This document presents an overview of a doctoral research project focused on measuring the impact and legacy of mega events like the Olympics or World Cup, with an emphasis on intangible assets. The research question aims to develop a model for evaluating the impacts generated by mega events that takes intangible assets into consideration. The methodology includes a case study applying an intangible capital rating model to assess the impacts of infrastructure investments for the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Rio de Janeiro on the tourism industry. Next steps involve further data collection through interviews and developing an intangibles measurement model, which will be tested and validated following established program evaluation standards.
1. Impact/legacy measurement and evaluation in
mega events projects with focus on intangible
assets
Mauricio Nunes Rodrigues
Supervisor: Marcos Cavalcanti
Co-supervisor: Ahmed Bounfour
The 7th International Doctoral Consortium
on Intellectual Capital Management
2. Content
1. Introduction
2. Research Question
3. Objective
4. Research Methodology
5. FIFA World Cup Tourism case study
6. Next steps - Model development and validation
3. 1. Why?
• There is an increasing number of nations interested in hosting
international mega events
• Despite of
• Why these countries place value on hosting such events (e.g.
Olympic Games, Sports World Championships, Festivals,
Cultural and Political summits)?
the costly bidding process
the costly organizing planning and operation
4. 1. Because of...
• Outcomes related to local economic development
• Benefits of optimism dissemination among the citizens,
increase in external capital flow to host city/country,
tourist attraction and, socioeconomic development
acceleration
(Clark, 2008; Kasimati, 2003; Preuss, 2007)
Copenhagen - October 2nd, 2009
5. 1. Potential economic benefits
Directs
• Capital flow to host city/country
• Infrastructure construction or
upgrade
• Lower transportation costs due
improved networks
• Increase in tourists spending
Indirects
• Advertising effect of the host
city/country as a potential
tourist or business destination
• more local business
opportunities
• Improved local sense of
community and in civic pride
• Improved perceived abroad
image of the host city/country
• Citizen entertainment and
welfare
• Human resources skills
development
• Motivation to a more active life
(Clark, 2008; Kasimati, 2003;
Preuss, 2007; Preuss, 2010;
Zimbalist, 2010)
6. 1. Potential downsides / risks
• Don`t be able to deliver all positive impacts (planned or unplanned)
• Socially unjust displacement and re-distributions
• Poor urban land use
• Underused facilities after the event
• High public debts
• Excessive costs
• Athens 2004 more than US$ 10 bi
• Beijing 2008 more than US$ 40 bi
• London 2012 about US$ 15 bi
(Cashman, 2010; Haußermann & Simons, 2000; Flyvbjerg et al. 2003; Zimbalist, 2010)
7. 1. Potential problems and issues
(Bounfour, 2003; Bruijn & Liijten, 2008; Flyvbjerg et al., 2003; Frick, 2008; Orueta & Fainstein,
2008; Preuss, 2007; Van Marrewijk et al., 2008; Walder & Verma, 2004; Zimbalist, 2010)
8. 1. Costs x Investment - Are it worth it?
• The mega projects seem to have a key role on public policies and
investment (tourism and business destination attractiveness,
business growth, urban regeneration, and infrastructure, image,
environmental and local population quality of life improvements)
(Clark, 2008; OECD, 2010; Orueta & Fainstein, 2008; Preuss, 2007; Zimbalist, 2010)
• Intangible impacts are potentially the most important economic
benefits, by its nature, variety and indirect influence
(Preuss, 2010)
• When hosted well, the mega event project can play a significant
role in city/region local development, growth and competitiveness
(OECD, 2010)
9. 1. Costs x Investment - Are it worth it?
• The benefits do not occur by accident or without an effective
action
Need strategic vision and a proper impact planning and
management (Clark, 2008; IOC, 2009b; OECD, 2010)
• Actual scene of poor performance in terms of public support,
economic and environmental outcomes
• Megaproject Paradox = incongruence between the increasing
number, size and importance of mega projects and it’s poor
performance
Flyvbjerg et al. (2003)
10. 1. Mega events impact evaluation/forecasting
• Point of continuing debate and controversy, due to the high
event expectations (Cashman, 2010)
• Traditionally is performed by benchmarking approach:
– based on past events
– through macro socioeconomic indicators
– Comparison between different places, at different times,
under different circumstances (Preuss, 2007)
Each event is a unique project!
• In a fast changing economic environment, there not seems to
be the best option to planning positive future impacts and
legacies
11. • Do not provide relevant information for effective decision-
making, neither for the strategic management of the mega
event projects positive impacts, legacies and benefits
• The value of nations, regions, organizations is directly related to
their intangible capitals and depends on systems to visualize,
cultivate and capitalize on value-creation interactions
(Edvinsson, 2003; Edvinsson & Bounfour, 2004)
• There are a lack of reliable models and performance indicators
to assess the intangible aspects in this context
1. Mega events impact evaluation/forecasting
12. 2. Research question
How could we measure and evaluate the impacts
generated for and by mega event projects, taking into
account the intangible assets and resources, with a
focus on future value creation (legacies)?
