ASK THE EXPERT
Why Effective Risk Management Requires a Broader View of Campus Operations
Risk management is often associated with safety procedures, emergency response, and regulatory compliance. But the responsibilities of campus center operators extend well beyond those concerns. We spoke with CENTERS’ risk management subject matter expert, Michelle Rieger, PhD, about the complexities of managing risk, the lessons she’s learned through her experience in aquatics, and what campus leaders should look for in an operator.
CENTERS: What do campus leaders tend to overlook when they think about risk management?
Michelle Rieger: I don’t think there’s necessarily one thing campus leaders overlook. There’s just so much involved in risk management that it’s difficult to focus on every component all the time. Most people naturally gravitate toward safety and compliance, and for good reason. Those risks can have serious legal consequences. But risk management is much broader than preventing injuries or responding to emergencies. Think about something as common as a staffing shortage. It’s an operational challenge, but it can also affect service quality, create financial pressures, and potentially damage a facility’s reputation. Even decisions about program offerings, facility hours, or adopting new technologies can introduce risks that aren’t immediately apparent. That’s why CENTERS looks at risk management through five interconnected areas: safety and compliance, operations, finances, reputation, and strategy. The real challenge isn’t necessarily identifying risks within each category. It’s recognizing how decisions and circumstances across an operation can influence one another, sometimes in ways we don’t anticipate.
CENTERS: How has your experience leading aquatics operations shaped the way you approach risk management?
MR: Working in aquatics changes how you look at risk because water introduces hazards that aren’t present in most other environments. Almost everything you do in a pool involves some level of risk, and you’re often relying on relatively young employees to help manage it. That forces you to be proactive rather than reactive. You’re constantly looking ahead, evaluating what could go wrong, and trying to address potential problems before they become serious. After working in that environment, you naturally carry that mindset into other facilities and operations. I’ve found that it makes you much more observant. You start noticing things that might otherwise go unquestioned, and you’re always thinking about how a particular condition, procedure, or decision could create a risk down the road.
CENTERS: What separates a team that’s completed training from one that’s truly prepared to respond?
MR: Just because someone has a certification doesn’t necessarily mean they’re proficient at what they’re certified to do. Training provides the foundation, but you have to practice those skills to become good at them. That’s true for someone teaching a fitness class, performing CPR, or responding to an emergency. Think about professional athletes. They’re already among the best at what they do, but they still practice constantly. Risk management shouldn’t be any different. We can train employees on emergency action plans and procedures, but unless they’re regularly practicing those responses, we can’t assume they’re prepared to execute them effectively. That’s why CENTERS requires regular mock emergencies and scenario-based exercises. The more opportunities our staff have to apply what they’ve learned, the better prepared they’ll be when something actually happens.
CENTERS: Can you share an example of a risk you’ve identified that changed how you approach operations?
MR: Years ago, I participated in a discussion about a drowning incident where sunlight coming through the windows created a glare and a blind spot for a lifeguard. I wasn’t involved in that incident, but it completely changed how I evaluate aquatic facilities. Now, whenever I walk into a pool, I’m looking at the windows, the sunlight, the positioning of lifeguard stations, and what staff can actually see. Those conditions can change depending on the time of day or even the season. A pool might be designed for three lifeguards, and local health department requirements might support that staffing level, but the actual layout and visibility could mean you need four or five. That obviously affects operating costs, but it’s an important consideration. You can’t base every operational decision solely on the way a facility was designed or the minimum requirements. You have to evaluate how it actually functions.
CENTERS: How can university leadership determine whether risk is being managed effectively?
MR: University leaders need to be engaged enough to understand the risks within the departments and facilities they (or their partners) oversee. They don’t have to be experts in every operation, but they should be walking through facilities, talking with department leaders and operators, and asking questions about all areas of risk. Operators should be able to explain what their risks are, how they address them, and what challenges they’re facing. If the answers are vague or someone becomes uncomfortable when you ask more detailed questions, that’s a reason to dig deeper. Leadership should also be reviewing risk management plans and emergency procedures regularly. Incident reporting is another valuable resource, particularly for larger operations. Analyzing those reports, potentially with the help of AI, can reveal trends that aren’t immediately obvious. Ultimately, I think it’s important to ask department leaders and operators what patterns they’re seeing, where their roadblocks are, and what’s working well. Those conversations tell you a lot about how thoughtfully risk is being managed.