LONDON GAMES WHAT WENT WELL? Report of seminar 179 held on 12th June 2013 Hallam Conference Centre, London SUMMARY

LONDON GAMES WHAT WENT WELL? Report of seminar 179 held on 12th June 2013 Hallam Conference Centre, London SUMMARY

SEMINAR PROGRAMME 08:45 Coffee and registration 09:00 Chairman's introduction Antony Oliver, Editor New Civil Engineer Magazine 09:15 Establishing the demand forecast 09:45 Keeping London moving during the 2012 Games 10:15 Discussion 11:00 Coffee 11:30 London 2012 first and last impressions 11:50 2012 security what worked? 12:10 Discussion 12:45 Lunch 14:00 Providing the most digitally and socially connected Games ever 14:30 BBC Project L2012, planning the programme 15:00 Discussion 15:45 Chairman's closing comments 16:00 Close Hugh Sumner, Director of Transport Mark Evers, Director of Customer Strategy Andy Garner, T2 Airline Readiness Director Robert Raine, Director Jon Osbiston, Senior Project Manager formerly London 2012 Venue Telecoms Manager, BT Global Services Jamie Hindhaugh, Chief Operating Officer Antony Oliver, Editor Olympic Delivery Authority Transport for London LHR Airports Ltd Home Office BT Global Services BT Sport New Civil Engineer Magazine 2

KEY CONCLUSIONS PURPOSE To learn why various aspects in delivering the London 2012 Games were as successful as they appeared to be and to explore how approaches to planning and execution might be applied to other projects. KEY MESSAGES The scale of the operation of the Games was enormous. The duration of both the Olympic and the Paralympic Games was discrete and yet the daily variation in attendance numbers and use of different locations introduced a complex variable to planning and execution. The planning required exceptional attention to detail, for example the types of visitors, the athletes, the Olympic Family, the media and public all required separate consideration, often down to a 15-minute timeframe. The backbone to all planning for the operation stage was the travel demand forecasting model. This helped fix the choice of venues and the provision of public transport, freight deliveries, border control and security. All forecasting models are inaccurate and need constant updating. During the Games not only did planning have to address the event itself, but London had to keep operating as normally as possible, giving rise to conflicts of interest. Stakeholder engagement across as many bodies as possible was essential, as was the advanced publicity to enable everyone to adjust their personal travel and work plans. Several rehearsals and pre-exercises were undertaken. Many themes held independent reviews during planning to receive robust comments for improvement. In media and communications the Games easily exceeded all previous events for scale of coverage, quantity of immediate data handling and security of provision. During the Games themselves real data was measured and analysed to influence and modify planned execution. Messages to stakeholders were constantly updated. Combined project teams were co-located and run as a single integrated command and control centre. Many existing organisations were brought together for the first time and aligned behind a single and genuine desire to deliver a world-class Games. KEY LESSONS Plan in huge detail. Expect forecasts to be wrong. Hold independent reviews. Update models with live data. Be flexible and agile in responding to unfolding issues. Embrace creative thinking, but lock down development work early enough to use established technologies. Embody maximum cross-communication, but be decisive when needed. Manage changes in technology and people. Know what good looks like and convey. Just because you can, does not mean you should. These are the views of Malcolm Noyce, Executive Director, MPA 3

INTRODUCTION Since 2006 the Major Projects Association has held seminars which have addressed the planning and delivery of facilities and infrastructure for the London 2012 Games. This full day seminar looked back at the six weeks of the Games themselves. Focusing on three key topics transportation, communications and security the seminar heard from speakers who were directly responsible for these areas of operation. It considered how the planning and implementation determined the success of the Games, and if the reasons can be replicated. The event was chaired by Antony Oliver, who as Editor of New Civil Engineer has closely watched both the delivery and execution of London 2012. ESTABLISHING THE DEMAND FORECAST The Olympic and Paralympic Games are the largest logistical peacetime challenge any nation faces. The numbers of participants, workforce and spectators involved drives every facet of the design of the Games, and creates logistics of huge complexity. The first presentation, from the Director of Transport at the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA), explored how demand for the London 2012 Games was predicted, refined, validated and then used in real time by many organisations. Data was shared through an open architecture data repository created by the ODA. It was used by a wide range of stakeholders in assessing the implications for their organisations for example Transport for London (TfL), the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG), the Home Office, the NHS, security services and local councils. In looking at the research undertaken and the forecasting models it was noted that at the heart of the exercise were the large numbers of people involved: about 12 million ticketed and 8 million nonticketed spectators, the Games Family of some 14,000 athletes, and 20,000 media personnel. Detailed modelling was required to assess likely travel patterns and the subsequent effect on transport systems such as London Underground. The models had to be integrated, not just within London, but back into the UK transport distribution models in order to tie in with local public transport. It was explained how understanding demand and transport patterns influenced the planning of events in a variety of ways for example, the competition schedule, or defining Olympic Park approach routes. Transport during the Games was a success. Nonetheless there were aspects that only became clear with hindsight, such as how much variability there would be in terms of the sports overruns or late sales of tickets, or just how complex the logistics challenge would become. The lessons learned are available for organisers of future Games, whilst tools and techniques for information dissemination and travel demand management have been passed on to operating organisations, including TfL and Network Rail. 4

