Investigating the London Olympic Stadium 2012 Programme - Case Study Example

Report investigating the London Olympic Stadium programme Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction and 3 Program management 4 Risk management 4 PRINCE2 methodology 7 Projects in the London Olympic Stadium 2012 programme: Identification and evaluation 8 Success of the programme 10 Conclusion and Recommendation 11 Reference List 12 Introduction and Description The Olympic Stadiums are characteristically, noteworthy works of architecture and are historical masterpieces. But the London Olympic Stadium 2012 Programme was unique from the other programmes due to a unique characteristic. This stadium has been designed and constructed in such a way that it can be easily deconstructed after the games are over. It is the first of its kind in the world and has employed the skills and talent of the best architectural and engineering companies in the United Kingdom. The stadium provides a seating arrangement for 80,000 viewers and has been made to scale the seating arena to a smaller 25,000 seated stadium. This requires an in-built flexibility and it maximises the potential of the stadium to meet needs of the community and arrange smaller national sports events in the stadium. The designer, Rod Sheard, and his team introduced ingenious designs and used 3D computer graphics, time-lapse photography and conducted persuasive interviews with the key personnel of this programme so as, to receive advices and feedback on the work done. The roof of the stadium is one amazing piece of art and scientific architecture; it is a cable-net roof of more than half kilometre circumference, and is erected as one enormous piece of roofing. The lighting arrangement is equally amazing (Channel5, 2012, Megastructures: Londons Olympic Stadium). Lighting pads are attached to each individual seat which when lighted produces a magnificent effect. Also the administration team has taken care of the environmental issues. The entire structure has been created to minimize waste generation right from the structure of the building to the transportation and food facilities, procurement of raw materials and checks on carbon emission. All these have helped the building to achieve a successful seat in modern architectural development. Program management Programme management refers to an approach that is integrated into the approach of project management and streamlines the effect of project management principles implemented for the proper delivery of different projects (Gray, 1997). Programme is a group many portfolios of separate projects (Shehua and Akintoye, 2009; Ferns, 1991; Reiss, 2003). These projects are managed in a synchronized manner which creates certain benefits that would not have been earned had the projects been administered independently. When the cost benefit analysis is made while planning a mega event, nalysts must calculate long term costs and benefits. These affect the economy of the host destination and also influence the performance of the programme in the long run (Jago, et al., 2010). In this paper the business objective of the London Olympic Stadium built for the 2012 games would be evaluated according to the academic theory of risk management and PRINCE2 methodology. The architectural design would be studied to assess the long term performance of the programme. Risk management Mega-events as the World Cup in football or cricket or the Olympic Games are special events that require rigorous practice for risk management. Although mega-events take place for a limited time span, they cast long-term impacts on the host cities. Hosting of such mega events require the creation of large infrastructure that often entail long-term debts and necessitate long-term programming (Roche, 1994). It requires efficient analysis of the probable security risks and their proper management of security risks. It involves substantial interdependencies among the different projects within the large programme and provides a wide scale of resource commitments. Apart from the consequences on the host nation, these events are of geopolitical significance across the globe and are therefore vulnerable to scrutiny of the public as well as international media. There are different forms of risk in such a grand programme. These risks are categorised into retaining risk, technical risk, schedule risk, cost risk and funding risks. Retaining risk - This risk pertains to the retention of the employees that are working at the construction site. They are labourers that are working on a contractual basis or a daily basis. These labourers are free to join other job opportunities. Retention of these employees was a difficult task. Technical risk – Construction of the Olympics Stadium is a big project and it involves several technical risks. Any mismatch in the management process might lead to problem of procurement of the raw materials, security at the construction site, accidents due to the loopholes in supervision and casualties. Schedule risk – Proper coordination is essential for avoiding the schedule risk. This risk relates to discrepancies in following is the time framework. It would lead to financial loss, due to fine and reputation loss for the company that is constructing it. The organisers would face problem since failure to stick to the original time frame would cause difficulties for the organisers in arraging the event. Cost risk – Cost minimization is one of the most important objectives of this programme. A budget has been prepared for the programme and failure to remain within this budget would reduce profit for the company. Schedule risk ultimately paves way for cost risk. Funding risks – Fund generation is a serious concern for such big projects as the London 2012 Olympics Stadium. This project has been funded by both government and private sources. The UK government is already facing a slow recovery from the financial down turn since 2009, and therefore government funding on this project is not abundant. Private