Otoole Engineering EventsV01

ENGINEERING
EVENTS
A Comparison of the standard

Project Management
Methodology with the
Management of Events and
Festivals.
by
William John O’Toole
2005
i
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the following people and organizations for their assistance over the five
years:
The staff and teachers of the PM Outreach programme and the Department of Civil
Engineering at University of Sydney, for their inspired assistance in an area that was
completely new to most of them.
Over one and a half thousand event managers who I have trained in event project
management in Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, USA, UAE, Britain, South Africa, and
all the cities and most regional centres of Australia. They have provided valuable feedback to
refine the event project management system
The graduate students of the online Pmoutreach program of four years, who compared event
management and project management as part of their course work.
The members of the online event management group and users of the event project
management system for their feedback.
The Event Management Body of Knowledge executive committee, who have taken an idea
and created an international team to take it forward to the world.
To my family whose support has been unyielding.
Bill O’Toole 2005
© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page ii

CONTENT
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................ii
Glossary of Terms : Definitions and discussion of the terminology used in the thesis...........v
Preface...................................................................................................................................ix
EMBOK: statement of intent............................................................................................. xiii
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
Chapter 1 Overview of Thesis................................................................................................ 4
A model, processes, system or a Body of Knowledge?..................................................... 6
Complexity and Uncertainty ............................................................................................... 8
Phases of event management and the event life cycle.................................................... 12
Intangibility of outcomes................................................................................................... 12
Conclusion........................................................................................................................ 13
Chapter 2 Scope/Integration/feasibility ................................................................................ 14
Event Feasibility ............................................................................................................... 15
Measuring the Product ..................................................................................................... 16
Project Asset Impact ........................................................................................................ 16
Network of Plans .............................................................................................................. 17
Performance Measurement.............................................................................................. 19
Work Breakdown Structure .............................................................................................. 19
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 20
Chapter 3 Stakeholder Management ................................................................................... 21
Stakeholder classification................................................................................................. 22
Sponsorship...................................................................................................................... 23
Sponsor Management ...................................................................................................... 24
Other Stakeholders .......................................................................................................... 26
Stakeholder Management of the Event............................................................................ 31
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 33
Chapter 4 Design Management ........................................................................................... 34
Staging ............................................................................................................................. 35
Wow factor........................................................................................................................ 36
Site /venue location and layout ........................................................................................ 36
Programming and the program ........................................................................................ 37
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 37
Chapter 5 Event Marketing .................................................................................................. 38
Product Quality................................................................................................................. 39
Marketing Process............................................................................................................ 39
Market Segmentation ....................................................................................................... 40
Marketing Mix ................................................................................................................... 40
Promotion ......................................................................................................................... 41
Quality of Management .................................................................................................... 42
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 42
Chapter 6 Financial Management........................................................................................ 43
Revenue ........................................................................................................................... 44
Revenue and Resources.................................................................................................. 46
Sponsorship management ............................................................................................... 47
Cash Flow......................................................................................................................... 47
Cost .................................................................................................................................. 48
Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 48
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 48
Chapter 7 Time Management .............................................................................................. 50
Event Date........................................................................................................................ 52
Deliverables...................................................................................................................... 53
Deadline Management ..................................................................................................... 54
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 56
Chapter 8 Risk Management ............................................................................................... 57
Risk in event literature...................................................................................................... 59
Attendees ......................................................................................................................... 60
Qualitative risk assessment.............................................................................................. 61
© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page iii

Summary .......................................................................................................................... 61
Chapter 9 Communication ................................................................................................... 63
Event manuals.................................................................................................................. 64
Tools................................................................................................................................. 65
External Communication - Promotion .............................................................................. 65
Onsite communications (OSC)......................................................................................... 67
Event Documentation, Filing and Archiving ..................................................................... 67
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 68
Chapter 10 Procurement Management ............................................................................... 69
Site/venue Choice ............................................................................................................ 70
Contract management...................................................................................................... 72
Contract variations ........................................................................................................... 73
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 73
Chapter 11 Human Resources ............................................................................................ 74
Volunteers ........................................................................................................................ 76
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 78
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 80
The Future ........................................................................................................................ 81
Reference List ...................................................................................................................... 82
Bibliography. ........................................................................................................................ 90
Event Articles.................................................................................................................... 90
Event Books ..................................................................................................................... 92
Event Documents ............................................................................................................. 93
Event Manuals.................................................................................................................. 94
Event Textbooks............................................................................................................... 95
Books and Articles: management, models, systems and dynamics ................................ 97
Project Management Textbooks and Articles................................................................... 99
Appendix ............................................................................................................................ 101
© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page iv

