Analysis of EMBOK and EPARS - Essay Example

Analysis of EMBOK and EPARS Introduction The world has evolved and became more sociable. With this in place, events have become a day-day occurrence, regardless of the magnitude an event will remain an event ranging from simple to complex. Operations going down in an event ought to be executed efficient and effective. According to (“Events Feasibility and Development”, 2011), event project management has to develop an excellent strategy that will ensure events do meet their objectives as stated. However, some objectives do contradict with the mission of an event this should not be the sole reason for an event failure. Models have been developed to assist event managers in the process of planning. Planning for an event go beyond the literary word and involves a series of activities ranging from been awarded permits by relevant authorities to the closure of an event. A well informed and experienced event manager should always be aware of the possibility of activities planned for an event failing, and therefore, proper fall-back plan should be in place to salvage the moment. It has been argued that all over the years that an event cannot be rated as successful either by a brilliant plan or execution but how the event ends is what can be used to gauge (Burke, 2011). Adoption of models like events management body of knowledge (EMBOK) and Event Plan and Archive Review System (EPRAS) can assist in event planning. Both are useful tools for event to be successful, however, conflict arises on how one model prefers planning and execution ought to be done. Therefore, it would be wise to incorporate elements that are applicable to a planned event from the two models, so as to achieve objectives of the events. Primary research St. Patrick Day Parade event need to be an outstanding one that will not only leave residents Huddersfield City centre with memorable moments, but enlighten with the theme for the float ;“ World Medical And Health Games 2015”. Primary research has to be conducted to get fine details on what is expected from the team and the event itself. Research concerning the target group for the parade display should be known. An event should be planned when the target audiences have been identified (Westerbeek, 2006). An interview was conducted with John and Agnes on board to expound on the target audience. For this case, the target group is middle-aged. Research will be conducted on them to get their idea and thought over the theme. Organizing for the event will cost a minimum £ 3000, and there is no charitable organization to fund the event. Best way to raise the fund will have to be sought. Each team member is required to conduct research on how best the funds can be raised to ensure the event become successful. Theoretical framework Event Management Body of Knowledge model, developed by (O’Toole, 1999), emphases on the essential need to conduct research to determine the feasibility of an event. The first phase of EMBOK, initiation gives credit for prosperous events that identify feasibility at the initial stage (Robson, 2009). An event can have a positive impact on the society, but what it takes for the event to be actualized is what has to be determined. Event Project and Review System (EPRAS) is considered as the modern model for event planning. The model is based on the idea of ensuring an event can meet the objectives, more specifically on measurable aspect of each task. However, it does not explain how the feasibility of the event can assessed before embarking on the planning. The model cannot be regarded to have failed in successful managing events as far as event feasibility is concerned. The first phase of EPARS event is defined; briefing from the client is recorded. Events’ data archived similar to that of a client is retrieved and analyzed, and feasibility of the study determined. Analysis of the theoretical framework Primary research for the St. Patrick Day Parade was conducted through interview. EMBOK model can be termed as reasonable since it admits the fact that not all events can be done and become successful without a research being conducted. In addition to that, success of an event can be matched and compared to the success of a similar event as adopted by EPRAS. Toole, (2011) argued that EMBOK can be regarded as dynamic since each event is managed differently than the others. St. Patrick Day Parade is annual event the theme for each year keeps on changing; therefore, it is advisable for the team to conduct primary research. The research will reveal to the team the expectation of the public and their line of thought concerning the theme for the parade. However, for EPRAS events which are similar can be planned and managed with the same strategy; therefore it can be regarded as conservative. Though John shared how previous events had been conducted, it was still worth to conduct research to find out the best promotion and fund raising for the event. The team cannot depend on the suggestions from the previous parade as emphasized by EPRAS to plan for the parade; this will result in the failure of some objectives if not the entire event. Both EMBOK and EPRAS have gaps in the way they give directions for determining event feasibility (Cserháti, & Szabó, 2011). EMBOK recognizes the need for conducting primary research but does not give the leads to be explored. For this reason, the team will conduct