Learning legacy

Lessons learned from the London

2012 Games construction project

Lessons learned from the Abstract underpinned and facilitated these

This research project has sought enabling factors:
London 2012 Olympic to identify the key factors which –– the so-called ‘Olympics effect’;
and Paralympic Games have underpinned the success of –– the ‘health and safety’ effect;
the London 2012 construction –– the strong emphasis placed on
construction programme programme. The research has focused personal and organisational
on the approach taken to the overall development;
management of the programme and –– the practice of allowing contractors
the way this shaped the approaches to work with familiar partners;
taken to managing individual projects. –– full funding; and
–– the market downturn of 2008–09.
It was found that favourable
programme outcomes were directly While some of these factors were
attributable to three ‘headline drivers’: clearly circumstantial, many reflected
–– the rigorous use of five key project conscious senior management
and programme management decisions to put in place rigorous,
processes; professional, yet flexible, programme
–– the explicit specification of a series and project management.
of targets and principles around
other key programme objectives While each component of the
(such as health and safety); and management approach may appear
–– a pervasive, high-level unsurprising, the combination – and
management philosophy adopted the level of execution – proved to
across the entire programme. be immensely powerful. In addition,
it appears that the programme has
These headline drivers were had a significant impact in raising
Authors effective because of three critical standards of practice across the UK
Ian Mackenzie ‘enabling factors’: construction industry.
Senior Research Fellow, Innovation –– the use of a well-resourced
and Entrepreneurship Group, Delivery Partner (DP); We found evidence of learning
Imperial College Business School –– supportive contractual carried forward at the level of
arrangements; and individual managers and, at the level
Andrew Davies –– a supportive programme-wide of entire construction firms through
Reader in Innovation Management, culture. the adoption of new, firm-wide
Innovation and Entrepreneurship policies. This aspect of legacy is
Group, Imperial College Business Finally, the research identified six immensely valuable and should
School ‘supporting factors’ which, in turn, not be underestimated.

1
 Research objectives, methodology and created a consistent process
This research aimed to and scope to coordinate and integrate each
With less than one year to go to the project within the overall
identify what aspects Games, the construction programme, programme.
of programme and which will not only provide most of –– Project level: In a second phase
the venues for London 2012 but our focus shifted to specific
project management transform a huge swathe of east projects, including the Olympic
underpinned the London, has been successful. The £7.2 Stadium, the Velodrome, the
billion programme is on track to be temporary structures, the
success of the ODA’s completed under the detailed budget International Broadcast Centre
construction programme. set in the 2010 spending review a. (IBC)/Media Press Centre (MPC),
The safety record is outstanding the Aquatics Centre and the
and other targets (for example, Athletes’ Village. Here, interviews
sustainability) have been met. Most with the ODA project sponsor and
important of all, it is being completed the DP Project Manager were
on (and in several cases before) time. complemented with interviews with
the relevant Tier One contractor
This picture is in sharp contrast (project director). The interviews
to the experience of many other addressed the ways in which each
‘mega-projects’ (for example, individual project fitted within the
Denver international airport, overall programme, whilst being
Wembley Stadium and the Athens tailored to meet specific
2004 Games) which have been circumstances.
characterised by cost and time
over-runs 3. Whereas many of these While our main focus was on
other projects have been mired in understanding what led to success,
confrontation between client and we had a particular interest in the
contractor, the London 2012 use of innovative approaches to
programme has been a testament programme and project management
to collaboration with a remarkably – as exemplified by the use of a DP
low level of disputes. Although the output from each
mega-project is clearly unique, prior
Our research aimed to identify research has suggested that there is a
what aspects of the programme growing stock of knowledge around
and project management approach how best to manage such complex
underpinned this success to yield programmes which is generally
useful lessons for future mega- applicable1,4.
projects. We conducted 30 in-depth
interviews – each typically an hour in This stock of knowledge grows
length b. The research was undertaken through the use of innovative
in phases to address the two levels of programme or project management
organisation created to manage such practices which are either developed
a complex project c: ‘in programme’ or imported from
–– Programme level: In a first phase prior, similar projects or from other
we focused on the management industries2. Also of interest is how
of the overall programme with learning within a programme is
interviews conducted within the captured for future use – the key
ODA which acted as ‘the client’ objective of the ODA’s learning
for the programme and the ODA’s legacy programme. The section on
Delivery Partner (DP), CLM – the innovation and learning explores the
joint venture between CH2MHILL, source of the various management
Laing O’Rourke and Mace – which practices used on the London 2012
was formed specifically to act as construction programme and looks at
the ODA’s DP. The interviews how this is carried forward, while the
focused on how the ODA and DP section on overall lessons provides a
formed an umbrella organisation summary of key lessons.

a The original Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) budget, set in 2007, was £8.1bn.
This included considerable contingency elements.
b A list of interviews is provided in Appendix 1.
c The Games project is an example of the most complex ‘system of systems’ project,
comprised of a variety of systems which must be integrated to achieve an overall goal.
These projects are often called ‘programmes’ and structured under a formal ‘umbrella
organisation’ (Shenhar & Dvir, 2007: 105).