Glossary of Terms : Definitions and discussion of the
terminology used in the thesis
The glossary was created by the author of this thesis. All the definitions are placed in the
context of event management to clarify the text of the thesis. Any definitions copied from other
texts are referenced accordingly.
Analysis - studying a subject by breaking it into its component parts, with the aim to identify
the relationships between the parts.
Attendee - any person at the event other than the staff or suppliers. They may be referred to
as spectators, competitors or audience,
Baseline plans - management plans at the beginning of the event management that is
during the initiation phase. Often they are adapted from previous similar events. They provide
the starting point and a measure for all the changes that will occur. An example of this is the
event budget. Although this may be accurate at the time of creation, it will change.
Benchmarks - identifiable points in the management of an event where a high standard is
achieved
Breakeven point - the point at which the expenses of the event are equal to the revenue. It
can be expressed in a parameter of the event such as number of attendees, square meters of
exhibition space sold or sponsorship commitments.
Checklist - the event checklist is a list of mini tasks that need to be completed. Often they are
more correctly described as a 'prompt list' - a way of remembering what needs to be
accomplished. As the checklist is simple, understood by everyone and can be updated quickly
it is always employed throughout the management of the event.
Commitment account - the record of the event costs as they are agreed with the suppliers.
This is different to the cash account as it immediately tells the event manager how much has
been committed and will be spent. It is essential in events, as the invoicing may take longer
than the time to plan the event.
Communication plot - a table showing the various types of communication at an event and
the contact details of the staff and suppliers
Complexity - refers to the number of parts and the number of relationship between the parts.
Note that this is a relative definition rather than an absolute. It will depend on the 'graininess'
of the decomposition of a project. A characteristic of a complex system is that is impossible to
identify the property of the whole system by 'summing the parts'. According to Williams this is
a major limitation in the use of analysis - the decomposition of a project into its parts as a
method of management is fundamental to traditional project management. Gell-Mann has the
following definition of 'crude complexity " the length of the shortest message that describe a
system, at a given level of coarse graining, to someone at a distance, employing language,
knowledge, and understanding that both parties share (and know they share) beforehand"
(Gell-Mann 1994, p. 35). Flake's definition includes complexity as a measure of how
interesting something is (Flake 1998, p. 446). Both these definitions include the familiarity of
the system to the people observing it.
Coordinate - coordinating an event involves working with the suppliers to assist them in
meeting the event objectives. As these objective may change the coordinators role is also to
harmonise these changes and direct the common effort toward the success of the event. It
implies a person equal in rank to the suppliers. The two way communication between the
suppliers - or subcontractors - and the coordinator is fundamental as the coordinator needs
timely relevant information to understand the requirements of the suppliers and to direct the
suppliers in satisfying their needs for the event.
Cost Benefit analysis - the identification of the various costs and benefits of an event. The
event costs are often straightforward. However many events have intangible benefits. Modern
accounting can estimate these benefits in financial terms. An example of an intangible benefit
is 'community feeling'.
Cost Centres - grouping the costs of an event for better cost management. It generally
reflects the functional areas of event management such as operations, publicity and
administration.
Cost Plus contract - an agreement whereby the cost of the event is passed onto the sponsor
or client and the event company is given a margin or a fixed amount above the costs.
© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page v

Highly Coupled System - an aggregation of components, whereby each component is
depended on the state of the others. This system is characterized as a complex array of
interdependencies. For event management this means that an action in one area of the event
will have consequences in other areas not directly related to it. For example, if there is a
change of event program such as, a new performer/artist or speaker, it will have
repercussions on the logistics, finance, risk and marketing.
Critical path - the series of tasks that need to be completed to make sure the event is on
time. If one of these tasks takes longer to complete than what was planned, the result in the
event not meeting its deadline The term is also used for the most important tasks or critical
tasks such as permission for authorities. The crucial tasks is a better way to describe these
tasks.
Deadline - a fixed time for completion. Often used with a degree of latitude in general
business. However in event management it has an exact meaning. Sometime to stress this,
the term fixed deadline is used.
Deliverable - a product or service that is the result (output) of a task or work-package. It can
it proof that the task has been completed and passed on to start the next stage or task. The
venue design/plan is an example of a deliverable as it is a tangible result of site planning and
is used for the set up of the site.
Event Management - the process of planning, organizing, leading and controlling the efforts
of team members and using all other necessary resources to deliver and shut down an event.
This includes the functions of creation, planning, implementation, controlling and evaluating
according to the requirements of the event stakeholders.
Event performing organization - the team who delivers and managers to event. They can
be a specialist professional event company, a temporary event committee of volunteers or a
team brought together to organize the events from within a large company.
Event product - what is on at the event. For large events this may be treated as a number of
products or a product portfolio.
Event Project Life Cycle - a term coined by the author to clarify the difference between the
management of a number of events and festivals – such as that performed by a town or
region – from the actual process of managing an event. The former is best described as event
portfolio management of event program management. Unfortunately the term ‘program’ has a
different meaning in event management to that given it in project management. To confuse
the issue further the term event life cycle is used in the same sense as a product life cycle.
This refers to the life of repeat events such as an annual festival. Perhaps abetter way to
describe the event project is to call it the internal management. Therefore the event project
life cycle is the phases the management of the project goes through to deliver the event and
perform the shutdown of the event.
Feasibility study. The assessment a future event and created in the first stage of event
management, the initiation. It describes the business and or social case for the event and the
necessary success factors. Often the study will compare alternatives for the event, such as
sponsors, or venues and their strengths and weaknesses.
Gantt Chart - a graphic representation of the schedule. It is a list of tasks and uses
horizontal bars to show their duration. Often used in marketing campaigns or with volunteers,
as it is easily and quickly understood.
Gap Analysis - comparing the event plan with best practice in the event industry so as to
identify anything missing from the plan.
GO/NO GO Decision - at certain times in event organizing, a definitive choice must be made
to continue or to stop. An example of the GO/NO GO decision occurs when the event
feasibility study is complete and assessed.
Heinrich's Ratio - ratio of 88 percent of unsafe acts to 10 percent unsafe condition. Related
to Heinrich's theory of injury causation that traces back the causal link "injury, accidents,
unsafe acts and conditions, faults created by environment".
House seats - seats in a venue set reserved for the use of the venue management.
IFEA - International Festival and Events Association.
Incentive contract - an agreement with an inducement that links the contractor to the
success of the event. A 'door deal' for the entertainment is an example. The entertainers are
paid according to the number of people they attract.
Intangible - used in the sense of difficult to directly measure.
ISES - International Special Events Society .
© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page vi