the primary research and also create awareness for the parade’s team. Two members of the team will hold an interview with some local radio stations. From the interview, the public will know what the theme for the parade is all about and the team will harness the public opinion. For instance, what variables should be considered when conducting the research to determine the feasibility and successfulness of the event? However, EPRAS offers the solution for this by matching the event’s objectives and to those of previous events. Through, the match variables can be identified and be explored to gather more details. The discussion between the team, John, and Agnes gave the team highlight of the parade’s proceeding. It acted as a guideline for the planning of St. Patrick’s Parade Day. Conclusion The two models can be blended and form a robust tool in event management, thus transforming the traditional conservative event management into modern dynamic event management. Adopting distinguished elements from the models, for instance, research stage of EMBOK and usage of stored data in the defining stage of EPRAS to determining the feasibility and success of an event will enable St. Patrick Day Parade achieve the set goals. Stakeholder analysis PESTLE is a strategic tool that will help the team in identifying the stakeholder for prosperity of St. Patrick’s Day Parade. The tool identifies all stakeholders who can affect or who will affect the event politically, economically, socially, legally, and ecological. It is from PESTLE model that key stakeholders are analyzed. Stakeholder analysis refers to the study or inspecting all those individuals or organizations that might impact on the project that is planned to be undertaken (Schindhelm, 2012). Secondary stakeholders mainly do not have interest to the event but have the power in making the project successful. (Bannazadeh, Zomorodian, & Maghareh, n.d), suggested that having a close relation with primary stakeholders is essential because it is from the primary stakeholders that objectives of the event can be noted, and procedures towards the accomplishment can be identified. John and Agnes state how St. Patrick Day Parade should go down in history. The team should ensure the primary stakeholders who are the clients, Irish community, Nikki, kirklees Council, and Paul are not encouraged but influenced to put more effort towards the event. Stakeholder analysis identifies stakeholders that an event management can have power and interest, but the intensity varies. For instance, the team identified it had low power and high interest to St. Joseph school, University of Huddersfield, and Student’s Union. The team has to ensure it updates them with any relevant information. The university should be communicated too because posters will be placed around the institution. Paul will help the team manage traffic during the parade date. Both of them have powers to influence operations and success of the event but have less interest. The use of SWOT will enable the team to identify its strength, weakness, opportunities, and threats. It is vital for the team to identify the stakeholders who can be a threat to the event. Unfortunately most event managers fail to admit their weakness and focus on strength with an aim of exploiting opportunities. The team identified stereotype from Irish and event being held on Sunday as weakness and threat respectively. The objectives to be met by the team should be guided by SMART model. The goals are supposed to be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound. For example, the team has to raise £300 to fund the parade. Theoretical framework The second stage of EPARS, scope emphases the need to conduct stakeholder research. The model clearly identifies the value attached to the stakeholder of a project. A project will always have primary stakeholder and secondary stakeholder. It is upon the event management team to ensure the interests of both parties are met. Stakeholder Circle methodology brings out the steps required to analyze all stakeholders. The methodology asserts that the first step of identifying the stakeholders is important, so as to know who to contact on any development as far as the project is concerned. EMBOK also allow for research to be DID, however, the type of research to be conducted is not clear (Toole, 2011). The term research tends to be ambiguous since it can be a market research or any form of research Critical analysis The team opted to us PESTLE model as compared to PEST. The two models serves the same concept PESTLE goes step further to include legal aspect and ecological aspect into the model. Legal aspect that PEST had left out would cost the team to face a legal battle especially concerning selling of raffle tickets. The team used SWOT, matching the external threats and opportunities to the team’s strength and weakness making it easier to plan for the event. For instance, the team identified that it can use the international students, who are team members to market or inform other international students to attend the event. The objectives set by the team were guided by SMART. For instance selling of booklets was specific and measurable the member had to sell 100 copies; it was achievable since there were lots of participants for St. Patrick’s Day Parade. It was realistic to sell 100 copies during the parade. The team member will be helped by four parade