2
 An overall framework nevertheless, have made a valuable
Detailed analysis of the interviews contribution to outcomes. These were:
helped us to develop a framework –– the so-called ‘Olympics effect’;
which identified three ‘headline –– the ‘health and safety’ effect;
drivers’ which we believe are directly –– the emphasis placed on personal
responsible for favourable programme and organisational development;
outcomes. These were the: –– working with familiar partners;
–– rigorous use of five key project –– full funding;
and programme management –– the market downturn.
processes;
–– explicit specification of a series Figure 1 illustrates this framework
of targets and principles around in diagrammatic form.
other key programme objectives;
–– high-level management philosophy Headline drivers of success
adopted across the programme. Rigorous management processes
The Games construction programme
Next, we identified a series of posed three main challenges. The
‘enabling factors’ which allowed first was the crucial importance of
these headline drivers to function completing construction in a tight,
effectively. These were: well-defined timescale. The second
–– the use of a well-resourced DP; was the scale of the construction
–– supportive contractual programme, which encompassed
arrangements; over 70 separate projects with very
–– a supportive programme-wide significant interdependencies
culture. (common services, site logistics, etc).
The third was the wide range of
Finally, we identified a number of stakeholders that had legitimate
‘supporting factors’ which, while less influence over parts of the
critical to the primary drivers, programme.

Programme outcomes
Exemplary Other targets met
On time On budget
safety (eg: Sustainability)


Headline drivers of success
Five key management Explicit objectives and Programme management
processes principles philosophy


Enabling factors
Use of well-resourced Supportive contractual
Supportive culture
DP arrangements


Supporting factors
Personal and
Health and Working with Market
Olympics effect organisational Full funding
safety effect familiar partners turndown
development

Figure 1: Overall ‘drivers of success’ framework

3
 Against this backdrop, the familiar basis. This formed the basis for the
A high level of detailed ‘large construction programme’ DP to review the project (through
challenges – maximising the their ‘assurance’ function) and
planning, visibility efficiency of construction while for the DP to roll up projects to
of performance, minimising inevitable problems provide an overall programme
caused by: view f . Monthly trend reviews
inter-dependency –– designers or contractors failing to (involving the ODA and the DP)
management, and robust do what they say they would do; allowed senior managers to
–– misalignment between client/ spot trends which might not
problem resolution and stakeholders and design, between be so apparent at lower levels.
change control processes design and construction and Contractors and the DP were also
between the different pieces of subject to a very rigorous audit
were essential. the construction jigsaw; and regime. The DP had their own
–– changes caused by inevitable audit function (which would even
revisions to requirements, be auditing the DP Project
construction problems and external Management team). The ODA
factors – took on even greater operated an audit, backed up
significance. by Ernst and Young. Finally there
were periodic government level
It was, thus, essential that there was: audits. As one DP Project
–– a high level of detailed planning Manager put it ‘It was like
(both to optimise at the project working in a fish bowl’.
and programme level and to –– Problem resolution process:
reduce likelihood of problems); The above monitoring process
–– a high level of visibility of highlighted problems and
performance throughout kickstarted the associated
construction (to expose problems process of seeking solutions –
and issues at the earliest point); where typically, the DP would
–– a high level of inter-dependency seek to work with the relevant Tier
management d (to minimise One contractor. Whether at the
misalignments); and planning stage – or as a result
–– a robust way of identifying and of an unforeseen problem – time
dealing with problems and was taken to identify, explore and
changes across the entire evaluate options so as to work
programme. towards a ‘best solution’. An
example of this ‘optioneering’
Five key management processes would be the change to the
Our first headline driver is, thus, Velodrome roof structure.
the series of five key management –– Change management process:
e
processes that the ODA and DP set This involved identifying any
up and operated. These were: proposed changes at an early
–– Up-front planning process: stage, a rigorous change
A comprehensive ‘baseline’ approval process (with escalation
was developed in 2007 which depending on size of change)
defined scope, specifications and and fully documenting changes,
initial budgets across the entire together with their impact and
programme. The resulting ‘yellow their supporting rationale. Any
book’ provided a valuable tool significant change had to be
for tracking progress and changes reviewed by a ‘change board’
and was updated (‘the blue book’) chaired by the ODA. This process
in 2009. was instrumental in resolving
–– Project and programme contentious issues before they
monitoring process: Each got to a point where things
project was required to provide became confrontational. Also,
very detailed information on the tight documentation meant
progress, budget position, future that ex-post payment disputes
programme, etc. on a monthly were all but eradicated.

d We also use the words ‘integration management’ or ‘interface management’

interchangeably.
e At this point we simply acknowledge that CLM was the ODA’s DP. We discuss the use
of a DP, and the use of the DP in enabling factors section.
f A reporting matrix called ‘the wall’ was used with one axis corresponding to projects
and the other functions. This enabled senior DP managers to identify ‘problem bricks’.

