Event management & the PMBOK

Introduction

The Commonwealth Games is a quadrennial Sporting Event conducted across the 71+ members of the Commonwealth countries. The Melbourne 2006 Sports Program comprised 12 individual and four team sports, with a total of 24 disciplines:

• Aquatics included Diving, Swimming and Synchronized Swimming
• Cycling included Track, Road and Mountain Bike
• Gymnastics included both the Artistic and Rhythmic disciplines
• Shooting included Clay Target, Pistol, Small Bore and Air Rifle, and Full Bore Rifle.

The Melbourne 2006 Commonwealth Games featured a fully-integrated competition for Elite Athletes with a Disability (EAD), with 12 gold medals offered in Athletics, Swimming, Table Tennis and Weightlifting, all of which count in official medal tallies. The competition was run under the rules of the International Paralympics Committee, and followed the formal decision taken at the 1998 Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) General Assembly to include EAD events, and a highly successful program at the Manchester 2002 Commonwealth Games.

Australia has a long history of providing all people with a disability the chance to participate in sporting competition and events, as well as giving them the opportunity to develop their skills to an elite level. The Commonwealth Games Athletes' Village in Melbourne was accessible, incorporating the specific requirements for this population of athletes into the design and thus ensuring a world-class athlete experience.

The Sports Program has been confirmed by the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF).

Some Commonwealth Games Project facts (some hard to believe):
Timeframe: Project Length: 7.5 years (90 months)
Commencement Date: 1/1/2000 End Date: 30/6/2007
Phase 1 Set Up: 1/1/2000 – 30/6/2002
Phase 2 Build: 1/7/02 – 30/6/04
Phase 3 Delivery: 1/7/04 – 30/6/06
Phase 4 Wind Up: 1/7/06 – 30/6/07

Competition Period: 15th - 26th March 2006 – comprising 11 Days of competition across 17 venues, 24 sport disciplines (12 individual / 4 team sports) – and also allowing for EAD (Elite Athletes with a Disability)

Athletes: 4,500 – across 71 participating Commonwealth Games countries
Team Officials: 1,500 / Tech Officials: 1,200
Staffing: 600 / Service Providers 5,000 / Volunteers: 12,000 – 15,000

Event Project Management like any project follows the knowledge, group and process components consistent with the PMBOK. From our experience with the recent m2006 Commonwealth Games, primarily in the Venue Technology Program Area, we show how Project Management key components relate to the PMBOK processes and groups, and how even with a major/“short-term” event like the m2006 Games – “with a fixed deadline” that the key components of project management still exist, and are key.

In this presentation/report we outline what aspects of project management went well with the different environment of this processes, those factors which need to be improved during/prior to the next Commonwealth Games, and what PM lessons we have learnt (as you always continue to learn in every role you take) from this experience in our continuing PM careers.

These lessons are crucial as experiences/detail and processes from these Games are passed onto the next Commonwealth Games – the next being scheduled for Delhi India in 2010.

Abstract

An Overview of the m2006 Commonwealth Games – a brief history!

Let's firstly start with a brief history of the Commonwealth Games.

It was started in 1930 – and at that stage called the “British Empire Games”. The concept of the Commonwealth Games is “owned” by a group called the Commonwealth Games Federation - (UK).

Prior to 2000 - Australia earned the “rights” to hold the games in 2006. The Australian CGF then has the option to choose which city/location then has the rights to hold the games within Australia – and Melbourne was the city chosen. Prior to this decision – Perth, Brisbane & Sydney have all had this same opportunity. Melbourne previously has held the Olympic Games in 1956.

An interesting point to note is that the intellectual Property/learning is ‘transferred” from games to games. Therefore the learning & processes adopted from m2006 will be transferred to India in 2010 – the next Commonwealth Games location. This provides the opportunity for the learning with each event to be transferred, avoiding the cost of rework & reinvention on workable actions at the next Games.