Lead time – the amount of time between the decision to take an action and the completion of
that action by a third party. For example, the lead time for a promotion in a magazine is the
period starting with the PR material being sent to the magazine and finishing when the
material goes to print and distribution. Lead times are important for events as they will
determines when many of the tasks need to be started. They allow the event performing
company to work backwards from the date of the event and create a timeline for the tasks.
Letter of Agreement - is a document that briefly sets out the agreement between two parties.
Look of the Event - designing all the visual aspects of the event so that there is a common
theme.
Lump sum (fixed fee) contract - an agreement where the price of the service or product is
fixed.
Milestone - the date of completion of a significant action or task such as the day the
sponsors join the event or when the venue contract is signed. Milestones are used to plan
and communicate important times in the event's management.
PA - Public Address system. The sound system at an event site. May be used for
announcements, speeches and music.
Payback period - the time for the benefit of the event to meet all the costs involved in the
event. Ticketed events, such as concerts, have the pay back period as zero as the costs are
met by sales of tickets before or at the concert. Sales promotions and exhibitions typically
have covered the cost of the promotion by a number of months after the event. These are
estimated by sales directly traced to the promotion.
PMBOK ™ - registered name of the project management body of knowledge. The
comparison used in this text is from the 2000 version.
Process maps: a graphical representation of a series of actions or tasks that act on inputs to
produce a deliverable. The inputs and deliverables may be products, services or information.
Product life cycle – according to marketing theory it is the phases a repeat event/festival will
go through from growth to maturity and final decline. However it is contentious whether it can
be used for prediction as some events, such as religious festivals, have lasted thousands of
years and others have closed on their opening day.
Project Management - a methodology for organizing projects. Developed in project based
industries such as civil construction engineering, product development, military and
information technology.
Purpose-built venue – a venue that has been designed and construct to accommodate
events. The Olympic Stadiums are an example. Another example is the function room of
hotels and Exhibition halls. Some venue, although not ‘purpose built’ have facilities that can
accommodate events - such as theatres. A purpose-built venue will often require the hirer to
use the venue’s suppliers for the event. Catering and audio visual are common examples.
Any ‘outside’ suppliers may have to pay a substantial extra fee to use the venue.
Ratio Analysis - a method of monitoring the progress of the event management by means of
indicative ratios - such as income to expenditure .
Relational Database - a collection of facts (data) that are linked to each other such that
changing one or more of these facts will automatically change others.
Resource Analysis - the identification of the resources needed for the event and its
management. This may be completed via the work breakdown structure. The promotion of an
event, for example, will require email listings, printer, a knowledgeable person and office
space. Resource analysis is essential for the correct costing of an event.
Resource specification - the description of an event resource. In particular the description
of the goods and services supplied to the event by the contractors. These may be specified
by Function - how the fit into the whole event; Performance - what it will do at the event;
Technical - physical description of the goods or aspects of the service. Good specification is
important in events, as there may be no time to change the goods once they have arrived at
the site.
Rider - extra clauses to an entertainment contact that concern the hospitality required by the
artist and their accompanying personnel. It is often referred to in the contract and is found on
a separate piece of paper or a separate file to the contract file.
Risk Management - the identification, monitoring and controlling of possible problems to the
event. Often risk management will uncover event opportunities. This process needs to be
documented, updated and communicated as the event management progresses.
© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page vii

Risk register - a central list of the risks with an action plan to address them. It may include a
time frame and the person responsible. Due to the dynamic nature of event the register is
often updated.
Schedule - a time based list of tasks.
Scope Creep - the gradual growth in the amount of work needed to manage the event. The
scope can expand with being noticed by the management until it is too late. Increasing the
scope will affect the cost and the time needed to create the event. A large part of managing
the lead up to an event is controlling any changes of scope.
Scope of Work - a description of the work needed for the event to be successful. It includes
all the work involved in organizing the event as well as the work needed at the event itself. It
is sometimes represented by a tree like graph where the work is successively categorized into
finer detail.
Signage - the creation and management of the various signs at an event - such as
directional signs and warning signs.
Site map - a generic term for the floor plan of a venue or the venue map. It is a bird's eye
view of where the event will be staged.
Stakeholder - any one person or organization that has an interest in the event.
Sub contractors - generally the suppliers that are contracted to the event management.
Task - a unit of work needed to create, manage or shutdown the event. When a number of
tasks are grouped together they are called a work-package and given to a specialist company
to carry them out. The sound for an event may be a number of tasks and are grouped
together and sub contracted to a sound supplier company.
Total Quality management - a system of management procedures that are driven by the
requirement to increase the quality of the product.
Triple Bottom Line - measuring the impact of an event using economic, social and
environmental factors.
TRIZ - Theory for Inventive Problem Solving (Russian Acronym) – TRIZ originated from a
study of engineering innovation. It is a comprehensive collection of principles and inductive
laws derived from the features and functions of inventions throughout history(O’Toole et al,
2002).
Turnaround time - the time it takes to make a change in a task and complete that task. As
there are many changes over the event project, establishing the turnaround time for most
suppliers is important. For example the turnaround time for printing a brochure would be the
length of time it takes to print extra copies of the brochure, if they are required.
Uncertainty - can be defined as a lack of certainty and related to the ability to predict. Task
uncertainty, which is central to project uncertainty, can be defined as the difference between
the amount of information required to perform the task and the amount of information already
possessed by the organization (Tatikonda 2000).
Virtual team - an event team that is separated geographically and linked electronically.
Common for events that are organized across time zones.
Web enabling - using the web as a essential tool to assist in event management.
Webcast - 'broadcasting' the event over the world wide web.
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) - all the work needed to create, run and shutdown the
event categorized in a hierarchy. The work breakdown structure is used to estimate costs and
resources. As well it is used for risk analysis, assigning responsibilities and creating a folder
system for the management of the event.
Zero based budgeting – the practice of ‘starting with nothing’ in regard to event finance. It is
creating a budget without any allocated funds. As some special events depend on ticket
sales, zero based budgeting is quite common. .
© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page viii

