REQUIREMENT OF PROJECT ORGANISATION:

London Olympics is UKs largest construction project: developing and building the venues
and infrastructure for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Delivering high
quality venues, on time and under a global media spotlight, demands consistent high
performance despite unrelenting pressure. For this challenging programme to succeed, the
ODA needed to establish itself as a highly competent client, capable of interfacing with
multiple stakeholders and effectively driving the building programme through delivery
partners and contractors in the supply chain.
In ODA terms, the organisation is totally unique with all the inherent business and
organisational challenges that entails. It is a change programme of itself, on a massive, fast
moving scale. The need to embrace change and work under extreme time pressures in often
uncharted territory had to become second nature to all. This perhaps naturally created
personal and organisation tensions and therefore ODA needed to ensure that they built
capability at all layers of the organisation. In a nutshell, they needed to build confidence,
personal resilience and create a high performance mind set. It was also essential to motivate
and inspire staff and ensure full employee engagement.
To deliver this they adopted a multi-faceted approach. From the outset, they developed and
managed all their people activities using our People Strategy as an overarching framework.
The strategy covered critical business challenges, business drivers, HR principles. This was
crafted to match each phase of the ODAs lifecycle.
ORGANISATION STRUCTURE:

Sir David Hartmann Higgins was appointed Chief Executive Designate of the Olympic
Delivery Authority from December 2005, and appointed Chief Executive with effect from 30
March 2006. Dennis Hone, previously Director of Finance, succeeded Australian David
Higgins as the Chief Executive in February 2011


CHIEF EXECUTIVE: (Dennis Honne)
Hone was appointed as head of the ODA in February 2011 when David Higgins left to join
Network Rail.
Before he took over as chief executive, Hone was the director of finance and corporate
finances at the ODA.
He had previously worked as the chief operating officer at English Partnerships, the country's
national regeneration agency.
Responsible for overall leadership and management of the ODA, including responsibilities as
Accounting Officer.
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DECISIONS: (Vivienne Ramsey)
Accountable to the ODA's Chief Executive for the effective delivery of development control
advice and services to the ODA's Planning Committee.
DIRECTOR OF PROPERTY: (Ralph Luck)
Reported to the CEO, with lead responsibility for managing property supply, transfers and
transactions pre and post Olympics between the ODA and all third parties, together with
managing the Olympic village retrofit and completing sale of the village.
PROJECT SPONSOR-PROPERTY: (Jim Woolhouse)
Reported to Director of Property, managing land acquisitions, transfers and other property
transactions pre/post Olympics, with particular responsibility for the commercial aspects
of the development, management and delivery of the Olympic Village and the Stratford
City Retail Centre
CHIEF
EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF
PLANNING
DECISIONS
DIRECTOR
OF
PROPERTY
PROJECT
SPONSOR-
PROPERTY
PROJECT
SPONSOR
OLYMPIC
VILLAGE
PROPERTY
DEVELOPEMENT
AND LEGACY
DIRECTOR OF
VENUE AND
INFRASTRUCTUR
E
HEAD OF
SYSTEMS AND
TECHNOLOGY
HEAD OF
VENUES
FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT
DIRECTOR
OF
TRANSPOR
T
HEAD OF
CAPITAL
RAIL
PROJECTS
EXECUTIVE
HEAD OF
TRANSPORT
DIRECTLY
MANAGED
SERVICES
EXECUTIVE
HEAD OF
TRANSPORT
PROGRAMME
AND CONTRACT
MANAGEMENT
DIRECTOR OF
FINANCE AND
PROGRAMMING
ASSURANCE
DIRECTOR OF
COMMERCIAL
AND LEGAL
DIRECTOR
OF HUMAN
REOURCES
PROJECT SPONSOR OLYMPIC VILLAGE PROPERTY
DEVELOPEMENT AND LEGACY: (Paul Hartman)
Reported to the Director of property in managing land issues, transfers and transactions
pre and post Olympics. Taking responsibility for leading the development of design, town
planning, regulatory compliance pre construction and through the construction process.
Lead the delivery of the Athletes Village to assure product quality of all assets, through
the construction process, through the Olympics period, through retrofit and into Legacy
completion/handover processes to final disposal. Managed the interface with Triathlon
and maximising the development potential of the undeveloped areas left vacant until post
Olympics.