The Commonwealth Games as indicated above is a 7.5 Year Project – running from 1st Jan 2000 – 30th June 2007. However, publicly all would have thought it was over in just a single 11 days in March 2006.

One of the key Program Areas was Venue Technology (VT). This area was within the Technology Group – and they had a Commonwealth Games Program Area objective to be “Successful, timely and reliable implementation and operation of venue-based technology equipment and services”.

Some VT Key Objectives:

Some of the Venue Technology teams' key objectives did include;

• Outside the VT area – there were some 40 Program Areas. A Needs Analysis of these 40 areas across some 37 Venues needed completion;
• Venue Planning across these 37 venues;
• Implementation Planning – including scheduling, resourcing, vendor management, risk & issue communication (strongly aligned to the PMBOK Planning Process Group);
• Contract Management of external Suppliers (Procurement Management) – including Cabling, CATV, Office Automation, Videoboards & Audiovisual contractors;
• Scheduling of all competition & non-competition venue implementation/removals – post games;
• The planning, setup & removal of Technology Equipment Rooms (TER). These rooms were the central distribution point for external technical services to a venue – including voice & data;
• Games Time Operations including Helpdesk and Radio Distribution. During games time the local and/or centralised helpdesk for all helpdesk/support activities and the local function of management of 2-way radio distribution;
• Removal Management – overall planning etc. to return a venue to its original operating “state”.

Some Venue Technology Facts:

Just a brief overview of the size/scope/responsibility of technology within these Games and in which this VT group had control/responsibility of:

• 7,493 data & voice Cable Outlets;
• Over 1000 km Voice & Data Cable;
• 250 kilometres of optic fibre;
• 30 km TV Cable;
• 215 Network Switches – varying sixes/components – however one brand;
• In Total - 300,000 Technical Devices.

Important fact: the actual full network planned was in operation for only 4 hours maximum!! This was due to the operational nature of certain venues…

This technology was deployed as both non-legacy / and also legacy. Non-legacy meant that it was firstly installed, operated & then had to be removed. The legacy meant it was to stay.

And the technology involved…

This cabling, data/voice points also included (apologies for the facts) – but to emphasis the size of this project/operation: We had…

• 2,000 PC's;
• 100 Servers;
• 5,000 Radios;
• 3,060 Mobiles;
• A few TV sets – and some were Plasma (1,531 Television Sets);
• 973 Reprographic Devices - this includes faxes/printers/scanners (oops scanning was not allowed)

Some General Venue Technology Issues / Challenges Faced:

This event/project also had in some case rare situations, however some also challenges that are not unique to this project – but to all projects:

• Fixed Deadline – this was defined, published across 71 countries – so all knew when it was to happen – no shift possible here;
• Varying qualification and skills of PMs. The VT Group was very skilled, however brought to the team varying skills, qualifications and backgrounds. We had to be careful with assumptions and expectations also technical knowledge with discussion, planning & deployment within internal and external program areas;
• Constant Changes in Requirements from customers. Rigid Change Control process developed & managed –like any project – change management was crucial. We often experienced something like 30 changes a day. This resulting in the need to appoint a full-time change management staff member;
• Limited Budgets – it was difficult to understand what was the budget – primary responsibility here was to ensure that a Program Area had signed off on the requirement – sign –off was crucial;
• Expectation Management of Customer – like any project – managing this customer/stakeholder was crucial to ensure what they expected was delivered;
• Diverse Range of Stakeholders – ranging from sales, operational, technical to administration;
• Temporary but 100% reliable solution required - primary responsibility was to ensure 100% availability during prime competition time – TV audience availability was crucial to success;
• Dependencies – numerous on other Program Areas, suppliers (internal & external);
• We experienced short access times to Venues to allow for implementation activities prior to the Games. Many chosen games venues operated and received cash-flow from their normal means of operation eg. recreational swimming fees. With the Games, venues had to shutdown their normal revenue activities & were restricted. With this in place – a venue wanted access for as long as they could which restricted our time to deploy technology.
• Installation at a large number of sites simultaneously – this was a scheduling dilemma – we had limited suppliers with restricted time to access a venue for installation & even stricter with removal – and fixed deadline.