Preface
When reviewing the progression of a profession through history, such as medicine,

engineering, project management or accounting, there seems a set pathway that is followed.
The new methodology arises in response to changing times and assists in changing those
times. Initially it is not recognized as a profession or a body of knowledge separate from that
which already exists.
It is the contention of this thesis that the time has come for event management to have such
recognition.
Since 1996, when the first University courses started in event management in Australia, there
are now over 200 courses that have event management as a subject. The recent Event
Educators Forum in Sydney NSW in September 2004 , included representatives of nine
universities in the attendee list. This phenomenal growth is not restricted to Australia. In the
European Union, USA, Middle East and Asia courses and training programs flourish. In 2004 I
produced and facilitated event management workshops in Malaysia, United Arab Emirates,
Saudi Arabia, USA and South Africa, as well as all major cities in Australia. My post graduate
students in Australia come from China, Taiwan, Fiji and Canada. Compared to the single
course in 1996 with 30 students, this is an astounding growth. The two textbooks I co-
authored are now translated into three languages and have adapted versions in other
countries.
At the same time, the growth in the importance of events to a country, region and city has
been recognized by governments around the world. The economic impact of events in many
countries is measured in billions of dollars.
I began the idea of this thesis in 1999. I created a website to assist in the collection of data
and in promoting discussion. On the first page of the website I wrote:
“After 20 years of creating and organizing events, I found there is a definite system used in
event planning and control. Over the years I compared special events and festivals around
the world. Each event manager brings a different experience and style to the organizing of
these events. However there seems to be an underlying system. Whether the event manager
has come from theatre, film, music - or even engineering and medicine - they seem to
converge towards a common system. The managers are independently using similar
methods, although using different terms according to their work history. The closest existing
'body of knowledge' which describes this system is Project Management. It doesn't
correspond exactly, however the project management process is there, if unrecognized.”
( www.epms.net)
To gather information and assist discussion I created a ‘schema’ . The schema, produced
below Figure 0.1, enabled me to do this in a structured way:
“Below is a Schema of the Event Project Management System. It is a working model and over
the next two years will evolve and be continually compared to actual events and refined
accordingly. It forms the basis of my Masters thesis and, eventually, a manual on event
organizing. Parts of it, in particular the Checklists, have been compiled from the experience of
many event coordinators, directors and managers.
That is not to say that the checklists are complete - after all each special event is indeed
special.” (www.epms.net)
William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page ix

Figure 0.1 Schema from the 1999 website
Unfortunately it was too far ahead of its time and I could not complete the thesis in two years
as there was not the information to reference. So I created, wrote and presented at
conferences the papers necessary for a reference list.
On the time line Figure 0.2, is illustrated the progression of the thesis. The papers presented
at event conferences lead to the formation of an International Committee to create an event
management body of knowledge (EMBOK). The international authors such as Julia
Rutherford Silvers and Dr JJ Goldblatt, were easily convinced of the need for an EMBOK.
Their latest event textbooks now include the tools and techniques of project management
(Silvers 2004; Goldblatt 2005).
I felt that the thesis needed a guideline to progress. Therefore the clearly stated methodology
in the PMBOK ™ and associated textbooks was used to compare event management with
project management. In this way the thesis had a structure from which to construct a body of
work.
.
As I pointed out in the third edition of Festival and Special Event Management:
“PMBOK ™ 2000 ™ lists 9 areas of knowledge: scope, cost, time, integration, procurement,
quality, human resources, communication and risk. These are the traditional project
management areas. However the event management will also be concerned with marketing
and designing the event. In the construction industry, the project manager would rarely be
involved in designing the building, finding the money to build it or making decisions on the
building's marketability. These are major concerns of the special event and festival manager.
(Allen et al 2005, p. 285)
William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page x

Figure 0.2 Thesis Timeline
William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page xi

The study lead to problems that arise from straddling two disciplines. Any inter-discipline
study is fraught with detractors. However I regard this as proof of its efficacy and applicability.
Some project managers regard event management as a sub-set of their discipline. After the
Sydney Olympics in 2000, this mind-set lead a number of project management companies,
such a APP and GHD to form event companies. However it was quickly obvious that the skills
and knowledge were not the same.
According to Greek Mythology, the innkeeper Procrustes only had one bed in his inn. When a
guest arrived to stay at the inn, Procrustes would fit the guest to the bed. If the guest was too
long, he would cut off his legs. If the guest was too short he would stretch him until the guest
fitted the bed perfectly. The analogy is with the event management being stretched and
chopped so it fits the traditional project management system.
On the other hand, the experienced event managers were disparaging of any increase in
bureaucracy and external control they thought accompanied the project management
discipline. As Ric Birch, the producer of numerous large scale events, including the opening
ceremony of the Sydney Olympics, wrote:
“Since I left Sydney at the end of 2000, the world of special events has grown more than ever.
The opportunity to produce ceremonies on behalf of the Olympic or Commonwealth Games,
or any of the many other regional sporting events is attracting more and more interest -
although the role of a creative producer of ceremonies seems to have been overtaken by
consultant project managers, who refer to ceremonies as ‘deliverables’ that produce
marketing and promotions ‘outcomes’.” (Birch 2004, p.308)
Perhaps the quickest development in events that is changing the attitudes of event managers
is the rise of risk management. A number of these influential event risk studies were used in
the construction of this thesis. Legal changes concerning director’s liability are filtering down
to the events sponsored by their companies. Therefore compliance is a new issue for the
event manager.
The thesis charts a course between the Scylla of project management methodology and
Charybdis of event management experience. Each discipline is absolutely certain they are
right. Just like the six blind men who try to describe an elephant having touched only one a
part of its body:
“And so these men of Indostan

Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!”
(John Godfrey Saxe)
I wish to conclude this preface with the statement of aims of the EMBOK. The full EMBOK
paper is included in the thesis. There can be no doubt that the EMBOK project arose out of
my work at the Department of Engineering at the University of Sydney. Therefore this thesis is
dedicated to those in the Department who willingly accepted my project and had the foresight
to realise the marriage of project management theory and event management practice would,
as Professor Joe Jeff Goldblatt, the progenitor of the event management discipline, wrote ,
“revolutionise the field”.
EMBOK: statement of intent

The intention of the International EMBOK Project is to create a framework of knowledge and
processes that are used in the management of events that may be customized to meet the
needs of various cultures, governments, education programs, and organizations.
The EMBOK Is…

· A descriptive summary of the scope of event management
· A framework for future development of the event management profession
William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page xiii

· A flexible tool for all industry stakeholders
The EMBOK will provide a framework for the creation and improvement of
· Competency criterion for education and training
· Curriculum development
· Books, software, manuals and job performance aids
· Professional development programs, products and certification systems
· Position descriptions and career development for staff
· Assessment systems for contracting, bidding and tendering
· Research framework to develop the profession
· Knowledge transfer systems
· Legislative and regulation frameworks
· International standards — including ethical and quality issues
The members of the International Committee are :

• Dr. Joe Goldblatt, CSEP — (USA) Professor at Temple University; Founding Director
of the George Washington University Event Management Certificate Program
• William J. O’Toole — (AUS) Event Project Management System Pty ltd.; University of
Sydney Project Management Program
• Glenn Bowdin — (UK) Principal lecturer at the UK Centre for Events Management at
Leeds Metropolitan University
• Julia Rutherford Silvers, CSEP — (USA) Speaking of Events; adjunct faculty at
University of Nevada, Las Vegas;
• Kathy Nelson, CSEP, CMP — (USA) Professor at the University of Nevada, Las
Vegas
• Janet Landey – (SA) Director Institute of Event Management, Johannesburg South
Africa
• Matthew Gonzalez, MCSE, PMP — (USA) G Solutions, Inc. Entertainment – Project
Manager of the EMBOK project
William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page xiv

Introduction
In his analysis of the event management of a major public event Johnson states
“...in the initial phase of the event the only real objective came from the UNTAET [United Nations
Transitional Administration in East Timor] stating that there would be an event to celebrate East Timor’s
independence. What form the celebrations would take, who was to perform, where it would be held, and
how much it would cost were not further developed even when the event had been given full approval.
Furthermore, the goals of the event seem obvious in some ways but difficult to define in other ways.”
(Johnson 2002b, p. 2)
Johnson was a member of the event management team for the celebrations to mark the handover of the
administration of East Timor to its newly elected government. His candid observations came from an
experienced project manager perspective in the centre of an important event with a large number of
stakeholders.
In this description, Johnson captures the essence of this thesis, the complexity, uncertainty and intangible
nature of the event management environment. In such an environment, many of the tools and techniques
that make up the PMBOK ™ and other project management texts are “too cumbersome” to use. The
short time frame, unfamiliarity, temporary logistics and the ultimate, unchangeable deadline do not allow
the time for these tools to be employed. The deadline, in particular, influences every aspect of event
management. The scope is developed as the event is coming into focus. The definition of the asset, as
illustrated by the Johnson quote, where the event is constantly changing up to the day of the event itself,
is almost impossible to make. In my case study of the East Timor Celebrations, I quote from an interview
with the Event Director, Ignatius Jones. He describes the problems of deciding what will happen at the
celebrations:
"….there’s 13 districts in Timor because of the mountainous nature of the country, they’re extremely
diverse. There’s 15 indigenous languages, not counting Tetum Prasa or Tetum Dili which is the lingua
franca. Or Portuguese, which everyone over 35 speaks. Or Bahasa, which everyone under 35 speaks. So
there’s been enormous pressure from the districts that each of them be represented. So to do this it’s
been very, very difficult to do this in such a way. There’s 13 districts and a sub-district; if I give every one
of them 2 minutes, we’re up at half an hour. And half an hour out of a 2-hour ceremony is an enormous
amount of time when you consider you’ve also got to pay tribute to the traditional law, the elders of Timor
are very, very important there. The youth of Timor, the resistance itself, and then of course the formal
hand-over."
(O’Toole 2005, p. 2)
The scope of work changes rapidly as marketing and promotion are employed to develop the event.
The thesis begins by investigating whether a model can actually be made of event management and
whether project management can be used as the basis of this model. The immaturity of the event industry
is compared to the capability maturity model to illustrate the industry’s lack of self-recognition. An
indicator of this immaturity is the deficiency in a standard terminology to describe the process of event
management. Even the term ‘event management’, as it is currently employed is confusing. The more
general characteristics of the event management environment described that mitigate against using the
PMBOK ™ model. As illustrated by the quote from Johnson, these include complexity, uncertainty and
the intangible nature of the event outcomes.
The next 10 chapters concern the areas of event management and their comparison to the similar areas
in PMBOK ™. They are not in order of time or importance, as event management does not have a linear
progression for the use of areas of knowledge. The dynamic system that describes the event
management process has all areas of management working at all times. In a similar way to the multi-
threading of modern software, each area affects each other area over the course of the project.
I have ordered them according to the degree of difference between the traditional project management
and event management. Each area of management - or area of knowledge - has a flow chart attached to
it to illustrate the management process.
Scope, feasibility and integration are grouped into the first chapter as this reflects the process in event
management. Scope is developing over the project life cycle. Therefore feasibility and integration are
William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc Page 1 of 115