4
 –– Integration management process: This was unusual for an industry
Taken individually, these This sought to identify how that is not renowned for embracing
slippages or changes in one formal management processes.
approaches were not project impacted on others. Nevertheless, there is little doubt that
particularly innovative. Integration committees were these processes were instrumental
operated in both design and in keeping individual projects –
What was striking, construction phases. Integration and the overall programme – firmly
however, was the level between each project interface on the rails.
and the overall London 2012
of effort and rigour Olympic Park infrastructure (which These processes were not without their
applied. was split into two major areas) critics. Several Tier One contractors
was particularly important. voiced frustration with what were
Indeed, integration of the various perceived as being overly bureaucratic
elements of the infrastructure (such procedures which ‘took resource away
as utilities) which represented from project management’. For
successive overlays required example, the need to recast the
careful integration. forward programme each month was
criticised in more than one interview.
Taken individually, these approaches Nevertheless, there was a broad
were not particularly innovative. recognition that detailed information
What was striking, however, was the was needed to facilitate sound
level of effort and rigour with which programme management, especially
they were pursued and executed. in the context of a highly visible,
public-sector-funded programme.

Whilst the priority theme Mission

To deliver venues, facilities, infrastructure and transport on time for the
targets were non- London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games that are fit-for-purpose
negotiable, it was up and in a way that maximises the delivery of a sustainable legacy
within the available budget.
to each contractor to
implement them in their
own way.
Overarching themes

Time, cost and fit for purpose

Objectives Priority themes

Venues

Site platform
Health, safety and security

Design and accessibility

Equality and inclusion

Employment and skills

Village vertical build

Sustainability

Legacy

Transport

Operations

Stratford projects

Other projects

Figure 2: Details of the London 2012 policy values and priority themes

5
 Objectives and principles relating flexibility. Tightly controlled aspects
Major emphasis was put to other aspects of performance included the five key management
While ‘cost, time and quality of processes (discussed previously), the
on safety through the construction’ were clearly its prime principles and targets relating to
setting up of ‘safety and objectives, the ODA had a number health and safety and the other
of additional objectives that had to priority themes (discussed previously)
leadership’ committees. be met to achieve broader social and the kind of behaviours required
As a result, the safety and economic impact. Accordingly, to underpin the programme culture
at an early stage, the ODA identified (in the next section).
record on the Games site six ‘priority themes’ as follows:
has been exemplary. –– Health, Safety and Security This ‘tightness’ made sense partly
–– Design and Accessibility because of the need for programme-
–– Equality and Inclusion wide consistency (for example, if
–– Legacy individual project reporting was to
–– Employment and Skills be rolled up to the programme level)
–– Sustainability and partly so as to reinforce the
importance of process, principle
The ODA published a ‘strategy’ for or target.
each of these themes and detailed
specific objectives and principles Loosely controlled aspects included
which the ODA was committed to how contractors would implement the
achieve in the course of delivering principles (for example, health and
its programme of construction. These safety) or achieve the targets (priority
objectives were cascaded down themes) and the procurement and
through the DP to Tier One contract approach to be used for
contractors and beyond. While the each project. The rationale for the
targets and principles were non- former was that each contractor
negotiable, it was up to each already had their own way of doing
contractor to implement them in things. Attempting to impose uniform
their own way. safety routines would probably be
counterproductive. Better to provide
What was crucial was that ODA an objective and challenge the
senior management made it clear that contractor to find their own route
these additional targets were not just to achieving it. Providing flexibility
window dressing. They were deemed around procurement and contract
just as important as the traditional approaches also made sense, given
construction targets. As a result, they that projects within the overall
were taken seriously – and achieved programme differed greatly.
– right across the programme.
While a recognised Tier One
Particular mention should be made contractor under design and build
of the Health and Safety theme NEC3 C (target price with pain/gain)
which was championed right from was probably appropriate for
the top of the ODA. A ‘Park health’ the Olympic Stadium, design-led
facility was set up whereby everyone procurement seemed appropriate
on the Park could get health care for the Velodrome (give the
‘on-site’. Major emphasis was put aspiration for a signature building)
on safety through the setting up of while the ‘managed package
‘safety and leadership’ committees. strategy’ was appropriate for the
As a result, the safety record on the temporary venues given that their
Games site has been exemplary, with somewhat unusual requirements
no fatalities or major injuries to date. were less attractive to conventional
Tier One contractors.
Broad programme management
philosophy The ODA also exhibited appropriate
The ODA (and by extension the DP) flexibility when project circumstances
exercised the thoughtful use of changed. The most striking example
‘loose-tight’ management, where was where the economic downturn
some aspects were tightly controlled in late 2008 meant that the Athletes’
so as to achieve a highly consistent Village needed to revert to public
approach across the programme, funding. The ODA renegotiated the
whereas other aspects were loosely contract with Bovis Lend Lease to
managed – which provided for ‘development management’.

