Advertisement

Project Management in 2016 Olympic Games

  • Maria José SousaEmail author
  • Fabiano Lima
  • Jair Martins
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 444)

Abstract

The main goal of this paper is to analyses “Which project management model best fit a mega event like the 2016 Olympic Games?” The organizations which participate in the Olympic Games project management in Rio are under the pressure of external scenarios of uncertainty and also several constraints to manage all the Olympic resources and need to deal with limitations of costs and time—the model adopted can help to achieve a major success of the event. According to studies made on the past, Olympics Project Managers face various challenges and the models adopted can help to achieve the ambitious goals of the event. The main finding of this research is that project management maturity models benefits management approaches and reinforce the definition and the use of strategic plans enhancing the control techniques of project management and also that a sustainability dimension is necessary to orchestrate the successful completion of a project with the amplitude of Olympic Games.

Keywords

Project management Project management models Sustainability Maturity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ibbs, C. W., Kwak, Y. H.: Assessing project management maturity. Project Management Journal, 31, 1, 32-43 (2000).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baccarini, D.: The logical framework method for defining project success. Project Management Journal, 30, 4, 25-32 (1999).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yu, A.G., Fleett, P.D., Bowers, J.A.: Developing a value-centered proposal for assessing project success. International Journal of Project Management, 23, 428-436 (2005).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Griethuysen, P. (Van) and Hug, P.-A.: Projet Oggi Olympic Games Global Impact. Fiches Techniques, Lausanne: Aists, September 2001Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Turner, J.R. & Müller, R.: The Project Manager´s Leadership Style as a Success Factor on Projects: Literature Review. Project Management journal, 36, 1, 46-61 (2005).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Belassi, W., Tukel, O.: A new framework for determining critical success/failure factors in project. International Journal of Project Management, 14, 3, 141-151(1996).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hillson, D.: Effective Opportunity Management for Projects. New York: Marcel Decker (2003).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kwak, Y. H., Ibbs, C. W.: Project management process maturity model. Journal of Management in Engineering, 18, 3, 150-155 (2002).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Judgev, K., Müller, R.: A Retrospective Look at our Evolving Understanding of Project Success. Project Management Journal, 36, 4, 19-31 (2005).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cooke-Davies, T.: The “real” success factors on projects. International Journal of Project Management, 20, 185-190 (2002).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lim, C. S., Mohamed, M. Z.: Criteria of project success: An explanatory re-examination. International Journal of Project Management, 17, 4, 243-248 (1999).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dinsmore, P.C.: Winning in Business with Enterprise Project Management. New York: Amacom (1999).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wateridge, J.: IT projects: A basis for success. International Journal of Project Management, 13, 3, 169-172 (1995).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Freeman, M., Beale, P.: Measuring Project Success. Project Management Journal, 23, 1, 817 (1992).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shenhar, A. J., Levy, O., Dvir, D.: Mapping the dimensions of project success. Project Management Journal, 28, 2, 5-13 (1997).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hastak M, Shaked A.: ICRAM-1: Model for international construction risk assessment. Journal of Management Engineering 16(1): 59-69 (2000).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Emery, P.: Past, present, future major sport event management practice: The practitioner perspective. Sport management review, 13(2), pp.158-70 (2010).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roper, T., The Sydney Olympics And Their Impact On Development, Cities’ Experiences: The Impact Of Major Events On The Development Of Large Cities, World Association Of Major Metropolises, Metropolis: 95-98 (2002).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jennings, W.: Mega-Events and Risk Colonisation Risk Management and the Olympics (2012).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Flyvbjerg, B. & Stewart, A.: Olympic Proportions: Cost and Cost Overrun at the Olympics 1960-2012. (2012) [Online] Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2238053 [Accessed 11 November 2015]
  21. 21.
    Holden, M., MacKenzie, J. & Van Wynsberghe, R.: Vancouver’s promise of the world’s first sustainable Olympic Games. Environment and planning. Corporate Government & policy, 26(5), p.882 (2008).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cuellar, M.: Assessing Project Success: Moving Beyond the Triple Constraint. International Research Workshop on IT Project Management 2010. Paper 13 (2010).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jennings, W.: Why costs overrun: risk, optimism and uncertainty in budgeting for the London 2012 Olympic Games. Construction Management and Economics, 30(6), pp.455-62 (2012).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hadjichristodoulou, C. et al.: Mass gathering preparedness: the experience of the Athens 2004 Olympic and Para-Olympic Games. Journal of environmental health, 67(9), pp.52-57 (2005).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leopkey, B. & Parent, M.: Risk management issues in large-scale sporting events: A stakeholder perspective. European Sport Management Quarterly, 9(2), pp.187-208 (2009).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pitsis, T.S., Clegg, S.R., Marosszeky, M. & Rura-Polley, T.: Constructing the Olympic dream: a future perfect strategy of project management. Organization Science, 14(5), pp.574-90 (2003).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liu, Y.W., Zhao, G.F. & Wang, S.Q.: Many hands, much politics, multiple risks–the case of the 2008 Beijing Olympics Stadium. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 69(s1), pp.S85-98 (2010).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kissoudi, P.: The Athens Olympics: optimistic legacies–post-Olympic assets and the struggle for their realization. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 25(14): 1972-90 (2008).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stamatakis, H., Gargalianos, D., Afthinos, Y. & Nassis, P.: Venue contingency planning for the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. Facilities, 21(5/6), pp.115-25 (2003).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Turner, R.: Handbook of Project-Based Management. London: McGraw Hill (2009).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Anderson, E. S., Jessen, S. A.: Project maturity in organisations. International Journal of Project Management, 21, 457-461 (2003).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kerzner, H.R. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. London: John Wiley & Sons (2013).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Koskela, L. & Ballard, G. Should project management be based on theories of economics or production? Building Research & Information, 34(2), pp.154-63 (2006).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria José Sousa
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Fabiano Lima
    • 3
  • Jair Martins
    • 4
  1. 1.CIEOUniversidade do AlgarveFaroPortugal
  2. 2.Universidade EuropeiaLisboaPortugal
  3. 3.Instituto Universitário de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  4. 4.Universidade do Sul de Santa CatarinaTubarãoBrazil

Personalised recommendations