How & Why Did It Work (team & delivery)?

With all the issues & challenges – it did work. This was however not by choice – but by applying some key PMBOK principles:

• Planning – we never stopped – if we remember carefully – it is the planning group where the success or failure of a project can result;
• KISS principle adopted - Keep it Simple! – sometimes being too complicated would not produce the result – this was an example;
• Regular Communication – like any project planning – Communication Management was crucial –especially with internal & external stakeholders, internal & external suppliers – and fellow Technology Staff. Communicate, communicate really did provide a very useful tool here (PMBOK Planning);
• Made Decisions Quickly – crucial with fixed deadline deliverable – no time to procrastinate – and management (steering committee) were prepared to provide a quick response;
• Did not Procrastinate – see above;
• Venue Technology worked together as a Team;
• Comprehensive Project Scheduling Program – 10,000 task lines – managed by individuals who had the direct responsibility – and reviewed by other staff to ensure compliance and gaps were all covered;
• The Objectives & Goal were clear to all – clearly defined crucial here;
• Change Control Process rigidly managed & controlled – process & procedure and outcomes clearly documented and communicated;
• Good Vendor & Stakeholder Management – all the necessary components from the PMBOK covered;
• Proven & Tried Processes from previous Commonwealth Games & also from staff's previous employment experience – taking advantage of the learning opportunity provided is crucial in any project – regardless of size, location or extent.

and How is this experience All Related to the PMBOK^® Guide?

This next section may seem repeated from above – however it provides a brief summary of the key aspects with the Commonwealth Games – and where these relate directly to the PMBOK Guide:

• Project Initiation:
  • –    Needs Analysis of 40 Program Areas across 37 Venues
• Project Planning:
  • –    Venue Planning – 37 Venues / fixed deadline / limited contractor resources
• Project Execution:
  • –    Implementation Planning (installation / operation / removal)
• Project Monitoring & Control
  • –    Procurement Management: Contract Management of Cabling, CATV, Office Automation, Videoboards & AV
• Project Closure
  • –    Games highlights / learning's prepared for India.

A Venue Overview- MSAC (Melbourne Sports & Aquatic Centre)

What we would like to do now is take a snapshot from one of the major venues – and relate that to the challenges/issues by the VT Team. This venue – the Melbourne Sports & Aquatic Centre had Doug Treasure (our co-presenter) in the position of Venue Technology Manager at this location.

Some brief details on this venue include:

5 Sports were contested – these included:

• Aquatics (Swimming); Aquatics (Diving)
• Aquatics (Synchronized Swimming)
• Squash
• Table Tennis

The Media Centre provided a location within the venue for the media (print, TV & radio) to report on an event within a venue. As this was a high profile venue (for swimming in Australia) there was the opportunity at any one time for 200 media positions.

As a lead up to the main event – and to allow the detection and analyses of processes and procedures prior to the Games – we held 2 test events – these being World Doubles Squash and also Diving. This provided a unique opportunity for the sports area to test – but also for VT to test deployment/usage and technology coverage for certain events. The learning from here was then used in the primary games – one key area to mention was the deployment/coverage of centralized helpdesk staff. We also used these test events to get these support staff to a venue to “experience” an event in operation – to facilitate forthcoming support.

Each day was an 18 hr operation across the entire 11 days competition (onsite 2 weeks prior – 1 week post). It was an intense operation and with volunteer staff. Most operational staff – including volunteers were onsite 2 weeks prior to the Games. With this onsite need – we also needed to manage staff around the clock – starting at 6.00 am – and often concluding at midnight – with staff changeovers/breaks and days-off (major staff rostering was needed).

We operated a local Helpdesk. As a major location our goal was to solve all problems and issues locally without the need to use outside venue assistance. We did achieve this – however we always needed to be aware of this goal.