DIRECTOR OF VENUE AND INFRASTRUCTURE: (Simon Wright)
Lead the management of the infrastructure and utilities work programme, commissioned
by the ODA, setting clear programme objectives and ensuring delivery to strict timescales
and budgets, Park Operations. From 1st October becomes Director of Venues and
Infrastructure.
HEAD OF SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGY: (Gordon Shipley)
Head of Systems integration, Head of IT, IM & RM, project sponsor for legacy
telecoms, delivery close out and other projects (structured cabling, park fibre network
and EMC assurance)
HEAD OF VENUES FACILITIES MANAGEMENT: (Brian Gray)
All FM related activities for ODA venues and village, ensuring buildings are
occupiable and licensable to support the games. Ensure enhanced services are
available to support LOCOG activities.
DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORT: (Hugh Sumner)
Reporting to the CEO of the ODA, lead, coordinate, review and implement the Transport
plan for the Olympics, setting clear policy objectives, delivered to strict timescale and
budget.
HEAD OF CAPITAL RAIL PROJECTS: (Mike Story)
Responsible for sponsoring and delivering the physical outputs of the Olympic
Transport Plan, primarily in the rail and tube sector, from Business Case development
through design and implementation to close out. Delivery is achieved through third
party infrastructure partners or through direct contractor procurement. Also
responsible for rail interface assistance with ODA Village, Park and bridges
infrastructure projects.
EXECUTIVE HEAD OF TRANSPORT DIRECTLY MANAGED SERVICES:
(Mike Sinclair Williams)
Responsible for leading Transport Planning, Transport Readiness, Transport
Management and Coach & Shuttle operations
EXECUTIVE HEAD OF TRANSPORT PROGRAMME AND
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT : (Sue Kershaw)
To assure delivery of road and rail transport for the games, and the programme
management of the ODA portfolio.
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND PROGRAMMING ASSURANCE:
(Gerry Murphy)
Responsible for developing and maintaining appropriate programme governance
structures and providing assurance that they operate effectively. Provides oversight and
challenge of all programme performance monitoring, providing assurance of the integrity
of reporting and programme management systems. Provides oversight and challenge of
risk management at project and programme level. Provides management information on
programme performance. From 1 October becomes Head of Venues and Infrastructure
programme Responsible for financial management of the ODA, to ensure effective use of
public funds/alignment with business objectives. From 1 October 2011, assumed
responsibility for Programme Assurance and becomes Director of Finance and
Programme Assurance.
DIRECTOR OF COMMERCIAL AND LEGAL (Mike Cornellius)
Responsible for managing the procurement activities of the ODA ensuring that the ODA
complies with its statutory obligations and policies. Also provided assurance and
professional leadership to a team of procurement and commercial managers and was
responsible for ensuring commerciality in activities of the ODA. From 1st October
became Director of Legal and Commercial and assumes responsibility for legal services.)
DIRECTOR OF HUMAN REOURCES: (Wendy Cartwright)
Responsible for all aspects of HR strategy, policy and delivery including organisation
development and change management. Also responsible for ODAs Corporate Facilities
Management function. From the 1 October responsible for Equality and Inclusion and
Corporate Business Continuity and Crisis management.


INTEGRATED PLANNING FOR THE LONDON 2012
PROGRAMME:
THE NEED:
The scale and complexity of delivering venues and infrastructure for London 2012
drove a programme structure of around 50 individual projects.
In addition to adopting best practice project management for each element,
learning from previous Olympic delivery programmes indicated that an integrated
planning approach was essential.
Some of the issues were:
key programme milestones depended on inputs from multiple projects
decisions made during design could lead to cross-project interfaces
on site.
space on site was limited and project plans had to be aligned to resolve boundary
clashes handovers of areas of land were to be key interface factors

works by others in a Principal Contractor area tended to create disruption or re-
sequence of works and needed proactive management
bid documents and contract incentives, target dates and design documents had to deal
with known interfaces before award

THE METHOD
The principle of an integrated plan was established in the very early stages, although the
detail that was eventually created had to be progressively built up as scopes were defined
and contracts were let. A suite of processes, meeting structure, reports and assurance
framework were gradually set-up to achieve the following:
Understanding the interface on a strategic level (the impact on overall delivery; which
key stakeholders are impacted; and who in the project team will have to resolve
the interface).
Understanding the interfaces on a detail level using drawings, scope documents and the
drivers for key deliverables.
Reviewing an interface(s) or understanding and capturing new interface(s) at monthly
strategic and weekly detail integration meetings.
Capturing the timing of the interface, the type, the cost and schedule impact to
successor activities or projects (impact category, high, and medium, low).
Capturing and maintaining the overall programme in a single, integrated, plan with
projects accountable for maintaining their own areas.
Establishing intensive tracking implementation
IMPLEMENTATION:
Effective integration requires a culture with excellent communication and cooperation.
Construction Integration teams were formed to understand and capture the interfaces.
Construction Integration engineers and design managers were also part of the major
project teams where the number or complexity of interfaces was significant. All teams
were involved in monitoring and managing interfaces through regular coordination
meetings and reporting. Initially, the Integration team was set up as a centrally-based
group within the programme. However, it was soon recognised that these individuals
had to work in Project Delivery teams to effectively identify the required interfaces and
implement the required programme changes. This change enabled more focused,
interactive dialogue to take place, resulting in earlier and better definition of interfaces
which, in turn, meant more effective and efficient delivery. As the complexity of the
Level 2 schedule grew, it became more difficult to maintain the complex logic in both
baseline and forecast schedules. The baseline was simplified, with all key milestones
captured and any changes subject to change control. Subsequently, the forecast schedule
was kept current on a day-to-day basis with logic, activities and milestones being updated
whenever detail became available. Progress was updated on a monthly basis.Planning
teams were encouraged to be proactive on interfaces or potential issues that led to
interfaces; this eventually became the culture within the programme.It also became clear
that when more time was spent reviewing the impact of the interface before accepting a
construction integration solution, a better outcome was achieved. Trying to define and
solve all the integration and interface issues in the early stages of the programme was
impossible. Dealing with known issues and using the risk process to deal with the
unknowns was a far more efficient method for forecasting outcomes. The process ensured
that the majority of interfaces were dealt with effectively at the working level. Only those
which could not be solved locally were escalated to more senior management