13. 3. Objective
To develop a diagnostic model for measurement and
evaluation of the mega event projects impacts and
legacies, taking into account the intangible assets and
resources
15. 5. The Concept testing phase
• A case study of the traditional intangible structures measurement
• Objective
• To test an adaptation of the Intangible Capital Rating
(CRIE/BNDES) model, proposed by Deutscher (2007, 2008) and
Cavalcanti (2007) on the assessment and evaluation of the
impacts of the Brazilian governmental 2014 FIFA World Cup
interventions in the Tourism industry at Rio de Janeiro region,
Brazil
• Focus
• Identification of the assets and resources which the
organizations should have to implement their future vision
16. 5. Case study – The CRIE/COPA-Turismo Model
• The model implementation are following the methodological
proposition of Deutscher (2007) with 3 additional preliminary
phases
1. Documental analysis
2. Stakeholder mapping matrix
3. Preliminary interviews
4. Adaptation of the operational model
5. Validation of the operational model (indicators and questions)
6. Second round of interviews
7. Data gathering evaluation
8. CI Report elaboration
17. 5. Case study – The CRIE/COPA-Turismo Model
The Operational Model consist of
• 5 Capitals
• 15 Assets and competencies
• 41 Indicators and questions
21. 6. Case study – Next steps
• Second round of interviews with regard of to gathering
information about the stakeholders perceptions on the
efficiency, effectiveness and impacts related to the
intervention action plan
– with the project managers and decision-makers (internal
stakeholders)
– With the hotel, restaurant, sectors business associations
(external - tourist industry stakeholders)
• The data collection and evaluation procedures will consist of
the narratives, notes, reports, stories, insights and
impressions which will be coded and associated with
concepts developed from the literature review
22. 7. Intangibles model development and validation
• Based on the data and findings collected from the literature
review (chapter 2) and the case study (Chapter 3)
• Concerned with capturing and expressing the performance of
the mega event project in achieving its goals, according to a
specific strategic vision
• To avoid reducing the external validity we chose apply the
concepts of the Design Thinking on the development phase
(Lockwood, 2010)
• The operational version of the diagnostic model will be tested
following the Standards for Educational and Psychological
Testing for testing in program evaluation and public policy
(AERA, 1999)
The mega events performance evaluation and forecasting planning is a point of continuing debate and controversy, due to the high event expectations.
By tradition, the spotlight of the cost-benefit assessment has been targeted to identify the past experiences, by benchmarking approach, and to measure the socioeconomic outcomes of these events, by macro-economic indicators.
But, as each event is a unique project, the comparison between different places, at different times, under different circumstances, in a fast changing economic environment, there not seems to be the best option to planning positive impacts and legacies for the future.
In addition, the traditional approaches do not provide relevant information for effective decision-making, neither for the strategic management of positive impacts.
As in the actual knowledge economy, the value of nations, regions and organizations is directly related to their intangible capitals and depends on systems to visualize, cultivate and capitalize on value-creation interactions,
We perceive a lack of reliable models and performance indicators to assess the intangible aspects in this context.
All these factors leed us to develop the following research question:
How could we measure and evaluate the impacts generated for and by mega event projects, taking into account the intangible assets and resources, with a focus on future value creation (legacies)?
So, our objective is to develop a diagnostic model for measurement and evaluation of the mega event projects impacts and legacies, taking into account the intangible assets and resources
To persecute the general aim, we decide on conduct the research in four main phases: Concept definition, concept testing, model development and model validation.
The concept definition phase will be composed by a critical literature review.
The Concept Testing phase will be composed by an case study of the traditional intangible structures measurement on the FIFA World Cup Tourism intervention project on the Rio de Janeiro city.
In the development phase our concern will be to identify what would be the managerially relevant intangible assets, the interdependencies between then, the success factors generated for and by the mega event projects, the variables that should be collected and taking into account, and to identify the activities related to utilizing, improving and/or capitalizing these assets.
Finally, the model validation phase will be conducted by a pilot-study with the objective of to test the proposed operational version of the diagnostic model.
To test some concepts regarding the potential applicability of the traditional intangibles structures on the assessment of mega event projects performance we decided to run a case study.
The objective of the present case study is to test an adaptation of the Intangible Capital Rating (CRIE/BNDES) model, proposed by Deutscher (2007, 2008) and Cavalcanti (2007) on the assessment and evaluation of the impacts of the Brazilian governmental interventions in the Tourism industry at Rio de Janeiro region, Brazil to host the 2014 FIFA World Cup.
Among the different options of models available on the literature, we chose the CRIE/BNDES model due its focus on the identification of the assets and resources which the organizations should have to implement their future vision.
We named this implementation of CRIE/COPA-Turismo
The model implementation are following the methodological proposition of Deutscher (2007) with 3 additional preliminary phases
The modeling phase was preceded by a documental analysis and preliminary interviews with the project decision-makers. Such analysis and preliminary interviews had the goal of identify the strategic vision for the event and to collect information regarding the planning and management of impacts and legacies.
As the work is already in progress, we present in the current paper the preliminary findings based on stages one (documental analysis) to four (operational model development) and we intend to collect feedbacks to the validation of the conceptual model and indicators by the intangible assessment experts group (stage five).
We performed the adaptation of the operational model and the CRIE/COPA-Turimo is characterized by 5 Capitals, 15 Assets and 41 Indicators.
Indicators and questions
The mega event intangibles impacts model will be developed with basis on the data and findings collected from the literature review (chapter 2) and the exploratory case study (Chapter 3) and will be concerned with capturing and expressing the performance of the mega event project in achieving its goals, according to a specific strategic vision.
To avoid reducing the external validity, because of its limited applicability, we will apply the concepts of the Design Thinking on the diagnostic model development phase, performed with a sample of individuals with some decision-making level in the 2016 Summer Olympic Games.
The operational version of the diagnostic model will be tested following the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA, 1999) for testing in program evaluation and public policy.