funding has to be relied upon and any failure in this funding by the private shareholders would significantly affect the construction of the stadium, its security projects and the hoisting of the Games in the end. These risks have been handled by the government of UK efficiently. The tools of risk management have been compared according to the classification scheme proposed by Christopher Hood in 1983 (Hood, 1983; Hood and Margetts, 2007). This theoretical framework provides a way to categorise and analyse the way national governments interface with the society by using these tools. Figure 1: The tools of the government Nodality Reliance on being in the middle of an information network Authority Reliance on possession of legal authority Treasure Reliance on exchange of goods and money Organisation Reliance on ability to act directly (Source: Jennings and Lodge, 2009)  Nodality For the London 2012 Olympics, international intelligence agencies (such as the Defence Intelligence Staff, MI5 and others) coordinated with the national Olympic-specific organisations, of the different participating countries. Special Intelligence Units worked cohesively to gather and evaluate information from across the world.  Authority Special legal framework has been enacted by the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) for the hoisting of the 2012 Olympic Games. The Metropolitan Police and the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (LOCOG) followed a particular set of jurisdictions. Since the stadium was a totally new venue, stadium modernisation was made following international safety standards and better access to the security facilities. Treasure For the 2012 Olympics, treasure refers to direct expenditure made by public bodies as well as quasi-private organisations. The event has been funded through commercial activities such as sponsorship by various organizations and sale of tickets. The general security budget has being borne by the UK government. Organization For the London 2012 Olympics, A wide network of different organisations and a huge workforce have been involved in the extensive security coverage for the event. Government agencies have been deployed for maintaining direct high-level coordination among the different projects. Intelligence services have been combined with the law enforcement services by the Metropolitan Police to bring the most desirable effect. PRINCE2 methodology The PRINCE2 methodology had been developed by the UK government in 1989 as a standard approach to management of projects in the IT field. This methodology is used extensively in both private and public sectors in different countries. The main features of PRINCE2 include a process based approach in a clearly defined business case, a well defined organizational structure, quantifiable products produced from distinctly defined resource base (Lowe, 2013). This methodology has been successfully used by the London Olympic Authority for management of all the projects in the 2012 Games. Using of PRINCE2 has helped the management to save time and remain business focussed. This method allows the managers to attend meetings only at the end of every stage of the project and not attend long regular meetings that generally wastes time. The entire programme has been structured with “continued business justification” (Buehring, 2012). This has ensured that the event has made timely delivery of return to investment. It does not side track the management such that the project is managed all throughout and not “as an end in itself” (Buehring, 2012). Projects in the London Olympic Stadium 2012 programme: Identification and evaluation The London Olympic Stadium 2012 programme is a grand program that consists of 50 different projects inter-correlated with each other (Comptroller and Auditor General, 2008). Among these projects are transportation project, the health planning project, materials food services, waste management, carbon emission reduction and Sustainable Procurement programme (Ruddick, 2011). Transportation The transportation project, is important as a part of the Olympic project, and is also important for the economy as a whole. London already has a high quality connection of roadways and waterway routes linking the different parts of the city. However, the transportation project of the Olympics 2012 would enhance the GOAL 2012 of building a number of ‘green corridors’ mainly for the purpose of walking and cycling. These two options would be most useful for the workforce working for the construction and also spectators that would come to watch the show. It would produce less pollution and help make the place greener (Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Transport Committee, 2006). Health planning The health planning project is an important part of the Olympics programme and outcome of evaluation of this health project sheds light on the level of success of the programme. An independent evaluation of the project has been made by the UCL Department of Applied Health Research has published their report on the state of health planning by the “Olympic health services programme” (UCL, 2013). Food and drinking water Apart from these there was food and drinking water service facility for the participants, organizers and the spectators. Food service facility speaks for the performance of the project and affects the overall performance of the programme. Food service is an integral part of the programme and proper maintenance of the service would also involve other factors, such as, hygiene, proper distribution, timely procurement of raw materials and preservation of food and minimization of wastage. Carbon emission The amount of carbon produced due to this programme can potentially harm the atmosphere to a great extent. Therefore measures have been adopted that are aimed at reducing the level of carbon production. A base line has been established to restrain carbon emission and a carbon calculator named after Sir Robert McAlpine has been used to measure the carbon emission