Olympic and Paralympic Games 2012: Legacy - Culture, Media and Sport Committee Contents

Written evidence submitted by pmpgenesis


  1.1  pmpgenesis is a leading international management consultancy working with clients around the world to achieve sustained high performance in business, sport, major events, culture and leisure. pmplegacy is the major events division within the company.

1.2  pmplegacy welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the Culture Media and Sport Select Committee's inquiry in to preparations for securing a legacy from the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games and is well placed to add value to this debate.


  2.1  pmplegacy has been active in the major events arena for 19 years, helping clients bid, win, plan and deliver major sporting events. As the name suggests, legacy planning and implementation are integral to all of the services we offer and our expertise has been used to good effect by a wide range of organisations since 1991. For example:

    — International Olympic Committee (IOC)—Peter Mann, the founder director of pmplegacy is an advisor to the IOC on legacy planning.

    — LOCOG, ODA and LDA—various legacy assignments have been carried out with respect to the Olympic Park and specific venues.

    — National Audit Office—a review of the lessons learnt from previous Olympic Games.

    — Madrid 2016—bid and legacy consultants—creation of the Legacy Commission and the "Action Not Words" Madrid Legacy Plan.

    — England 2018—bid consultants working with the bid team on the candidate host city selection and legacy planning.

    — Legacy Lives—founders of this annual international legacy conference that looks at best practice major event case studies and initiatives from around the world—the 2010 event is in London 3-5 March.

    — 2007 Cricket World Cup—bid and legacy consultants to World Cup Barbados—creation of Legacy Barbados and a 20 year Legacy Plan.

    — Delhi 2010—legacy advisors on venues and sports development.

    — 2002 Manchester Commonwealth Games—evaluation of the impact of these Games for Sport England.

  2.2  Further details on our expertise and experience in legacy planning and implementation can be found on the website www.pmplegacy.com


  3.1  The widely accepted definition of legacy in the context of major events is as follows:

3.2  Ensuring that as many long term and sustainable benefits are generated for the host city, region and country, well before, during and long after the event.

  3.3  These benefits normally cover the following areas:

  3.4  Sporting, social and education, economic, environmental and cultural.

  3.5  The IOC would also highlight that direct involvement in the events themselves (Olympic and Paralympic) are also an integral part of the legacy and that "the event experience" should feature as part of the legacy agenda or canvas of opportunity.

  3.6  Involvement includes athletes, spectators, sponsors, volunteers and many other members of the Olympic Family. Benefits created include enjoyment, acting as a catalyst to participate in sport, empowerment and self-esteem (especially for volunteers) emotion and excitement—all contributing to the all important "feel good" factor.

  3.7  Reference is also often made to both hard and soft legacy benefits. For example, ensuring that all permanent event venues have a viable and sustainable role after the event (hard) and empowering communities to engage in the event planning via a wide range of programmes and initiatives such as volunteering (soft).

  3.8  Legacy has, in many ways become an overused word and it is important to link legacy with benefits, impact and sustainability.


  4.1  The importance that the IOC now places on effective legacy planning and implementation can be illustrated in three ways.

    1. Chapter 1 of the Candidature File (bid book) for Candidate Cities is entitled Vision, Legacy And Communication.

    2. Christophe Dubi (now the IOC Head of Sport) said in January 2007 at the Legacy Lives Conference that "Legacy has made it to the very top of the agenda for the IOC. We are looking for operational experience and positive long term benefits. We are proud that legacy is part of our DNA".

    3. At the recent IOC Congress in Copenhagen in October 2009, the second recommendation (2.19) was as follows:

        "The Olympic Movement fully embraces the importance of embedding the key values of environmental protection, development and sustainability within the Olympic ideals. As part of this commitment, all members of the Olympic Family should facilitate the delivery of a lasting sporting, environmental and social legacy ..."

  4.2  It is a widely held view throughout the international Olympic Family, especially National Olympic Committees, International Federations and Organising Committees (OCOGs) that the one thing that convinced IOC Members to vote for London over Paris for the 2012 Games was its commitment to a robust, innovative and sustainable legacy, both nationally and internationally.

  4.3  The timing of the DCMS inquiry is therefore both timely and appropriate and we are pleased to contribute our views as part of the Committee's on-going scrutiny of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

  4.4  We would be pleased to elaborate upon this contribution and give evidence to the Select Committee and indeed, to work with DCMS officials on the development and delivery of our proposals.


  5.1  Major events can and should be the catalyst for new activity, opportunity and for the creation of sustainable benefits that would have not been created without the event at or would have happened much more slowly.

5.2  The acid test is additionality or, as the IOC refers to it, incremental benefits ie whether these benefits are really new or just the result of displacement.

