Institutional set-up and organisational management
Overlapping mandates, unclear responsibilities, inadequate coordination, lack of skilled staff and high turnover rates are all critical delivery risks. Event organisers can establish effective institutions and organisational frameworks by defining clear decision-making bodies and establishing collaboration mechanisms and a flexible organisational structure.
Four groups of risks are identified as relating to institutional set-up and organisational management:
Overlapping mandates and unclear decision-making powers can blur responsibilities around the effective delivery of the Games
Inadequate coordination mechanisms could impair OCOGs’ ability to manage a large programme of projects involving various stakeholders
Lack of staff with diverse skills in the delivery of infrastructure and associated services could risk the effective and efficient delivery of the Games
Inadequate or unresponsive on-boarding processes and high turnover rates could hinder the rapid organisational growth needed to meet OCOGs’ needs
Principles for ensuring an effective institutional set-up and organisation management
Establish clear divisions of responsibility and decision-making for the delivery of infrastructure and associated service
OCOGs should seek to ensure that roles and responsibilities are clearly established as early and as comprehensively as possible. Decision-making structures should consider how institutions will work together throughout the evolution of the Games delivery cycle as capacities and appropriate responsibilities may differ significantly across through planning, delivery and post-Games phases.
Put in place informal or technical coordination mechanisms to increase agility in decision-making
Formal governance structures should be supplemented with informal mechanisms and working groups, while measures such as physically siting institutional partners in the same building can help promote a common culture. Coordination mechanisms should integrate key decision makers and be sensitive to local context, aligning the Games within the institutional framework of the host city and country.
Build a flexible organisational structure to support delivery of infrastructure and associated services
OCOGs should invest in organisational structures that allow them to successfully bring internal and external institutional and operational threads together. The OCOG should be adaptive to changes throughout the delivery of the Games, and should reflect this flexibility in its human resources and organizational structure.
Invest in leadership and staff with the capabilities to deliver a complex programme of infrastructure and associated services
OCOGs should establish leadership that is empowered and committed to the success of the Games, with strong credibility and experience. Continuity through the delivery of the Games should be maintained to the extent possible. OCOGs should invest in staff recruitment and retention to develop and accumulate knowledge and skills. Experts with previous Games experience in key areas and secondees from local operators can be key to facilitating knowledge transfer and leveraging local experience.
Case studies
External resources
Institutional framework tools and guidelines
These resources can provide OCOGs with a range of policies, tools and guidelines from broader infrastructure and project delivery practices to support the establishment of effective institutional frameworks.
IPA Routemap on Governance
Project Routemap is the United Kingdom Government’s Infrastructure and Projects Authority’s (IPA) support tool for novel or complex major projects.
The Governance module of Project Routemap helps to assess the suitability of existing or proposed governance arrangements. It includes consideration questions across four pillars (allocating and exercising accountability, empowering decision-making, maintaining alignment with corporate strategy, and reporting effectively and embedding assurance) to assess governance arrangements and suggest improvements, as well as 10 good practice examples.
Responsibility Matrices
Responsibility matrices can be useful tools for mapping and assigning the participation of various organisations involved in the delivery of infrastructure and services. The examples at right provide a range of approaches to setting up and assigning responsibilities:
- An approach from the Public Olympic Authority for Rio 2016, responsible for coordinating the efforts of federal, state and municipal governments to prepare and stage the Games. Its Responsibility Matrix listed projects, responsibilities and financial contributions and was regularly updated and published.
- A comprehensive example of the roles and duties of various positions compiled by Crossrail Limited for the Crossrail project in London, UK. It outlines the tasks and responsibilities across all levels of management, from the Chief Executive to the Head of Urban Intergration.
Compendium of large infrastructure projects
Through an analysis of projects across the EU, this report identifies three recommendations for the European Commission, namely: 1) to improve the training of both procurement and project management professionals in the selection and implementation of the procurement procedures; 2) to recognise procurement as playing a significant role in the overall design of the project organisation and its resulting long term capability; and 3) to strengthen the efforts to facilitate a more dynamic form of knowledge creation through the development of national and pan European communities of infrastructure organisations.
Organisational management tools and guidelines
These resources can provide OCOGs with a range of policies, tools and guidelines to support the development of effective organisations, with a focus on procurement and delivery.
ProcurCompEU
ProcurCompEU is a tool designed by the European Commission to support the professionalisation of public procurement. It defines 30 key competences and can be used by organisations to assess and enhance their procurement function to respond to the organisation’s priorities.
Major Project Leadership training
Major Project Leadership training can help to retain and build critical infrastructure skills and expertise on major project delivery.
While necessarily context dependent, the examples to the right have been identified by the G20 Global Infrastructure Hub.
IPA Routemap on Organisational Design and Development
Project Routemap is the United Kingdom Government’s Infrastructure and Projects Authority’s (IPA) support tool for novel or complex major projects.
The Organisational Design and Development module of Project Routemap helps to establish appropriate organisational design and provides gives guidance on change management approaches. It includes consideration questions across four pillars (understanding organisational context, designing the organisation, developing the organisation, and a managing ongoing change) to guide organisational design and change, as well as 10 good practice examples.
IPA Project Delivery Capability Framework
The IPA’s Project Delivery Capability Framework describes the job roles, capabilities and learning for project delivery professionals. It contains three main elements:
- ‘Career pathways’ that set out the job roles within the profession
- Technical and behavioural competencies aligned to those roles
- A development section to enable project delivery professionals to identify the right development for them
While developed for use in the United Kingdom Government, the Framework may be useful for OCOGs in identifying the skills and capabilities required for project delivery, as well as a template for skills development.
