Management - London 2012 Olympics - Essay Example

? London Olympics Contents London Olympics Contents 2 Organisational Structure 3 Handy’s Model 6 10 Reference 11 Bibliography 12 Identifythe type of organisational structure adopted to organise and deliver the 2012 Olympic Games. Analyse the main benefits associated with that structure, and suggest what problems the organisers might experience as a result of the structure. Organisational Structure The London Olympics and Paralympics games organised a committee which was to look after at the affairs of the event, LOCOG was created with Lord Coe as its Chair. This committee is responsible for staging the games and to raise funds by means of sponsorship. According to IOC the government is not allowed to take part in any of the games. Thus the Olympic Deliver Authority (ODA) was created to look after the functioning of the games. The Olympic board is shared by the Mayor of London and the minister for Olympics. The board is a strategic body takes make decision for the betterment of the game (Bloyce & Smith, 2009, p.169) LOCOG had a plan to build the best organisation for the Olympics 2012 and leave an everlasting economic, cultural and sporting legacy. But creating a structure for an event like Olympic is not an easy task. LOCOG created an organisation that was able to deliver the largest most complex sporting event and that also without a blueprint. While designing the committee, LOCOG took help of the previous games but till date nothing has been so unique with the country’s culture, legacy from the games and the level of involvement of the governments and the stakeholders. There is an estimate of staff accounting to 3000 people who would be supported by 70000 volunteers and about 100000 contractors (Deloitte, 2010). In a nutshell London Olympics constitute of British Olympic Association (BOA) who works with governing bodies and selects teams; The Department for culture media and sports are the departments which are of importance in the 2012 Olympics; the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (LOCOG); and finally the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) who is responsible for the venues and infrastructure (London Olympic 2012, 2012). Figure 1: Organisational structure for London 2012 Olympics (Source: ICE, 2011, p.6) The ODA which stands for Olympic Delivery Authority is an organisational body which was established by the LOCOG, London Olympic Games and Paralympics Games Act of 2006. Therefore the mission of ODA is to look after the venues, infrastructure, facilities and transportation for the Olympic game. The ODA was responsible for the success of the organisation with time, cost and purpose. This body is solely responsible for the success of the Olympics 2012. In order to deliver an effective management program it was essential for ODA to appoint a partner. Thus the delivery partner was made responsible for the smooth run of the event. The internal organisational structure of ODA is as follows: Figure 2: Organisational Structure of ODA (Source: Olympic Delivery Authority, 2007, p.3) The benefit of such an organisational structure where the ODA is involved, is that the committee is further divided into four sections, Assurance, project construction, program operation and administrative. The structure is designed so as to provide a suitable fit to the ODA. The committee has appointed a delivery partner from the private sector the consortium CLM which comprises of CH2M Hill and Laing O’Rourke along with Mace to carry out the role of private partner. The advantage of appointing a private partner was that ODA was able to provide a larger skill from the organisations which make up the CLM. As seen in the diagram, the five departments had different set of bodies regulating so to bring in the desired result. The ODA aims to provide its progress to the Olympic Board. The ODA also requires seeking advice for projects which crosses above its prescribed budget which is 20 million pounds. The duties and powers of ODA are defined by the London 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympics Games Act. The ODA is accountable to DCMS which is Department of Culture, Media and Sports and also to other funders. Other benefits of ODA structure is that the committee would measure the performance and see that the desired targets are achieved (Olympic Delivery Authority, 2007, p. 3-4). The risk involved with the structure is that if one of the departments does not perform the work on time the whole project would have to face a serious problem as all are interrelated with each other. The Olympic board has appointed ODA so that the work is completed on time. Otherwise the structure is fully planned and established so that it can deliver the desired result. The scale and time of ODA program is one of the risk involved with the project. The development of the park is one of the biggest construction in Europe and it need to be completed in a short timescale and on a complex site. The key risk associated with the Games is such as managing the stakeholders, governance, security, time and cost and decision making on time. If the ODA fails to accomplish any of these task, the Olympic game can suffer thus it’s the responsibility of ODA and its members to work effectively and produce the needed result. Using Handy’s model as a framework for discussion, analyse the potential problems associated with a project involving a mix of different organisations and cultures. Handy’s Model Handy’s model is basically based on work performed by Harrison. The model aims to classify culture into four categories which are represented by Greek mythology. The four cultures include power culture, task culture, role culture and person culture. In Greek mythology these are termed as Zeusian, Athenian, Apollonian and Dionysian respectively. Power culture whose another name is Zeus have only one source from where power radiates. The power is used to get things done. The only deficiency with this type of culture is that it is rare to find such type of people especially in public services (Doherty & Horne, 2002, p.97). Task culture referred to Athena which means goddess of wisdom. In this form of culture, the project teams