6
Broadly speaking, the Enabling factors
There is no guarantee that specifying rigorous processes, setting overall
DP faced ‘downwards’ targets and principles and adopting what appears to be a well thought
to the various individual out overall management philosophy will achieve the programme’s goals.
Certain ‘enablers’ are needed to ensure that desired outcomes are
projects while the ODA delivered through proper execution and appropriate behaviour. Our
faced ‘upwards’ to the analysis suggests that there were three key enablers:
– a well-resourced DP
plethora of stakeholders. – supportive contractual arrangements
– a supportive programme-wide culture

In addition, the procurement The DP evolved over time (see

approach was changed from discussion below) but ended up
‘all construction management’ to undertaking seven key roles:
a hybrid approach where over half 1. developing/specifying detailed
of the building was procured with project and programme
a Tier One contractor under a lump management processes;
sum, Joint Contracts Tribunal (JCT) 2. administering the contracts with
design and build contract. A further Tier One contractors or equivalent
example of ODA flexibility was (for example, involving sign-off
when ISG, the Tier One contractor and payment authorisation);
on the Velodrome, challenged the 3. providing project assurance,
incumbent steel roof design in favour for example, checking that things
of tensioned cable. are done – and done properly –
on each project; challenging the
The ODA provided time for a future programme;
proper evaluation and ultimately 4. providing optioneering and
accepted the switch even though problem solving expertise at the
it exacerbated short-term time project level;
pressures. Also on the Velodrome, 5. managing the ‘change’ process;
ISG’s contract was changed from 6. providing visibility of project
target price with pain/gain to fixed performance to the programme
price as part of a restructuring where level and collating performance
the budget was creating a major programme-wide;
problem and the ODA took on 7. managing the interfaces between
the risks associated with resilience the various projects, such as
and security. integration management.

A well-resourced DP Of these seven roles, items

– The DP concept 1, 6 and 7 related primarily to
Given that the ODA was a transitory programme management, whereas
organisation and that the lead time items 2 to 5 related primarily to
for getting ‘up and running’ was individual projects. There was,
short, it was always clear that they therefore, tight linkage between the
needed to appoint an organisation to project and programme levels.
act as overall programme manager.
The initial thinking was to contract In addition, the DP provided specific
with a conventional programme capability when needed. The DP
manager. However, the ODA’s Chief was asked to undertake certain
Executive, David Higgins, felt that programme-wide functions such as
the role should be broader and set site-wide logistics. At the project
out to appoint a DP. level, the DP was able to step in
to provide a form of construction
Interviewees often found it difficult management for the temporary
to draw a clear distinction between structures when it became clear
‘programme manager’ and ‘DP’ but that the conventional Tier One
most would agree that the latter implies procurement route was not working.
a more dynamic, more pro-active
leadership of the overall programme.

7
 Broadly speaking, the DP faced per cent is worth it. Across the
Overall, the ODA and ‘downwards’ to the various individual programme, the clear consensus is
projects while the ODA faced that the extra five per cent has indeed
DP represented a ‘very ‘upwards’ to the plethora of been worth it given the favourable
intelligent client’. stakeholders g. This division of roles outturn performance.
was generally felt to have been
very valuable. Together, the ODA Supportive contractual arrangements
and DP played a vital role in The ODA had a clear preference for
brokering between stakeholders and NEC contracts between themselves
the contractors when it came to and Tier One contractors. NEC3 C
changes in requirements or changes was ‘target price plus pain/gain’
necessitated by a project’s situation. while NEC3 A was ‘fixed price’.
Despite this role separation, it is clear The most important aspect of these
that the ODA and DP worked very contracts was the requirement to
closely together (as discussed further provide transparency of progress,
below). Overall, the ODA and DP to bring problems or issues to light
represented a ‘very intelligent client’. as soon as possible and to work in
collaboration with DP and others
–– The choice of the DP to find solutions to problems.