  5.3  There is a myriad of "legacy related" activity throughout London and the UK that would not have happened without London 2012. Some of this is set out in the GOE's 2008 report—Before, during and after; making the most of the London 2012 Games.

  5.4  The Select Committee's challenge is to identify the activity that really is new and also to evaluate whether every one of these initiatives and programmes could have been done or could now be done in a more effective way so as to maximise the long term benefits.

  5.5  There is a consensus of opinion throughout the UK and with many would-be 2012 legacy stakeholders (especially in local government) that the respective organisations involved (DCMS/GOE, LOCOG, Nations & Regions, LGA, LDA et al) have thus far, failed to live up to the promises made in Singapore and the expectations generated from the bid publicity and momentum.

  5.6  This is perhaps unfair and has more to do with the need for more effective communication and coordination that it does the actual activity on the ground.

  5.7  Getting the right message across should be a top priority going forward as should a much more coordinated approach to what is being done and by whom.

  5.8  Duplication of effort, budgets and scarce resources is obviously inexcusable in the current economic climate as is missing opportunities to really make a difference using the momentum and catalytic effect of 2012.


  6.1  The following challenges and recommendations correspond to the specific legacy areas being studied by the Select Committee and to additional priorities that we have identified through our day to day work in major event legacy planning.

Challenge 1: Communicate more effectively and secure "buy-in"

6.2  A considerable proportion of the very good work being done by Nations and Regions (N&R) and the GOE through its Legacy Action Plan (LAP) is not being communicated well enough (top down and bottom up) to the respective stakeholders. There is a strong perception around the country, especially within local government that "2012 is not helping us" and that legacy does not appear to be a high enough priority for Government.


6.3  Review again the examples of discrete legacy organisations such as Vancouver's 2010 Legacies Now that operates very effectively across all areas of the legacy agenda (sport, social, education, economic, environmental and cultural) throughout British Columbia.

6.4  Review the overall structure and reporting mechanisms currently in place for N & R and also consider the following new initiatives with respect to its scope of work and remit:

  6.5  Commission a PR and Communications Agency to review just how GOE and N & R publicises the work being done and to make suggestions on how the overall communication could be improved—at all levels of engagement. Ask them to review the N & R name and come up with a much more dynamic and appealing brand with legacy in its title and with a clear strap line that embraces the "benefits across the UK" messaging.

  6.6  Bring together all the various legacy plans being worked on by N & R and related organisations such as LegacyNow London (Gains beyond the Games) into one overarching National Legacy Plan (NLP) that highlights programmes, targets, progress and key performance indicators in a more holistic way than the five promises set out in the GOE's LAP.

  6.7  Distribute this NLP to all relevant stakeholders to help ensure increased ownership and buy-in to the processes being developed and to improve the public's perception of what long term legacy benefits are actually being created.

  6.8  Integrate the relevant work being done in the UK by the International Inspiration Programme (IIP) into the above NLP in order to demonstrate the holistic approach being taken across the legacy agenda.

  6.9  Commission research in to best practice legacy initiatives and programmes from around the world in order to help identify where the gaps are in the current NLP and inform ways in which these gaps can be filled in order to create more impact, a more positive public perception and greater long term benefits.

  6.10  Launch a new NLP in mid 2011 that also pays due consideration to ensuring that as many people as possible throughout the country benefit from the "event experience" legacy (see reference above).

  6.11  This will be linked (in liaison with LOCOG) with ticketing policy for spectators; the overall volunteer programme; engagement with IOC and 2012 sponsors and no doubt many other stakeholder groups, including London and local authorities around the country planning fan fests, city dressing, links with the Cultural Olympiad and other related initiatives. Set targets for how many people in the UK can be directly involved in 2012 and aim to inspire millions via this "feel good factor".

Challenge 2: Deliver the dream nationally

  6.12  Few local authorities in the UK are going to benefit from any long term sporting legacies from 2012. Despite all the work of both the N & R and the Local Government Association (LGA) there is still the view, especially outside London and the adjacent counties, that there will not be ANY hard or soft sporting legacy benefits in place by the middle of this decade.


6.13  We recommend that careful note is taken of the draft document that has been produced by Kent County Council and ISPAL (Institute for Sport Parks and Leisure) entitled London 2012 Games—Sports Legacy Agenda for Local Government. It builds upon much of the good practice and lessons learnt from 2012 Beacon Authorities.

6.14  The draft has gained the support of the CCPR and is currently being reviewed by other key stakeholders such as the Youth Sports Trust, British Olympic Association and the English Federation of Disability Sport.

  6.15  It offers an agenda for action via 26 initiatives that are applicable to every local authority in the UK and also sets out those initiatives where support may be required from other organisations to enable local government to deliver.

