BCU study exposes retention fault lines in UK live events

New academic research into the UK live events workforce suggests that the sector’s talent difficulties stem less from a shortage of skilled people and more from longstanding problems with working conditions, career pathways and staff retention.

The study, conducted by Birmingham City University (BCU) and led by Dr Roy Priest, examines why live events businesses continue to report hiring challenges despite an apparent influx of new and emerging talent. The findings point to a structural retention issue that predates the pandemic but has been intensified by it.

Background: a sector under workforce pressure

Table of Contents

Live events in the UK – spanning festivals, concerts, theatre, corporate gatherings and large-scale productions – have traditionally relied on a mix of permanent staff, freelancers and seasonal workers. In recent years, industry bodies and employers have repeatedly highlighted a so‑called “skills shortage”, particularly as activity rebounded after COVID‑19 shutdowns.

BCU’s work suggests that this widely used label may obscure more fundamental problems. Rather than a lack of interest among early‑career professionals, the research indicates that many trained and qualified individuals either exit the sector or restrict their engagement because of how work is structured and rewarded.

The research team drew on qualitative input from students, educators, early‑career practitioners and industry stakeholders, focusing on the pipeline between formal education and professional live events work. The project set out to understand why a sector that appears attractive to young people on paper struggles to hold onto them once they enter the workplace.

Key developments from the BCU research

The BCU study identifies a disconnect between the expectations of new entrants and the realities of live events employment. While detailed findings have not all been made public, several themes emerge from the research narrative:

Conditions, not capability: The research argues that the core problem is not a deficit of talent or training, but the working environment itself – including long and irregular hours, unpredictable workloads and pressure around event delivery.
Unclear progression routes: Many early‑career workers reportedly struggle to see a viable long‑term pathway in the sector. Roles can be project‑based and fragmented, making it difficult to build a stable career narrative or understand how to advance.
Retention rather than recruitment: Employers frequently focus on attracting new staff and freelancers, but the research suggests that keeping experienced workers in the industry is a more pressing challenge. People with significant skills appear to be leaving for other sectors that offer clearer progression, greater stability or better work‑life balance.
Impact of education‑industry gap: The study highlights tensions between what is taught in higher education and what graduates encounter on the ground. While universities can equip students with technical and creative capabilities, they have limited influence over pay structures, working patterns and employment practices once graduates enter the sector.

Dr Priest’s work positions these issues as systemic rather than isolated. Instead of framing the situation as a temporary post‑pandemic blip, the research suggests that the industry has relied on a reservoir of goodwill and informal labour practices that may no longer be sustainable.

Industry impact and strategic implications

The findings carry significant implications for organisers, production companies, venues and suppliers who depend on a reliable pool of skilled personnel. If the problem is fundamentally about retention and conditions, short‑term recruitment drives and training interventions will have limited effect.

For event businesses, the research points to several potential areas of impact:

Higher operational risk: Persistent churn in technical, production and management roles can increase the risk of delivery issues, as teams lose institutional knowledge and need more time to bed in before major projects.
Increased costs: Constantly onboarding and upskilling new people can be more expensive over time than investing in better conditions and progression frameworks for existing staff.
Pressure on freelancers: The sector’s reliance on freelance and casual workers may intensify workload and scheduling pressures, contributing further to burnout and exit from the industry.
Reputation among new entrants: As experiences are shared among student cohorts and early‑career professionals, perceptions of instability or poor conditions could discourage some individuals from committing long term, even if they remain interested in live events creatively.

The research also intersects with wider debates about diversity and inclusion. If only those able to absorb financial uncertainty and unsocial hours can sustain a career in live events, the sector risks narrowing its talent base and limiting the range of perspectives represented on and behind the stage.

Why this matters for event professionals and technology providers

For event organisers and production leaders, the BCU study is a prompt to examine workforce strategies beyond basic recruitment. Reviewing scheduling practices, compensation models, wellbeing support and clear role definitions may become as critical as technology or content decisions.

Hybrid and digital tools may play a role in easing some of the pressure points identified in the research. Workflow platforms, remote collaboration tools and more precise resource planning can help distribute workloads, reduce manual coordination and improve visibility over staffing needs. However, the study suggests that technology alone cannot offset structural issues such as low pay in certain roles, fragmented contracts or the absence of transparent pathways from entry‑level to senior positions.

For technology vendors and platforms serving the live events sector, the research highlights an opportunity to support workforce sustainability as part of their value proposition. Features that enable better forecasting, more equitable shift allocation, or easier onboarding of new crew members may resonate strongly with organisations grappling with retention concerns.

Education providers, meanwhile, may need closer dialogue with employers to align expectations on both sides. While universities can continue to prepare students with technical competence and creative skills, shared work on placements, mentoring and realistic career information could help bridge the gap between training and long‑term employment.

Conclusion

The BCU research reframes the UK live events workforce challenge from a question of skills scarcity to a deeper retention and conditions issue. The sector appears to have no shortage of interested and capable entrants, but struggles to convert that interest into sustainable careers.

For a live events ecosystem increasingly dependent on complex production, hybrid formats and advanced technology, the stability and wellbeing of its workforce will be central to future resilience. Addressing the structural factors highlighted in the study – from working hours and pay to progression and support – may determine whether the industry can secure the talent it needs for the next phase of growth.