10%
Percentage of the overall programme
The choice of the DP appears to
have worked out very well despite
the need to weld together staff from
While an ‘open and collaborative’
approach can be affected under
a JCT contract, there is little doubt
spend on programme management. three distinct organisations. Initially, it that working under a contract that
seemed that Bechtel was the heir enshrines these behaviours makes
apparent to the role. However, the life easier.
joint venture emerged to offer a novel
breadth of programme management, The contract between the ODA
project management and direct and DP was carefully structured
construction expertise. The ODA ran in two regards: Firstly, the DP bid on
a selection process which periodic ‘work packages’ i. The ODA
emphasised (amongst other things) would specify the overall, ‘top-down’
‘compatibility of working style’ and requirements for the period leaving
‘capability to deal with problems’ and the DP to work through the detail
as a result, the DP was appointed. and come back with a ‘bottom-up’
proposal which was then subject
The DP clearly provided access to to examination and negotiation.
a wide range of skills. Less obvious This approach ensured that the DP
was the notion that the use of a new, had high ownership of the resulting
purpose-built joint venture created a work packages which reflected
‘clean sheet of paper’. This probably bottom-up knowledge.
fostered a fresher and more objective
approach to going about things, Secondly, the contract also involved
whereas a single firm appointment important incentives. The DP opted to
could have imposed an established put 90 per cent of its margin ‘at risk’,
set of beliefs about how things linked to meeting multiple key
should best be done. performance indicators (KPIs). This
provided the DP with a huge incentive
The appointment of a DP would not to meet various milestones and targets
have paid off without the funding to and served to align objectives
fully resource the task. At its peak, DP between the DP and the ODA. The
staffing reached around 600. If the KPI approach also provided flexibility
200 or so staff from the ODA are so that incentives could be aligned
included, the overall ‘programme between the DP and Tier One
management’ cost will come out contractors. An example of this was

90%
Percentage of DP’s margin ‘at risk’,
around 10 per cent of the overall
programme spendh. If we assume that
the minimum level of programme
on the Athletes’ Village where
relationships between the DP and
Lend lease improved once it was clear
linked to meeting multiple KPIs. management would be five per cent, that success would benefit both.
then the issue is whether the extra five

g Stakeholders span from LOCOG through to various sports associations through to many
statutory bodies to Local and central Government.
h Source: ODA Annual Financial Reports.
i These work packages were typically let for a 12–18 month period.

8
 A supportive organisational culture level who, mainly through past
The culture on the It is well known that formal experience, held these aspects to
organisational arrangements be important. Several important
programme can be (processes, resources, objectives, influences on the development of
traced back to the etc.) can only go so far in driving this culture are highlighted in the
outcomes. The informal aspect of an following section.
leadership of the ODA organisation, notably a supportive
and other senior culture, is crucial for driving the ‘open Supporting factors
and collaborative’ behaviours that We now describe a series of
managers at the DP underpin success. The organisational factors which helped to underpin
or Tier One level. culture that we observed across the the enabling factors and thereby,
programme was indeed supportive the headline drivers of success k.
in three important aspectsj:
–– a fundamental belief that The Olympics effect
‘failure was not an option’ and The fact that the programme was
that everything must be done to for ‘the London Olympics’ – a very
make the programme a success; prestigious and high profile event –
–– a commitment to bringing underpinned a widespread attitude
problems to light at an early that ‘this programme has to be a
stage and striving collaboratively success’ and ‘we’ll do what it takes to
to find solutions; get it done’. This undoubtedly helped
–– a particularly strong discipline to foster a culture of collaboration
around health and safety aspects. across the programme and indeed, is
attributed by many for inspiring high
Organisational culture cannot simply on-site productivity. As one executive
be imposed by managements – they put it: ‘People were working at least
develop in response to a number of 10 per cent harder than they would
factors. Importantly, organisational normally work’. Some contractors
culture is greatly influenced by the explicitly sought to produce ‘superior
pronouncements and actions of performance’, a good illustration
senior managers. This culture on the being Carillion’s ‘going for gold’
London 2012 construction programme campaign on the IBC-MPC where
can be traced back to the leadership their supply chain were challenged
of the ODA – and other senior to‘do the best they could every day’.
managers at the DP or at Tier One

The IBC-MPC contractor sought to produce ‘superior performance’ through their

‘Going for Gold’ campaign, challenging the supply chain to ‘do the best they could
every day’

j Appendix 2 provides further detail on the culture observed across the London 2012
construction programme.
k The role of technology, though important, is not viewed by the authors as distinctive
as these other aspects. A brief summary of the technology deployed is contained in
Appendix 3.