continuous processes. PMBOK ™ and other standard texts on project management stress that scope
definition during the initiation phase is essential for a project to be successful. Event practice and the
writings on event management demonstrate that scope is constantly ready to change in response to
opportunities and risks during any of the phases.
Perhaps the greatest driver of scope development is the influence of the multiple stakeholders. Unlike the
traditional project such as civil engineering, the average event has numerous stakeholders. As set out in
Chapter 3, the larger the number of stakeholders the more complex and uncertain becomes the
management environment. In such an environment, event management has developed sophisticated
tools of stakeholder management. These include the management of sponsorship and the techniques of
marketing.
Chapter 4 is unique to event management and concerns the design of the product – the event. The
design includes staging, venue design, and the event program. All of these are created to enhance the
uniqueness or ‘specialness’ of the event. Therefore they are determined by intangible objectives. Most of
the event texts are concerned with this aspect of event management. These intangible objectives are an
essential part of the over all management objectives and therefore significantly contribute to the
uncertainty inherent in event management.
Event marketing, as compared in Chapter 5, can be regarded as a method to reduce this inherent
uncertainty in event management. The optimisation of the event variables of product, price, promotion
and place, is the essential tool of event marketing. As with the area of knowledge, design, this is not
mentioned in PMBOK ™ or any of the standard texts on project management.
The Cost section of project management contains sophisticated tools of cost monitoring and reporting.
This is necessary but not sufficient to describe this area of event management. Event management is
also concerned with revenue. Hence this area of knowledge is called Finance (Chapter 6). Cost control
methods work when the income is stable. However for many events this is not the case. Income is
variable and therefore ongoing cash flow management takes on an importance not found in the PMBOK
™. Revenue sourcing in the form of sponsorship development is, in some cases, a major part of the
management of an event.
Time management as set out in Chapter 7, concerns the date of the event and the deadline. The
scheduling tools of PMBOK ™ are used extensively in event management. However all aspects of the
management of the event work under the cloud of the deadline. Therefore every aspect of change must
be assessed according to its possible affect on the deadline.
The risk management process as described in project management texts is one area that is increasingly
being employed by event management. When assessed in terms of its applicability in a dynamic complex
system, quantitative risk management is secondary to qualitative. Chapter 8 investigates this aspect of
event and project management.
Communication management as discussed in Chapter 9, concerns the external communication with the
possible attendees as well as internal communication of the event team. The later is well described by
project management. The former, called promotion, is unique to event projects.
The procurement of resources, found in Chapter 10, is similar in all projects. However the contractors will
have to accommodate change. The short term logistics and temporary nature of the event preclude the
effectiveness of contract penalties. More informal methods are recommended by the event texts such as
partnering. The major procurement is sourcing and contracting the venue or event site ,as this will set the
constraints on many other areas of the event.
The ten areas of event management conclude with Chapter 11 on human resources. Volunteers and
rapid changes in staff numbers over a very short period are the characteristics of events not found in
other projects. Both of these contribute to the uncertainty and complexity of event management. The
deadline has an affect on human resources. The time taken to use the tools and techniques used in the
PMBOK ™ have to be measured against the deadline. The result is that event management employ more
informal methods of human resources management than those described in PMBOK ™.
The model suggested by this thesis is a process model. The figures that are attached to each chapter
attempt to show the processes involved in each area of knowledge. The first level process is simply
illustrated in Figure 1.1 found in Chapter 1 Overview. This can be broken down into the ten areas of
knowledge processes. These become the second level. Each process will be influenced by external
trends, as the event project management take place over time and is under the influence of trends
affecting the numerous stakeholders. There will be many changes and these need to be assessed
according to their affect on the deadline as well as on the numerous intangible and tangible objectives of
the stakeholders.

I have chosen a number of project management texts to assist in the interpretation of the PMBOK ™.
However the aim of this thesis is to compare event management with traditional project management, so I
have not strayed too far from the PMBOK ™ standard.
To support the model of this thesis, I have use texts from a wider variety of management areas, including
system dynamics, complexity, decision optimisation, risk and software development.
The event texts chosen are the main textbooks used in Universities and by event managers around the
world. New textbooks are being published at a rapid rate. In the course of preparing this thesis, many of
the original textbook have been rewritten using the findings of my research into the application of project
management. Goldblatt (2005), Silvers (2004) and Shone (2004) all refer to the textbooks or papers I
have presented. Two revised event textbooks now have chapters on project management.
As I explain in the first chapter of the thesis, the academic event management journal articles have little to
say on this topic. Therefore, I have relied on the documents used in the management or assessment of
15 major events. These are listed in Chapter 1. Documents related to event management are difficult to
obtain. This is further proof of an immature industry.
As well as these specific events, I have used the results of my post graduate student’s work in studying
event management as part of their online course in project management. They were required to work on
an event occurring at the time of their study. Their insights were invaluable as they tested, first hand, the
assertions of this thesis. Over the four years, they described and analyzed in detail over 25 events. These
included: a large book fair, a heritage festival, the sale of flats as an event, the Grand Prix, various
product launches, the City to Surf race, the Hong Kong Oxfam Trail walk and a number of exhibitions.