representatives, so as to make the goal more realistic and achievable. Analyzing the stakeholders for an event; is one task an event manager will never mess with because the consequential impacts are enormous (Turner, n.d.). St. Patrick Day Parade has to be successful thus it is important to adopt the right model. EPARS provide the stage of conducting research on the stakeholders. The group DID the research and came up with the list of stakeholders for the event. From the analysis, John, Agnes, Paul, Irish community and University administration are the critical stakeholders for the success of St. Patrick Day Parade. The value contributed by the stakeholders regardless of the intensity, their interests has to be considered and met. Unlike EPRAS, EMBOK does not explicitly state which kind of research should be conducted. Therefore, using this element (stakeholder analysis), the group will be in the course in achieving the event’s goals. However, it cannot be ruled out that EMBOK approach to research does not have logic behind it. The term research being open it gives room for all kind of research on events to be conducted. Conducting research which is specific will result in tangible results as compared to a general idea of conducting research. For instance, the group is to sell lottery tickets and booklets. It would be wise if still the stakeholder involved in the production and marketing of both booklets and lottery tickets were analyzed. According to (Smith, (2007), marketing analysis will reveal the best approach for successful selling of raffle tickets and booklets for an event. Last but not least the stakeholder that is a crucial factor for any successful is the public, but normally little is done to meet their interests (Berridge, 2007). The team decided to turn around the normality and engage the public, so as to understand their interests and incorporate in the overall St. Patrick’s Parade day. Interview conducted harnessed the community interests that were factored into the overall objectives. The information harnessed helped the team to monitor the university students, travel companies, town travelers on Sunday, and business in town. It should be noted that the team has low power and interest to the above stated stakeholders, but their interests have to be incorporated. Conclusion The contributions provided by both model are vital to the success of the parade’s and goal accomplishment. For the group conducting the stakeholder analysis is very important thus preferring to use EPRAS model. The stakeholders in this case, are the immediate to the event. The event is supposed to be a parade display, and EPRAS provides the details of how to conduct the research on the stakeholders. EMBOK would have been used in the marketing aspect of the project, but that was not the main objective of the event which was “World Medical and Health Games 2015”. Managing expectations The client got high expectation from the team. John wants the parade to be conducted exceptionally and goes down in history. The team has a great responsibility to ensure the expectations of the customer are met. According to (Westerbeek, 2006), in any organization, customers are held like “gods” and there are always right. For John, the objectives of the parade are of paramount important. St. Patrick’s parade is expected to sensitize the public on the various health games. The team should come with a strategy that will actualize the objectives. Managing expectations of not only an event but also personally is not a walk in the park; it requires skills which should be incorporated with experience. Berridge, (2007), managing a complex event like this one can never be accomplished single-handedly and, for this reason, a dedicated team is required to be in place with the right skills. The team will have to use the experience (success and failure) from the previous events held and plan for John and Agnes an exemplary parade. To ensure this is done the team need to possess diversity in management. For example, one member can mobilize volunteers and school children from St. Joseph RC junior school while another one will be coordinating the actual activities during St. Patrick’s parade day. It can be recalled that this is the best St. Patrick’s parade and we hope to have even better than this in the years to come (“Crowds Enjoy St. Patricks Parades; Celebrations Free of Protest, Trouble”, 2003). According to the article, the public expects the next parade to be great than that which had happened that year; therefore the team has a duty to ensure the public demand are met. Theoretical concept Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK), identifies nine elements in a project that need to be assessed and managed so as to meet a client’s expectations (Haughey, 2013). They include; time, procurement, communications, risk, human resource, quality, scope, integration, and cost. Brilliance in managing these elements will achieve the project deliverables. Both EMBOK and EPRAS are concerned with meeting the expectations of the client only that they differ in the way the objectives will be achieved. EMBOK in stage two; admits the fact that in any project risks are always present and unknown where and when it will occur (Allen, J. 2008). A mitigation measure is emphases on development of risk management strategy. The measure will ensure the set goals and objectives are actualized. EPARS, on the other hand, is