KEEPING LONDON MOVING Transport for London had the twin objectives of making sure London hosted a successful Games, and at the same time keeping the city moving and open for business despite unprecedented demand across the network for instance the 6.9 million journeys on the Docklands Light Railway during the Olympics were double the normal levels. This presentation explored how these objectives were achieved, and some of the challenges faced for example, the proximity of many of the venues to homes and businesses meant there were many conflicting movements in terms of pedestrians, vehicles and public transport. And every day of the Games was unique, with daily variability of movement and passenger flow. It was explained that transport worked well during the Games for a number of reasons. These included well-managed investment in new and upgraded infrastructure prior to the Games; good collaboration between transport operators; excellent operational performance; effective road network management; and a successful communications strategy for example, the Travel Demand Management programme provided spectators, businesses and regular travellers with information to help them plan ahead. Encouraging people to alter their regular travel pattern for at least some of the time during the Games helped to reduce demand at peak times. A well-integrated customer experience was also crucial such as free public transport for ticket holders on the day of their event, combined with frequent and reliable train services and real-time travel advice. Another factor was effective collaboration with business, providing help and advice on transport issues to businesses of all sizes. For example, TfL worked closely with the freight industry, the Government and regulators to ensure sensible enforcement regulations, and produced an online freight journey planner to help companies plan delivery schedules. The presentation concluded by considering some of the lasting effects of the Games across the network. Infrastructure improvements have provided extra capacity, better reliability, and improved connectivity across London. Accessibility was also markedly improved and included the use of manual boarding ramps at 16 Tube stations during the Games. This has now been extended to a further 19 stations. LONDON 2012 FIRST AND LAST IMPRESSIONS This session, from LHR Airports, looked at how Heathrow, the host airport, prepared for and carried out the successful London 2012 Games airport operation. The Games involved 70,000 Games Family journeys in and out of Heathrow and 12 million passengers, and was described by the CEO of LHR as Heathrow s greatest ever operational challenge. Key challenges included the need to accommodate some 3,000 extra aircraft movements in the already congested airspace of south-east England, and the increased numbers of passengers and their baggage particularly the day after the closing ceremony of the Olympics. continued 5

impressions continued The presentation went on to detail Heathrow s approach to planning and preparation, and some of the processes that were put in place for example meet and greet services for the athletes. An important factor at the outset was learning from the experiences of previous host airports such as Sydney, Athens, Beijing and Vancouver, and adopting aspects that would work for Heathrow. The objectives for the operation included a clear vision of success, a single operating plan with customer needs at its heart, a single set of contingency plans giving maximum flexibility, and rigorous programme and project management discipline. The plan was published in January 2012, at which point there was lockdown of the design and the proposed implementation. Partnership was key. For instance, the airport s 200 organisations and 70,000 employees worked as a single team with a single risk responsibility; the police worked closely with Heathrow in terms of security risk and the extra security measures that were put in place for example they worked in conjunction with the border control force, ensuring there were sufficient resources to avoid lengthy arrival queues. Record customer service ratings, positive media coverage and industry awards were indications of how Heathrow performed during 2012. It was explained that many of the solutions and ways of working implemented during the Olympics and Paralympics have been retained, providing a Games legacy for Heathrow. 2012 SECURITY WHAT WORKED? This session, from the Director of Olympic and Paralympic Security in the Home Office (who was in post from March 2008 through to the Games and their aftermath) described the scale of the Olympic Games security task, the particular challenges that it brought and some of the innovative approaches that were required to ensure success. It was explained that the Government does not normally organise the planning, fund or take part in the operational security of a major event in the UK. However, the size and visibility of the Games meant that the Government had to take on an overarching role for instance putting in place a strategic framework, defining roles and responsibilities, and dealing with issues of funding. The presentation looked at the threats and risks faced and how they were addressed, the planning methodologies that were adopted, and how the complex solutions were subject to evolving governance and programme management disciplines. A single holistic threat assessment process was developed, with four types of major threat assessed: terrorism, organised crime, domestic extremism/public order disruption and hazards (e.g. flooding). The whole security community and the Games community were brought together to create a single view of the threats, something which was in itself innovative. continued 6