9
 The Olympic effect also undoubtedly –– the co-location of the ODA and
enabled highly experienced the DP over the planning phases
managers to be recruited or of the programme. This was then
seconded into the ODA and translated into co-location of the
DP and encouraged contractors ODA and the DP with the relevant
to field their ‘A’ teams. The impact Tier One contractor in integrated
of having experienced construction project teams during construction
professionals working on the phases;
programme – many of whom had –– the pairing of an ODA executive
prior experience of working together (project sponsor) and DP executive
– cannot be overstated. (project manager) across the
major projects (and many smaller
The health and safety effect projects). Again, this was extended
Many interviewees cited that the to include pairing of the DP Project
great emphasis put on health and Manager with the Tier One Project
safety by the ODA did more than Director in the construction phase;
just achieve a highly successful health –– the proactive management of skills
and safety record. It made individual requirements. This involved
workers on site feel that management determining what skills were
did, in fact, care about them. This required, identifying skills gaps
generated commitment which, in and finding ways to bridge the
turn, inspired greater effort and gaps. It included the running of
productivity. If this effect can be training workshops, including
substantiated, it has important team building exercises and
consequences for future construction rigorous performance appraisal;
management practice. –– the provision of coaches for
senior executives and specialist
The emphasis on human resource facilitators for workshops;
A striking feature of the management and organisational –– a strong emphasis on internal
development communication to aid awareness
construction programme A striking feature of the London 2012 of how the programme was going,
was the emphasis placed construction programme was the to reinforce key messages and to
extent of attention and resourcing foster pride l.
on human resource devoted to providing what might be
management and described as a modern human Two further aspects are worthy
resource management and of special note:
organisational organisational development –– If it became clear that an individual
development capability. capability. These efforts contributed was not well suited to a particular
greatly to the effective working of the role – perhaps simply because
ODA and DP – and probably also of personal style issues – then
between the DP and Tier One changes would be made.
contractors. It is striking because the Proactively getting ‘the right person
UK construction industry is not in the right position’ was cited
renowned for being a major advocate on many occasions as critical
of devoting resource to these areas. to fostering the right working
relationships and embedding the
This emphasis does, of course, open, collaborative culture. A
make sense given that the ODA specific example of this principle
was a new organisation and the DP was the appointment of a Chief
was assembled at speed by its three Executive for the DP who was not
parent companies. It is not surprising from any of the three parent
that there were significant problems in companies. This, in retrospect, was
the early days, particularly as the DP a very helpful move as inevitably
sought to define its role, establish a there were tensions within the DP,
modus operandi and build personal where parent company practices or
relationships. Several organisational cultures clashed. The appointment
development activities appear to of someone who was seen as more
have been particularly valuable in independent and ‘above the fray’
overcoming these problems: helped to defuse these tensions and
set common directions.

l Much effort was also put into external communications with stakeholders and the
general public.

10
 –– The running of workshops to the London 2012 construction
discuss how the organisations programme was indeed funded to a
and the culture were developing ‘good level’. This is not to say that
and to seek consensus around there was money for whatever the
issues and solutions. Many stadia designers came up with. There
interviewees credit these for were, in fact, clear limits on the
achieving and maintaining a close funding available for the stadia,
alignment of the ODA and DP over which in some cases led to serious
time. Informal weekly ODA-DP redesign to meet the available
management meetings were set up budget. The important point, in our
to foster openness and view, is that there was sufficient
collaboration. As a result, trust funding to allow for the:
and confidence built up between –– deployment of a well-resourced DP
key individuals from each (as discussed already);
organisation. In the early days, –– rigorous implementation of the
each organisation would have its range of ‘best practice’ programme
own formal monthly management and project management processes
review meetings. However, over and tools as described already;
time, representatives from the other –– adoption of a proactive approach
organisation were invited along to human resource management
so that the level of openness and organisational development
(and hence, collaboration) (for the ODA and DP).
increased still further.
The full funding may also have
This emphasis on proactive assisted the recruitment of top calibre
human resource management and construction executives though, as
organisational development would mentioned, working on the London
not have succeeded without the 2012 construction programme was a
support of top ODA and DP great attraction in itself.
management. This support was
made explicit through the The market downturn
endorsement of a ‘People Strategy’ Any discussion of ‘key success
in 2007 which was prepared (and factors’ would be incomplete without
implemented) by the ODA and DP acknowledging that the market
human resources teams. downturn from the second half
of 2008, induced by the global
Working with familiar partners financial crisis, helped financial
Several of the Tier One contractors performance because contractor
interviewed stressed the role that and raw material prices declined.
‘working with familiar (supply chain) This was in sharp contrast to the
partners’ had had in achieving good ‘heated’ construction industry that
project outcomes, the rationale being was prevalent in the early years of
that the value of established personal the programme.
relationships in resolving problems
and issues outweighed any loss of Of course, the downturn created
competitiveness in bidding. In some problems in terms of the loss of
sense this is controversial in that EU private funding for the Athletes’
procurement regulations require open Village and the IBC-MPC. However,
bidding. However, it is clear that in both these cases, the switch to
the ODA and DP were sympathetic public funding triggered a
to the ‘relationship’ argument and reappraisal of design which, in turn,
generally tried to support the led to reduced cost schemes. A
preferences of the Tier One specific example of the impact of the
contractors. market downturn comes from the
IBC-MPC where ‘the overall cost of
Full funding the scheme was reduced from
Although it is difficult to come to a £350m to £300m on account of
truly objective view, the consensus procurement savings’.
from our interviews suggests that

11
 ‘Capturing and transferring
‘Learning from outside’ ‘Learning within’
learning’
events and experiences experiences and innovation
learning, capturing and
(such as other projects, generated within a
transferring knowledge gained
consultants and industries) mega-project
to subsequent mega-projects

