise carefully prepared first responder resources following the detonation of the bombs and the manhunt that ensued in the aftermath.
Conclusion
The three fatalities and dozens of injuries caused by the mindless bombings of the 2013 Boston Marathon were truly tragic, and the perpetrators have been captured and punished. Nevertheless, the criminal justice to which these terrorists were subjected will clearly not deter other homegrown terrorists from attacking innocent Americans in the future since these radicalized individuals are prepared and willing to die for whatever misguided cause compels them to act. While it is impossible to predict unexpected attacks of this nature, it is possible to develop contingency plans and deploy the emergency response resources that will be required in case they do occur, and this is what happened at Boston thereby minimizing the effects of this terrorist attack. There were some important lessons learned, though, including the need for additional weapons training and a unified command center to better coordinate emergency responses.





References
After action report for the response to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings. (2014, December). Boston: Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency et al.
Lasky, S. (2014, April 21). Boston Marathon a case study in lessons learned following last year's bombing tragedy. SecurityWatch. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/Boston_ bombing_lessons_learned.pdf.