  6.16  It is important that this draft document is given the support its content warrants and the final version could form an integral and important part of the recommended NLP referenced above.

  6.17  With respect to all potential the myriad of contributors and stakeholder in the world of sports development and participation, there is a need for clear and unequivocal leadership, support and promotion of a sports legacy for local government. Inclusion of the final version of this document in the NLP could be the way to achieve this.

  6.18  The document is being presented and debated at the forthcoming International Legacy Lives conference in London 3-5 March, attended by over 200 senior delegates from the major events sector worldwide.

Challenge 3: Engage our youth for real innovation in legacy

  6.19  One of the main reasons behind London's successful bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games lay in the focus on leaving a lasting legacy for the youth of the world. One of the biggest challenges and opportunities is to ensure as many young people as possible engage with the 2012 Games in order to benefit from the many long term legacies being created. It can be argued that this challenge is being addressed by the 5th promise in the GOE's LAP—to inspire a new generation of young people.


6.20  To achieve a successful legacy for youth requires engaging today's young people in designing the legacy fro the future.

6.21  Two countries are leading the way in the engagement of young people through major sporting events.

    — Singapore via the 2010 Youth Olympic Games.

    — Sochi via the 2014 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games.

  6.22  Both are achieving this engagement through the use of new and innovative media platforms to generate communication and dialogue between young people in the respective countries and around the world. The Select committee can learn from thee examples and help to ensure that similar opportunities are created for young people throughout the UK.

  6.23  Both these case studies are being presented at the forthcoming Legacy Lives conference in London on 4 March.

  6.24  Some excellent work has been done with children throughout British Columbia by 2010 legacies Now in Vancouver, working on the principle that it should be the youngsters themselves who define and develop their own legacy.

  6.25  How might this be done? New and exciting technology enables fresh thinking and the input of ideas. For youth to help create a future legacy they must live in the future. We suggest scenario thinking provides a perfect vehicle to achieve real innovation and engage the nation's youth.

  6.26  Working with groups of young people, celebrities and experts in forums throughout the UK a number of scenarios for the future, post 2012 would be developed. Potential strategies would emerge to achieve a vision of lasting legacy across a number of different and divergent scenarios, refreshing the official strategies largely built on history and experience.

  6.27  Through using techniques like co-creation, these strategies would be designed by young people for young people. This would inspire fresh, innovative thinking building a reputation for London and the UK as leaders in legacy rather than followers. The outcome would be a small number of significant strategic initiatives that would be owned by the nation and supported by the commitment of many stakeholders throughout the UK.

  6.28  We have direct experience of the development and use of scenarios for economic and social planning and in the use of co-creation to product new products and services for a number of our clients, with excellent results.

Challenge 4: London Olympic Park—creating a lasting legacy

  6.29  The planning and management of the Olympic Park after 2012 must learn from the mistakes made in both Athens and Sydney. The former had no plans in place for sustainable use post the event and Sydney left their thinking far too late before a realistic master plan emerged.


6.30  Of all the legacy challenges being looked at by the Select Committee, this one should be the most straightforward to achieve. This statement however assumes adherence to the following two best practice principles:

    1. The only permanent venues within the Park will be those that can demonstrate a sustainable future post 2012. In this instance, sustainability refers to professional management, full programmes of use with high occupancy throughout the year and long term community involvement for many years to come. Regional and national significance would be an added bonus.

    2. Robust and most importantly, realistic business plans must be produced for each venue. These plans should demonstrate sustainability and in particular, a clear and long term commitment for the anticipated annual revenue subsidy to be met by a responsible authority. The plans should demonstrate effective market testing in terms of the operational management of the facility with equal opportunity being given to all three sectors—public, third and private.

  6.31  The creation of the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC) is to be applauded—providing it is given a clear and unequivocal remit and budget to adhere to the above best practices and that it is free to work (with authority and the backing of central government) in conjunction with related stakeholders such the Host Boroughs, the ODA, LDA and Lee Valley Regional Park Authority.

  6.32  Achieving a successful and sustainable hard legacy for venues and facilities is a prerequisite of effective legacy planning and should be "a given". Let there be no more mention or incidence of the "white elephant" syndrome so prevalent in Athens post 2004.

  6.33  The Select Committee may wish to put a series of "checks and balances" in place to ensure the Olympic Park is a successful addition to London's landscape and we would be pleased to advise on what these could look like.

Challenge 5: New metrics for success

  6.34  Measuring the success of delivering a lasting legacy is essential if the country is to harness all of the sporting, economic and social benefits to accrue from bidding for and staging the 2012 Games. Empirical evidence will be the "seed-corn" for the major events industry in the UK and help ensure that future bidding is strategic and done or the right reasons.