Chapter 1 Overview of Thesis
Contents
Chapter 1 Overview of Thesis................................................................................................ 4
A model, processes, system or a Body of Knowledge?..................................................... 6
Complexity and Uncertainty ............................................................................................... 8
Phases of event management and the event life cycle.................................................... 12
Intangibility of outcomes................................................................................................... 12
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 13
"During the recent century beginning with the numerous world fairs and major sporting
events and concluding with the ubiquitous millennium festivities, the tourism industry has
seen a significant increase in the size, scope, length and visibility of these unique ventures
known as hallmark or mega events. However there continues to be little empirical evidence
that validates the social, political, ecological , and economic benefits of these projects. Further
more, the rapid growth of the event management profession has produced a current climate
that is confusing, lacking in credibility as compared to other professions and perhaps
detrimental to its future long term health."
Goldbaltt, J 2000) ‘A Future for Event management : The Analysis of Major Trends Impacting
the Emerging Profession’, Conference Proceedings of the 'Events Beyond 2000:Setting the
Agenda’, ACEM UTS, Sydney.
"Information infrastructure is a tricky thing to analyse. Good, usable systems disappear

almost by definition. The easier they are to use, the harder they are to see."
Bowker, G & Star, S 1999, Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences , MIT
USA, p. 33.
The purpose of this thesis is to establish a framework to enable the creation of an event
management body of knowledge. The method is to compare the current practice evidenced in
selected available event documents and contemporary literature of event management
practice, with the project management body of knowledge. This is executed by comparing the
methodology described in the PMBOK ™ (2000) with the equivalent areas of knowledge in
the event industry. The processes of event management are expressed by means of
schemas or process maps. Therefore, the synthesis of the comparison is a skeleton of
processes that can be fleshed out with research of current event management practice. The
first task is to decide on a classification of the areas of knowledge. The PMBOK ™ (2000) is
1
used as the starting point.
A major constraint for this thesis is the immaturity of the event industry. This recent discovery
of event management as an indefinable body of knowledge or discipline is mentioned by a
number of recent texts (Getz 1998; Getz 2000; O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002; Silvers 2004).
Shone (2001, p. 26) emphasizes the lack of data and the difficulty of collecting the data:
"In building up a picture of event activity we are, in effect, 'building a wall'. At present all we
have for this wall are a few bricks, from widely different sources, and not much by the way of
foundations. As the events industry is not typically seen as a homogenous whole, there is no
drive to seek common statistical information, either by the industry or by other uses of
statistical data, such as governments and academics. In the range of events activity, the
nature of personal events, voluntary events and similar activities means that almost no data
are collected for many kinds of events, except by occasional sampling, or perhaps by event
1
The importance of classification to the development of a body of knowledge and the related
profession is found in a number of modern texts Bowker and Star 1999 illustrate how
medical classification formed the attitudes, profession and culture of modern medicine.
Hamblyn 2001 describes the importance of classification of the clouds to the development of
meteorology.
William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 4 of 115

organizers for their own use or for a few household surveys…..Many events organizations
record data mainly for their own internal use, if they record it at all."
When commenting on the Sydney Events Beyond 2000 conference, Donald Getz wrote:
"This conference appears to be the very first anywhere to focus on education, research and
evaluation issues faced by the events field" Getz (2000, p. 10)
With the notable exception of some recent texts (Allen et al 2002; O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002;
Silvers 2004) a characteristic of an immature industry is the inability of the industry to
recognize its immaturity. The management processes that are obvious in other industries, are
implicit and nascent in events, rather than recognized, described and therefore able to be
assessed. This lead Getz to observe that festival managers rely on their reputation rather
than any external measure, such as benchmarking, to assess event success (Getz 1998).
In particular the lack of standard terminology within the event industry (Arcodia and Robb
2000; Getz 2000; Goldblatt and Nelson 2001; O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002; Silvers 2004) means
that any field research would first need to establish a common language. This was an early
identified problem faced by the Sydney Olympics (Allen et al 2002) and required the creation
of a dictionary or terms. It is not for the lack of documentation (Catherwood and Van Kirk
1992) as the Olympics is a repeat event with a long history. It illustrates this lack of a common
event language when an established event needs to create a dictionary. One outcome of this
thesis, a framework for the event management body of knowledge, will provide a starting
point for a dictionary of event management terms.
A further example of the immaturity of the event industry is the lack of any provision for the
assessment of the event management system or practice (Getz 1998). Most of the event
management texts describe tools and processes for the assessment and evaluation of the
event itself. The term “event management” is ambiguous in most event literature. In most
cases it means event portfolio management rather than the internal management of the
event.
Using a textbook standard definition of management as the process of planning, organizing,
leading and controlling the efforts of organization members and of using all other
organizational resources to achieve specific organizational goals (Stoner et al 1994), many of
the event texts and articles are misnamed. The only academic journal in this field, titled
"Event Management" has no articles on the management processes or systems. Of the 103
articles in the journal Festival Management and Event Tourism, one concerned the
management system or management processes, albeit indirectly. In the last four issues, a
majority of the articles concern the impact of events. These may be classified as strategic
issues of events portfolio management or business program management. The identification
of event management is often called operations management (McDonald et al 1999) or event
project management (O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002). The evaluation of the operations is often
mistaken for the evaluation of the management system and its practice. It is therefore not
surprising that the underlying management systems and processes found in project
management remain hidden in the event field. Arcodia and Robb (2000) article titled “A Future
for Event Management; A taxonomy of event management terms” makes the statement:
“this paper provides an analysis of current terminology used in festivals and events
discourse…” (p. 154). However this ‘current terminology’ does not include any terms that are
related to the management system or process of an event or festival. The article is refers to
the classification of types of events and festival. This pertains to portfolio management of
events and festivals.
The recent publication from the Australian Centre for Event Management, Event
Management; An Australian Bibliography (Allen, J Harris R and Huyskens M, 2000 ) has no
list of management system or processes. The majority of items on the list concern event
tourism and the impact of events. The Stoner definition of management has no application to
this management bibliography.
A further example of the confusion in the use of the term event management is provided by
the Festival DIY Kit - Arts Victoria 2002. The economic impact of an event is evaluated
without any link to the management of the event. With the exception of Goldblatt and Supovitz
(1999); O'Toole and Mikolaitis (2002) and A Sporting Chance (1999), there is little information
on event management auditing, risk arising from management decisions or event
management systems. It is this lack of any assessment of the internal event management,