resulting from these developments. The number of vehicles trips to the venue has been monitored and rigorous security procedures have been installed for checking the deliveries of different items to the site which reduced the number of deliveries via motor vehicles, thereby reducing carbon emission (Constructing excellence, n.d.). Sustainable Procurement All sub-contractors require accepting the document of sustainable development strategy and providing valid evidence to the management of the way in which they would meet these targets of sustainable development. In addition, they also need to provide a schedule outlining the environmental compliance plan on how they would conform to the plans of waste management. Waste management and minimization Waste management has been addressed in every level of the programme under different projects. On this current project, waste minimisation has been considered at all project levels, such as, use of reusable fixings, which would help in deconstruction of the stadium at the end of the show and again use them when necessary. Besides, the toilet blocks that would no longer be in use after the Olympics are over are being considered for reuse for other purposes. The entire structure above the podium has been erected as a temporary structure and can be dismounted as and when necessary and the materials can be reused. Success of the programme It is evident from the discussion presented above that the London Olympic Stadium 2012 has been a successful event. It is one of the most successful mega events and also one of the best hosting in the history of Olympics (DW, 2012). The programme has been successful not only in the year in which the games have been conducted but also the stadium has been built in such a way that it can serve the needs of hoisting other games in future. The stadium can be adapted for other games. The prime criterion for success is the long sighted objective and flexibility of the programme. It reduces cost since the flexibility allows the structure of the programme to be modified according to the budget and estimates of revenue generation. Conclusion and Recommendation The London Olympic Stadium 2012 programme has been a sure success. The various attributes and long sightedness of the stadium has led to the success of the programme. The economic condition of Britain is still fragile and in order to make the programme remain a successful venture in the future, administrators need to consider cost reduction strategies along with revenue maximization. The stadium is dismountable which offers the opportunity to adjust the roof of the stadium according to needs. It rains in London and therefore there has to be a provision to make a temporary roof cover so as to cover up the ground. It would not hamper the schedule of matches during rains. Besides, the seating arrangement should be kept higher than 25,000 since other international sports events are held in London which attracts huge crowd form all over the world. Hence, apart from Olympics, the seating arrangement can be kept at 40,000 to maximize spectators’ visit. Other free space is also released after the stadium is dismounted. These spaces can be utilized for building indoor games campuses, such as, squash, billiards and table tennis. This would lead to maximum utilization of the space and also increase revenue yield. Reference List Buehring, S., 2012. PRojects IN Controlled Environments (a.k.a. PRINCE2®). [online] available at: [Accessed 3 July 2013]. Comptroller and Auditor General, 2008. Preparations for the London 2012 Olympic and paralympic games: Progress report June 2008: Report. London: The Stationery Office. Constructing excellence, n.d. Olympic Stadium. [online] Available at: [Accessed 1 July 2013]. DW, 2012. London 2012 hailed as a success. [online] Available at: [Accessed 1 July 2013]. Ferns, D. C., 1991. Developments in programme management. International Journal of Project Management, 9(3), pp. 148–156. Gray, R. J., 1997. Alternative approaches to programme management. International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), pp. 5–9. Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Transport Committee, 2006. Going for gold: Transport for Londons 2012 Olympic Games; Third report of session 2005-06. London: The Stationery Office. Hood, C. and Margetts, H., 2007. The tools of government in the digital age. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Hood, C., 1983. The tools of government. London: Macmillan. Jago, L., Dwyer, L., Lipman, G., Lill, D. and Vorster, S., 2010. Optimising the potential of mega-events: An overview. International Journal of Event and Festival Management, 1(3), pp. 220-237. Jennings , W and Lodge, M., 2009. Tools of Security RiskManagement for the London 2012Olympic Games and FIFA 2006World Cup in Germany. [online] available at: < http://academia.edu/209696/Governing_Mega-Events_Tools_of_Security_Risk_Management_for_the_London_2012_Olympic_Games_and_FIFA_2006_World_Cup_in_Germany> [Accessed 3 July 2013]. Lowe, D., 2013. Commercial Management: Theory and Practice. Chichester: Wiley. Megastructures: Londons Olympic Stadium. 2012. [video] London: Channel 5 Broadcasting Ltd. Reiss, G., 2003. Portfolio and programme management demystified: Managing multiple projects successfully. London: Routledge. Roche, M., 1994. Mega-events and urban policy. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(1), pp. 1-19. Ruddick, G., 2011. London 2012 Olympics: The Olympic Stadium made in Britain. [online] Available at: < http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/london-olympics-business/8641977/London-2012-Olympics-The-Olympic-Stadium-made-in-Britain.html > [Accessed 1 July 2013]. Shehua, Z. and Akintoye, A., 2009. Construction programme management theory and practice: Contextual and pragmatic approach. International Journal of Project Management, 27(2009), pp. 703–716. UCL, 2013. UCL NHS London 2012 Olympics Programme Evaluation Project. [online] Available at: [Accessed 1 July 2013]. Read More