Figure 3: Learning and transferring knowledge

Innovation and learning on the Previous UK mega-projects such

London 2012 construction as Heathrow Terminal 5 and the
programme Channel Tunnel Rail Link were
Our research employed a simple repeatedly mentioned as important
model (see Figure 3) which sources for the learning brought in
recognises that learning and by these individuals. In parallel, the
transferring knowledge has three Director of Construction proactively
components: sought to engage advisors with
–– the introduction (to a mega- hands on experience of preparing
project) of novel approaches for previous Games to ensure that the
from outside the project, whether pitfalls were avoided and that the
from previous mega-projects or ODA and DP could take on board
from other industrial sources; previous experience.
–– learning and innovation that
takes place within a particular Examples of ‘learning from within’
mega-project; While the programme and project
–– activities aimed at capturing management processes described
the learning from a mega-project earlier in this research paper were
so that the innovations can be not new per se, there was no doubt
reused on future projects. considerable learning and refinement
that took place as they were
Examples of ‘learning from outside’ developed and operated. There
Throughout our interviews, we came were many examples of process
across examples where the use of a learning, such as moving from a 40
particular management approach or strong/four hour ODA-DP monthly
the advocacy of a desired aspect of review meeting to an eight person,
the culture was attributed to a key 1.5 hour meeting as familiarity and
individual. These individuals brought trust developed.
into the programme both their past
experience of ‘what drives success The value of using a DP drawn from
in major projects’ and an ability to multiple companies produced
assess what was needed or was considerable within-programme
appropriate in the particular learning including:
circumstances of the Park –– the value of having a broad range
programme. Examples would of skills and capabilities available
include: (to provide flexibility in role); and
–– Culture of collaboration from –– the need to provide time for the
David Higgins new organisation to ‘shake down’
–– Proactive ‘optioneering’ from Mark for ‘the right people’ (those
Reynolds (MACE) who could operate in an open,
–– MIS dashboard from Ian Galloway collaborative culture) to be
(Bechtel, CTRL experience) identified.
–– High health and safety standards
from Ian Galloway (Bechtel/oil
and gas experience)
–– Rigorous programme assurance
processes from Richard Rook (LOR)

12
 Finally, some of the Tier One –– Champion products: Templates,
contractors gained their first exposure tools and documents that could
to NEC3 contracts – with their usefully be applied to other
requirements for open, collaborative projects.
behaviour – and had to learn to –– Research projects: More detailed
work under what was an unfamiliar studies by external parties. This
regime. These contractors no doubt paper is a summary of a research
gained a variety of knowledge and paper and fits within this category.
experience from their participation
and resolution of challenges It is also worth mentioning that the
encountered in the different projects. programme and project management
processes and procedures developed
Examples of ‘capturing and specifically for the Games have been
The learning legacy aims transferring learning’ comprehensively captured in the
–– ODA’s Learning Legacy Initiative Project Document Management
to make the knowledge The ODA has clearly made a major System (PDMS).
available for subsequent effort to codify learning, at various
levels, and make the knowledge –– Individual and corporate carry
mega-projects. available for subsequent mega- forward
projects: This kind of ‘codification’ approach
–– Lessons learned: Lessons captured can make a significant contribution.
at 70 per cent and 90 per cent However, at the end of the day,
completion as part of the normal the most powerful mechanism for
project process. Some already carrying forward learning is almost
documented. certainly when it is carried in the
–– Micro-reports: One to two page heads of key individuals – or where
reports documenting innovations it becomes part of the DNA of an
completed by contractors, organisation, such as the efforts
designers, engineers, DP, the by senior managers involved in
ODA. the Olympic Stadium project to
–– Case studies: 3,000-word studies encourage McAlpine to adopt
on various learning topics. health and safety processes on
Completed by industry, for all the firm’s future projects.
example, the Institute for
Sustainability doing something on
waste, or produced internally and
peer reviewed by industry experts.

Overall lessons
In seeking to identify the most important overall lessons from the London
2012 construction programme, we must recognise that no two mega-
projects are the same and that programme-specific characteristics will
inevitably shape the appropriate organisational structure and
management style. For example, the London 2012 construction
programme contained a wide variety of individual projects (requiring a
flexible approach to project procurement and contracting), whereas
Heathrow Terminal 5 represented a much more integrated and
standardised set of processes. Nevertheless, we believe four key lessons
can be identified:
1. invest in comprehensive project and programme management
processes;
2. find a way to create an intelligent and broad-capability client. In
the case of Heathrow Terminal 5, BAA were already strong – and
seconded in certain staff to boost their capability. Here the appointment
of a DP with multiple capabilities appears inspired;
3. secure ‘full funding’ (having a realistic programme to work from helps
to create the right culture from the off);
4. invest in human resources and organisational development – to build
skills, relationships and a supportive culture.