have a specific task and they are the norms and values team work, flexibility and innovation. Ability of a member is respected rather than the status or position of a member. Therefore the task culture is mostly preferred in a highly competitive industry which generally requires quick response (Rohm, 1970, p.36). Role culture is associated with Apollo. The culture is organised with rational rules and procedures. With the role culture special fields such as finance, marketing and personnel are linked. Each of the group is guided by senior groups. Lastly it’s the person culture which is associated with Dionysus also a Greek god who is known for self interest. Example of person culture is doctors, whose workload is shred but the individuals has a high degree of importance (Doherty & Horne, 2002, p.97). With context to London 2012 Olympics, Handy’s model can be related with the event. The first model of Handy states the power culture. This power culture is mainly posed by individual who are superior in powers or position. In case of London Olympics the top most position is held by the mayor and the Minister. Thus power culture would be associated with them. They are the leader who communicates with its subordinates. The problem with such culture is that the top level management communicates in an informal way which is generally not accepted. The London 2012 Olympic being one of the biggest events, so things need to be coordinated in a formal manner. Also since many different people are involved with the program thus the culture of each other differs from each other. The culture is mostly verbal and intuitive which is a complete no in an event like Olympics. All the programs are to be finalised in a written manner. Thus the biggest problem lies with this type of culture is informal manner. The next type of culture discussed in Handy’s model is task culture. The different departments set to work for the betterment of Olympics would represent the task culture. They all work together under a senior member. For example the ODA works under the supervision of the Board of Olympics and also the members of ODA works accordingly to the head of ODA. This task culture is most suited as it involves a quick response for changes. But the problem associated with this type of culture is that if members are not motivated to work or lack a proper guidance from the seniors could result in a disaster manner. Therefore it is important for the leader to look after the need and wants of the members and keep them motivated to work. If the ODA does not receive a proper budget it would be possible for the members to finish their work on time and effectively thus it’s the responsibility of the British Olympic Association to cater to the requirements. The net type of culture discussed is role culture. Here each function is controlled by group of executives. In London 2012 Olympics, there are several boards which control different groups therefore it is necessary to maintain a healthy relationship with each of the team members. The problem with such culture is that the members may be slow to react with the required changes. For example when an order comes from the department head to make a change most of the workers may not be quick to work on the change initiated by the leader. This might take a longer time in completion of the work. As each of the function is controlled by department thus the process gets slow and workers takes time to adjust with the new work. Lastly the culture discussed in Handy’s model is person culture which is also known as Dionysus which indicates self interest. This culture is developed when members of a community decide to work which would benefit them. In London Olympic 2012 this type of culture can be titled to government. Since an Olympic opens up many door in forms of economic improvement, socio culture, and infrastructure and also other benefits for the country thus it’s the responsibility of the government to win such a bid that may increase revenue for own country and for the benefits of the government. Thus the Government or the British Olympic Authority would be given the title of person culture. The drawback might be if a government does not think about the country the country would not be able to progress and a n event like the Olympics is a great platform attract other countries and invite them to explore the country. Therefore the four culture model of Handy could be utilised to make an assessment of any projects. This model helps to know the organisational culture. Thus the London Olympics 2012 has tasted a huge success because of the different bodies who has worked to make the event a successful one. Reference Bloyce, D. & Smith, S. (2009). Sport, policy, and development: an introduction. Taylor & Francis. Deloitte. (2010). Organisational design. [Online]. Available at: http://www.deloittelondon2012.co.uk/projects/organisational-design. [Accessed on January 20, 2012]. Doherty, T. L. & Horne, T. (2002). Managing public services--implementing changes: A thoughtful approach to the practice of management. Routledge. ICE. (2011). Delivering London 2012: organisation and programme. [Online]. Available at: http://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/docserver/fulltext/cien-164-5-005.pdf?expires=1327046646&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=BDCA796DB186E914CFEBEE855FFC3982. [Accessed on January 20, 2012]. London Olympic 2012. (2012). Olympics 2012 Structure and Finance. [Online]. Available at: http://www.londonolympics2012.com/finance. [Accessed on January 20, 2012]. Olympic Delivery Authority. (2007). Lifetime Corporate Plan. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.london2012.com/documents/oda-publications/oda-lifetime-corporate-plan.pdf. [Accessed on January 20, 2012]. Rohm, S. (1970). Corporate Culture - How Corporate Culture is Managed in Organisations and what Could be Done Better. GRIN Verlag. Bibliography Girginov, V. & Parry, J. (2005). The Olympic Games explained: a student guide to the evolution of the modern Olympic Games. Routledge. Morden, T. (2004). Principles of management. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Theodoraki, E. (2007). Olympic Event organisation. Routledge. Read More