based on the philosophy of specialization. EPARS; breaks down the event project into simple achievable target. Critical analysis EPARS; is a robust model when it comes to managing expectations. The model will be used in the in the St. Patrick’s parade day event planning. The team has a responsibility for ensuring the objectives are met. EMBOK tends to be proactive rather than reactive in dealing with risks that might arise during the implementation of an event that is why it develops risk management strategy. (Malhotra, & Malhotra, n.d.), argued that managing the expectations of a client goes beyond risk management since what is delivered and met is what counts at the end of the day. EPARS; breaks down all the activities that are to be carried out for the event to be successful. For instance, the activities to be carried out during St. Patrick’s parade day are efficiently interlinked but performed by different people. Selling of the booklets and raffles were conducted by various team members but are working towards achieving the set goals and objectives. According to (Cserháti & Szabó, 2011), this feature in EPARS makes it robust to EMBOK which emphasis on risk management as a tool to ensure expectations are met if things go haywire. Allen, J. (2008), argued that EPRAS model is unique in itself since it identifies the critical role for the event that will be going to happen. The critical roles are the activities that are key determinant for the success of an event. The group discussed with John and Agnes the expectation of the events which includes the theme. Following the discussion the critical role identified was stewardship and, therefore, three members of the group had to be assigned that task. Unlike EPRAS, EMBOK does not identify critical roles before assigning each member. This does not go well with event management because each event is different, and each member can make a difference if assigned a role that is specific and enjoyable. For effective expectation management then the objectives should be measurable. This idea is vested in the EPRAS model. The team will set targets for each activity they engage in to make a positive outcome of the parade. The team is expected to have sales of 100 copies of the booklet. If the team achieves this, the overall objective of the parade will have been met by bit before for the closure. EMBOK; on the other hand it establishes objectives for an event but it does not give criteria to measure deliverability of each activity conducted but emphases on the overall event’s objectives. Conclusion EMBOK is an impressive model in managing expectations; event management is unique than any other project management in the sense that it encompasses many activities that need to be completed in a single day. However, the group will use EPRAS to manage expectation of the client since it is well structured in ensuring all activities are interlinked. Preparations before the actual happening of the event are important. The team plan how ST. Patrick’s Parade Day will go down without hiccups. This can be evidenced by the division of duties among the team member. EPRAS model proves to be robust at almost all angles. For instance, identifying critical functions that are vital to event success is just an outstanding feature of the model. Having said that EMBOK can be reviewed and certain elements strengthened, thus enhancing managing, and meeting client’s expectations. References Allen, J. (2008). Festival & special event management (4th ed.). Milton (Qld): J. Wiley & Sons Australia. Bannazadeh, B., Zomorodian, Z., & Maghareh, M. (n.d.). Assessment of PMBOK Indexes in Executive Projects. Journal of Advanced Management Science, 265-268. Berridge, G. (2007). Events design and experience. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Burke, R. (2011). Corporate reputation managing opportunities and threats. Farnham, Surrey: Gower ;. Crowds Enjoy St. Patricks Parades; Celebrations Free of Protest, Trouble. (2003, March 17). The Washington Times. Retrieved February 9, 2015, from http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-98840147.html? Cserháti, G., & Szabó, L. (2011). The relationship between success criteria and success factors in organisational event projects. International Journal of Project Management. Events Feasibility and Development. (2011). Elsevier Science. Haughey, D. (2013). Project Management Methodology. Retrieved February 9, 2015, from http://www.projectsmart.co.uk/project-management-methodology-explained.php Malhotra, A., & Malhotra, C. (n.d.). Evaluating Customer Information Breaches as Service Failures: An Event Study Approach. Journal of Service Research, 44-59. Schindhelm, R. (2012). Cooperative systems Stakeholder analysis. Bremerhaven: Wirtschaftsverlag N. W. Verlag für neue Wissenschaft. Smith, K. (2007). The Distribution of Event Tickets. Event Management, 185-196. Robson, L. (2009). Event Management Body Of Knowledge (EMBOK): The Future of Event Industry Research. Event Management, 19-25. Toole, W. (2011). Events feasibility and development from strategy to operations. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Turner, J. (n.d.). Towards a theory of project management: The nature of the project governance and project management. International Journal of Project Management, 93-95. Westerbeek, H. (2006). Managing sport facilities and major events ([New ed.). London: Routledge. Read More