security continued The security approaches taken by the main forces police, military and private security were outlined, and it was explained how they were brought together through a combination of both innovative and tried and tested command and control arrangements. Putting a national command and control structure in place was essential to manage a security operation that involved 50,000 people including a 105-day policing operation with 52 police forces and up to 14,500 officers. Over 18,000 members of the armed forces were deployed, as well as private security personnel. The command and control model was complicated, but well-developed, properly scaled and properly practised command and control procedures were crucial to success. The presentation concluded with an overview of what was achieved and some of the reasons why the security operation was successful. PROVIDING THE MOST DIGITALLY AND SOCIALLY CONNECTED GAMES EVER The London 2012 Games was the most digitally and socially connected Olympic and Paralympic Games ever and every picture, message and call was carried over BT s optical fibre networks. Working with its fellow technology partners at LOCOG, BT was involved in building the physical communications, and was responsible for delivering, operating and managing the telecommunications services that underpinned access to the internet for broadcasters, the media and the public. This presentation looked at the challenges leading up to and during the Games, and how the four years of meticulous planning led to six weeks of successful delivery. The first three years were spent in planning, designing and testing the infrastructure, using tried and tested technology. The decision was made to over-engineer the system to ensure there would be sufficient capacity in the network. Connectivity had to be provided to a total of 94 competition and non-competition venues. These included all the venues and services within the Olympic Park, the outlying venues around London, venues outside London, and other locations such as Heathrow and transport depots. Installing infrastructure during the test events held in 2011 provided valuable operational experience for instance a significant challenge was the safe and steady provision of electrical power to communications networks, particularly at places like Greenwich Park, where there is no normal mains electricity provision. Another challenge was installing a communications infrastructure in temporary venues that were constructed and dismantled very quickly, such as the beach volleyball venue in Horse Guards Parade. The presentation concluded by looking at what had been achieved, and what lessons had been learned. For example, service targets and delivery milestones were exceeded on a network that worked flawlessly this was put down to detailed planning that covered every possible scenario. It was noted that rapid, clear communication throughout the company is key, and improvements have been made to both organisation and communications across BT s lines of business. 7

BBC PROJECT L2012, PLANNING THE PROGRAMME The final presentation was given by the former Head of Production for the BBC s London 2012 project. Known internally as L2012, the project provided multi-platform coverage television, radio, online of the Games as well as other major events during 2012; it was the biggest single editorial project in the BBC s history. The presentation started by looking at the project s achievements. For example, the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games had 28.7 million viewers, the largest audience in 30 years. Online, some seven million people in the UK browsed the internet daily it was the first time that live events had been streamed on such a large scale. People were also able to watch sport on mobile devices, which had not really happened before. Over 2,500 hours of live Olympic sport were broadcast across 27 channels, 24 of which were streamed. The session went on to look at key aspects of managing and delivering the project for example the importance of trust; the creation of a road map to give a sense of direction; how to quantify value for money; the importance of audience research in gauging people s expectations of the BBC s coverage; and the logistics of setting up studios within and overlooking the Olympic Park. The project team successfully adapted core project management approaches and principles to manage and deliver this large project. For example, it was explained that the basic project triangle of scope, cost and time was not adequate for a creative environment. Two additional aspects quality and benefits were brought in; this produced a production diamond that formed the basis of the business case used for every programme commissioned around the Games. The project was closed in October 2012. The plan, do, review matrix for governance, delivery and audiences that was used throughout the project provided the basis for the closedown report, which detailed the budget, target, benefits, what was delivered and how. The report also included lessons learned, opportunities, risks, and what did not go according to plan. CONCLUSION The scale of activity that brought the six weeks of the Games to fruition was huge, as was the scale of plans needed to make them happen. In summing up the many and varied reasons why the Games were successful, the Chairman noted the importance of communication across the different working groups and stakeholders, whatever the activity for example, infrastructure construction, transport logistics or security. He also questioned whether it was possible to replicate this, and continue to work across organisational boundaries in the future. 8

PARTICIPATING ORGANISATIONS BAE Systems BBC Bechtel Ltd BT Global Services BT Sport CJ Associates Costain Ltd Crossrail Limited Defence Infrastructure Organisation EC Harris LLP Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Home Office Institute for Government LHR Airports Ltd MPLA Cohort 2/Department for Education Major Projects Association Mott MacDonald National Centre for Project Management (NCPM) New Civil Engineer Magazine Olympic Delivery Authority PA Consulting Group PricewaterhouseCoopers Risk Solutions The Nichols Group Transport for London WMG: University of Warwick 9