13
 References
1 Davies, A., Gann, D., & Douglas, T. (2009). Innovation in megaprojects:
systems integration at Heathrow Terminal 5. California Management
Review, 51(2): 101–125.
2 Dvir, D., & Shenhar, A.J. (2011). What great projects have in common.
MIT Sloan Management Review, 52/3: 19–21.
3 Flyvbjerg, B., Bruzelius, N., & Rothengatter, W. (2003). Megaprojects and
risk: an anatomy of ambition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4 Shenhar, A.J., & Dvir, D. (2007). Reinventing project management:
the diamond approach to successful growth and innovation. Boston,
Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

List of interviews
–– Carline Blackman, Head of Organisational Development, CLM
(17 November 2010)
–– Louise Hardy, Infrastructure Director, CLM (17 November 2010)
–– Ken Owen, Commercial Director, CLM (24 November 2010)
–– Mark Reynolds, Deputy Programme Director, CLM (25 November 2010)
–– Ian Galloway, Programme Director, CLM (1 December 2010)
–– Simon Wright, Director of Utilities, ODA (1 December 2010)
–– Ken Durbin, Technical Services Director, CLM (8 December 2010)
–– Alison Nimmo, Director of Design and Regeneration, ODA
(8 December 2010)
–– Richard Rook, Director of Construction Integration, CLM
(15 December 2010)
–– Hugh Sumner, Director of Transport, ODA (15 December 2010)
–– Michele Owens, HR Manager, ODA (1 December 2010)
–– Howard Shiplee, Director of Construction, ODA (15 December 2010)
–– Jason Millet, Venues Director, CLM (2 February 2011)
–– John Armitt, Chairman, ODA (9 February 2011)
–– Alice Coates, Marketing Strategy, ODA (9 February 2011)
–– Tony Aikenhead & Chris Hall, Stadium – Project Director, McAlpine
(17 March 2011)
–– Richard Rook, Stadium – Project Manager, CLM (17 March 2011)
–– Simon Birchall, Athletes’ Village – Project Manager, CLM (28 March 2011)
–– Mark Dickenson, Athletes’ Village – Project Director, Lend Lease
(28 March 2011)
–– Alan Bates, Athletes’ Village – Project Sponsor, ODA (28 March 2011)
–– Dean Goodliffe, Velodrome – Project Director, ISG (31 March 2011)
–– Davendra Dabasia, Velodrome – Project Manager, CLM (31 March 2011)
–– Colin Naish, IBC/MPC – Project Sponsor, ODA (6 April 2011)
–– Tony Coyle, IBC/MPC – Project Sponsor, T1 (6 April 2011)
–– Danny Richards, Basketball – Project Manager, CLM (10 May 2011)
–– Dave Coulson, Basketball – Project Director, T1 (10 May 2011)
–– Richard Arnold, Basketball – Project Sponsor, ODA (10 May 2011)
–– Michael Lytrides, IBC/MPC – Project Manager, CLM (22 July 2011)
–– Ian Crockford, Aquatics – Project Sponsor, ODA (4 August 2011)
–– Stuart Fraser, Aquatics – Project Director, Balfour Beatty
(5 September 2011)

14
Appendices Appendix 1: Organisational culture
Culture encompasses widely held assumptions which drive people’s
behaviours – which can be norms (accepted ways of behaving), values (what
is deemed to be important) or beliefs (what people believe about how things
work). The table below shows some of the main aspects of the culture on the
London 2012 construction programme that we discerned from our interviews:

Beliefs –– Failure is not an option

–– We can/will solve problems

Values –– Making a success of the programme is very important

–– All the major objectives (cost, time, quality plus the priority
themes) are important

Norms –– Bringing problems or issues to light is normal/good

–– Collaboration is normal/good
–– Working non-hierarchically (such as horizontally) where
appropriate

Perhaps the main feature to highlight is the highly collaborative culture which
extended across the entire programme. Within this culture, the cardinal sin
was not running into difficulties but not disclosing that the difficulties were
there and not working to find a solution.

Appendix 2: The role of technology

The key management processes were facilitated through a series of ICT
systems, for example:
–– Prima Vera contract management system
–– GIS (single model system)
–– PDMS (processes, policies) system

The use of these systems was generally viewed as being necessary but quite
commonplace. None were viewed as being particularly innovative. Overall,
technology was viewed as an enabler but not a key reason for success.

© 2011 Olympic Delivery Authority. The official Emblems of the London 2012 Games are © London Organising Committee of the Olympic
Games and Paralympic Games Limited (LOCOG) 2007. All rights reserved.

The construction of the venues and infrastructure of the London 2012 Games is funded by the National Lottery through the Olympic Lottery
Distributor, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, the Mayor of London and the London Development Agency.

Produced in association with:

For more information visit: london2012.com/learninglegacy Published October 2011

ODA 2011/269

15