Venue Technology at MSAC

Previously we outlined a summary of the total Technology deployment for Venue technology across all venues. Just to summarise and show the importance of the MSAC Venue – here are some of their technology stats:

• In total - 1835 Technology Components, this comprising:
  • –   604 data, voice & CCTV outlets
  • –   167 PCs, laptops
  • –   210 Radios
  • –   334 Phones
  • –   169 TVs

Also – we had

• CCTV, Videoboards, Scoreboards, broadcast cabling
• Timing/Scoring & Results
• No Wi-fi(at planning stage wi-fi was an infant product – with security issues)

Figure 1 – below shows the Aquatics Swimming area at MSAC. Visually the technology can not be seen – however with touch pad timing, scoreboards, under-water & above cameras, and video boards (shown) are all interconnected.

Figure-1 – A View of the Aquatics Swimming Area at MSAC

Venue Technology Planning/Execution Issues/Challenges:

With a venue the size, profile and scope of MSAC came some of the following challenges. Some of these are complimentary to the Venue Technology list previously outlined – however some are also unique to the size & profile – and operation for this venue.

MSAC was an Operating Venue – by this we mean it provided sporting services like recreational swimming to the general public. This required crucial liaising with internal venue stakeholders and management with this operating venue, prior, pre, during & posts the games. Important was to remember the need to transform this venue to an m2006 look & feel and then more importantly return it to “standard”. To facilitate this – we planned 5 “bump-in stages”. Each stage was the progressive change-over of a portion of the venue to the m2006 Games “look & feel”.

MSAC – being a swimming venue – everyone in Australia – and the world was watching. We needed to ensure all technology was operational during the prime events.

Outside influences/profile. With the venue being a high profile – we had high profile visitors – with high expectations and demands. These included – as mentioned before the Australians wanted to see aquatics from the general public, our Prime Minister John Howard, the US Secretary of State Condolezza Rice, and the British Royals and CFG patron Prince Edward – and his mother Queen Elizabeth II. With them all visiting – we needed to ensure all technology – and the venue was tip top and in working order.

During pre event testing we experienced some radio blackspots, this showed the importance and criticality of pre testing. We realized the importance that the test events (Squash/Diving) played in us learning prior to the games.

We had a venue with lengthy hours of coverage – in summary 18 hrs, 11 days, 6.00 am – midnight. We had to manage how this was staffed with local suppliers, full-time staff & also the reliance on volunteers. This included reporting lines, communication, escalation and performance monitoring – we even had to “sack' volunteer staff for not doing their job.

An upcoming event. The location where MSAC was also had scheduled post Games it's annual Grand Prix. We needed to plan our post technology removal around this need to operate a public event like the Grand Prix – with restricted access.

Staffing – with both permanent & volunteers we had some whom loved to work the sporting environment – and we also had others who wanted to watch. This was also highlighted by the fact we had such a small helpdesk call volume – we needed to ensure the staff on roster were busy/engaged and motivated to continue.

Doug commenced “part-way” through the planning process. With a large scale venue like this he was not involved in the early planning process – the up skill and knowledge of the environment may have taken some time. This was a great opportunity and challenge for Doug - and provided a unique opportunity to show his experience.

The overall Technology Strategy for the Commonwealth Games was already developed. This included no WIFI capability (however was continually asked for this), and it had to be done a particular way. At the time of developing this strategy – wi-fi was not a “secure” solution.

One of the major frustrations was that a member of the Venue Technology Program Area was the first & last to the venue. So we set it all up, were there during the operation – and then responsible with all other staff gone to remove the technology. Post the last day of the Games – who from the other Program Areas cared, and were involved with the cleanup.

During the Games and providing a level of service and support to correct problems in restricted access zones was a major issue. With the accreditation provided to our onsite suppliers – this did not allow access to key areas for support. We had to organize special passes to permit this access.