6.35  The requirement to measure and evaluate the impact of an Olympic and Paralympic Games is well established via the IOC's OGI (Olympic Games Impact) programme.

6.36  We know that OGI data for 2012 is being coordinated by the Economic and Social Research Council and managed on a daily basis by the Economic and Social Data Service which is collaboration between Manchester and Essex Universities.

  6.37  We are obviously also aware of the DCMS's meta evaluation research project. This gives an accurate and up to date description of the current 2012 legacy initiatives and legacy governance arrangements, in particular the promises set out in the LAP.

  6.38  We believe however that there is a strong rationale for increasing the five legacy promises in the LAP and that the additional promises or commitments should feature in the recommended National Legacy Plan and include the following benefits, to also be measured and evaluated in a robust way:

    — Demonstrable evidence of new sporting legacy initiatives being undertaken by every local authority within the UK (link this to the Sports Legacy Agenda referenced above).

    — Recognising and acting upon the need to build capacity in the workforce to help ensure enhanced and more professional management of sports, leisure, lifestyle, school and community facilities.

    — Recognising and acting upon the urgent need throughout the UK for major investment in to its sporting infrastructure.

  6.39  Achieving sustainable venues within the Olympic Park alone is not an ambitious enough legacy commitment or objective. Plans should be prepared to engage with local authorities (as the major providers of sport and active leisure facilities) to review and prioritise the investment in locally based facilities, especially those that serve disenfranchised communities with high proportions of young people.

  6.40  Use the very strong catalytic effect of 2012 to create a new national strategy for facility enhancement, linked to the Building for Schools (BSF) programmes and the opportunity to channel lottery funding in to new and enhanced amenities post 2012.

  6.41  This new strategic facility plan would be informed and populated by regional plans prepared by the relevant agencies and then coordinated through DCMS.

  6.42  Major impact on the workforce capacity would be achieved by demonstrating clear links with both the National Skills Academy (part of Skills Active) and with the forthcoming new Chartered Institute of Sport (CIS).

  6.43  The CIS is both bringing together the two current professional institutes ISPAL and ISRM and embracing wider representation from leading employers. Its application for charted status to the Privy Council is being sponsored by DCMS and therefore a strong link is already in place to help drive the need for increased capacity and professionalism in the sector.

  6.44  The above recommendations are not made lightly, fully cognisant as we are of the current economic climate and major constraints upon the public purse.

Challenge 6: Increasing grass roots participation in sport and achieving synergy

  6.45  It is foolhardy and naive to expect significant increases in participation by young people and all age groups if we do not have the necessary high quality facilities in which to carry out these sporting activities, nor the requisite management or sports development skills to optimise their contribution. The above strategic planning will begin to address this shortfall, but it is not enough.


6.46  The time is now right to bring together, in one room, all the leading sporting legacy proponents from around the country to explore the examples of what is being done well to increase participation and to help ensure synergistic benefits prevail.

6.47  For example, are the lessons learnt and examples of good practice generated by Boris Johnson's appointment of Kate Hoey MP as his Sports Commissioner, being adopted throughout the UK? They may well be as relevant in Hartlepool as they are in Hackney.

  6.48  The Select Committee can orchestrate this forum of best practice and demonstrate leadership and a response to a central theme of our evidence—the need for greater coordination and much better communication with ALL stakeholders. We would be pleased to offer our facilitation experience to help this forum work well.

  6.49  Communication, coordination and the opportunity to create synergistic benefits are particularly true in the case of creating a legacy of increased sports participation from 2012. This is by far, the biggest challenge and as we know, there is no hard evidence that previous Olympics and Paralympics have delivered a sustainable increase post the event.

  6.50  We should be identifying targeting the current non-participants in all age groups through a nationwide campaign. We should be exploring ways as to how these groups can be engaged and to truly be a part of 2012. If the inactive and disenfranchised can share in the event experience (remember the IOC's mantra set out in paragraph 3.5 above, on just how powerful a tool this can be) then we can go some small way to address this challenge.


  7.1  Major events such as 2012 are not panaceas that can address all of the current economic and social challenges in this country. The 2012 Olympic Games represents one of the biggest and best catalysts for change that we currently have in our society.

7.2  We all have a clear responsibility to ensure we make the most of what 2012 can deliver in terms of real and lasting legacy benefits. The world is watching and waiting to see just how well we will deliver on the promises made in Singapore in 2005.

  7.3  The Select Committee, can through this review, raise the bar of expectation, communication, coordination and most important of all, the delivery of these benefits.

January 2010

previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2010
Prepared 12 April 2010