Staff & contractors also had a strong reliance during the planning phases on email & internet technology. Pre, & during the games – this was restricted. This “forced” an improved level of communication with all staff – needing people to meet each other to action issues – and to better understand these.

The admin/paperwork volume was extensive. Although at the time it was considered excessive – the reward and results that this detail involved avoided numerous security & tracking/costing issues later in the close out of the project.

Standard Project Management Tools/Techniques Deployed:

In order to ensure that PM processes were effectively actioned – chosen tools & techniques were used. These included:

• Continual Stakeholder & Procurement Management;
• Strict & Accurate Detailed Planning was followed. It has always been documented and from proven experience that the planning phase either makes or breaks a project.
  • –    Attention to detail and forward planning (crucial deadlines with staged implementation –minimized rework – do it once was the theme).
• Solid People Management (suppliers/contractors/volunteers/senior management);
• Effective Communication Management (suppliers/contractors/venue staff/ m2006 staff – formal & informal). This was crucial with a vast number of different suppliers, and internal & external stakeholders –all with differing priorities & issues;
• Strong Change Control promotion and execution (want/want/want – now) – with any project – managing any change is crucial to success;
• Use of personally known PM tools & techniques was crucial e.g. MS Project for supplier resource & inventory planning, Adobe Illustrator for layout designing – experience in usage facilitated the better adoptions of these products in a project of this size;
• Usage of processes/tools from other Games e.g. centralized inventory system from Sydney 2000 Olympics. The Intellectual property from one Games transfers to another. Although Sydney was not a Commonwealth Games – the opportunity and experience from staff on the team facilitated and promoted its usage.

What PM lessons were learnt by the Experience?

From role to role it is always important to take the learning from these experiences and build on these in future roles. What was learnt and reinforced in this role at MSAC included..

• A re-enforcement of:
  • –    Plan/Plan and more Planning (you make it work here!!)
  • –    A deeper understanding of the criticality that Stakeholder/People & Communication Management play with a fixed deadline/high profile project.
  • –    Extensive planning & knowledge so you can act quickly when needed. Deadlines could not be moved.
• Enjoyment - I really enjoyed the experience/opportunity…this enjoyment assisted in achieving the result was both at a professional & personal level.
• If Doug Treasure was to do a similar PM event again – what would we take from this experience. In summary – plan/communicate & act (basic project management fundamentals), and would have also liked to have been involved earlier in the planning process. Often difficult & challenging being brought in part way through the planning stages of a project.

What Other Commonwealth Games VT Staff have said of the PM Activities/Processes?

What we did think useful was to question other staff on what areas they felt went well – but to also see what areas could have been improved. To facilitate this process – we utilized some Project Management survey software available from the US. In summary – the results included:

• The Good:
  • –    All deliverables were received and verified by the appropriate stakeholders.
  • –    The project outcome was successfully achieved.
  • –    All project close-out activities were completed in a timely manner.
  • –    Issues were identified and effectively resolved along the way.
  • –    The project team worked well together.
• And those we needed to Improve:
  • –    Project assumptions were not surfaced and tested.
  • –    The project plan needed to include an appropriate change control process.
  • –    Lessons learned were not captured and shared with others in the organization.
  • –    Project constraints were not clear to all stakeholders.

So did we achieve our initial objectives?

This question is best answered by analyzing some support stats from the games – primarily these being from the local & central helpdesk.

Overall – the central helpdesk received:

• –    5,722 Jobs Logged during Games Time (20 Feb – 27 Mar 2006)
• –    5,721 Jobs Closed by end of Games Time
• –    90% Jobs closed on the day raised

And at MSAC in total was 321 Calls, and the other interesting stat here was that during the actual Games – logged calls was 30, yes 30 – with the max one day being 5 in one day.

Overall - No Venue Technology Outage occurred during the Games.

With stats and performance like that – we did achieve our goals.

And how did we do that – by applying the tools/techniques & PM experiences learnt from the PMBOK – but also from our numerous and varied IT PM careers.