except indirectly by the evaluation of its product, that concerns this thesis. It is one of the
many reasons for the emphasis placed on the risk management as applied to events in this
thesis.
In the most recent published survey of the event industry, Helde, Jago, & Dreery (2002) point
out the lack of research in the event industry. They describe three areas of research: Event
Evaluation, Event Marketing, Event Management and Operations. However, the areas they
survey for their paper do not include any mention of research into event management
processes or a framework for management of the event as distinct from the actual event. This
is a further example of the ambiguity of the term “event management”. Their survey is quite
clear as to the lack of information on the event industry, with the notable exception of the
economic impact of events.
The value of the management system is illustrated by the sale of the manuals and systems
used by the Sydney Olympics to the Athens Olympic Committee. In particular: "The lessons
learnt by Sydney have been documented in the Transfer of Knowledge Program (TOK), which
the IOC purchased from SOCOG. The TOK includes manuals and reports prepared by most
of the departments within SOCOG." (Chappelet 2000, p. 3)
The overall lack of recorded data, research and analysis of events means that the
methodology of this thesis is similar to the Exploratory study. The current state of the event
industry fits with the characteristics requiring exploratory study as defined by Cooper and
Schindler (1998, p. 134):
"The area of investigation may be so new or so vague that a researcher needs to do an
exploration just to learn something about the dilemma facing the manager. Important
variables may not be known or thoroughly defined."
Of the nine approaches to qualitative research listed by Cooper and Schindler, only two are
available to an immature industry. These are the use of case studies and document analysis.
Event documents are not generally publicly available. However a number of public events
have published reports. The event documents that are used to support this thesis originate
from these events:
• Centenary Of Federation Celebrations in Sydney 2001
• East Timor handover ceremony and Independence Day celebrations 2000
• New Horizons Australia India country promotion in India 1996
• V8 Car Race in Canberra 2001
• Yass River Festival 2001
• Victor Harbor Folk Festival
• The Sydney Olympics 2000
• ICC World Cup Cricket 2003 (South Africa)
• Asia Pacific Scouting Jamboree 2001
• Big Day Out Sydney concert 2001
• AMP Journey of a Nation 2001
• newImages British country promotion 1997
• Sydney to Hobart yacht race 1998
• Ulladulla Summer Games 1999
• Canberra Hospital Implosion 1997
A model, processes, system or a Body of Knowledge?
This thesis presents a model of event management. It is a management model made up of

management processes. The high level process called ‘event management’ is illustrated in
Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1 Event Management Process
The objective of a management model is to support management to reach its objectives. It is

both a descriptive or explanatory and prescriptive model (Casti 1997). It describes and
explains the entities and relationships found in all events regardless of size or type and is
invariant (Beer 1985). It is prescriptive in the sense that it shows management the efficient
and effective processes that are currently hidden. This optimization of management decisions
is expected by event stakeholders. As set out by Williams (2002, p. 34):
" A Model represents or describes perceptions of a real system, simplified, using formal,
theoretically based language of concepts and their relationships (that enables the
manipulation of these entities) in order to facilitate management, control, or understanding of
that system."
Mapping the features of good model to the corresponding characteristics of this thesis
produces the table 1.1.
Table 1.1 Model Quality

Features that measure the Characteristics of this thesis
quality of the Model (Williams
2002)
Empirically based Primary source event documents and recent texts of best
practice.
Theoretically sound Based on PMBOK ™
Coherent A series of interlinked processes
Simplified for the purpose Process diagrams, process mapping
Addresses the complexity The substance of the thesis
Adds value Allows development and improvement in the management
system

Impacts decisions Makes overt the processes to assist in decision
optimization and improves future decision by gathering
data in a structured manner.
Using the structure of PMBOK ™ as the form for describing areas of knowledge, each chapter
of this thesis displays a process schema. The schema are not flowcharts in the engineering
sense, but tend towards concept diagrams, cognitive maps or process maps (Williams 2002 ).
They capture the major processes and are related to the data flow diagrams of structured
analysis (Demarco 1978). In a similar way to Checkland's activity models, (Checkland and
Scholes 1999) they lay the basis for information flow diagrams and a dynamic system model
of event management (Sterman 2000). It is important to establish at the beginning, that event
management can be described as a purposeful activity rather than an independent high
definition feedback system - as described by the hard systems methodology. A soft systems
methodology (SSM) can be used to describe such a system. Furthermore, such a model can
be used as an intervention tool to assist the event management process. Therefore, it is a
prescriptive model. The graphical display of the processes is essential in this intervention as it
enables the process to be broken down into individual elements illustrating the logical
relationships between the elements over time. Such a description enables better
understanding and the possibility of improvement.
The high level process is illustrated in Figure 1.1. It is a simple representation of event
management as a process working from the business or social case for an event to the
delivery of the event and the fulfillment of the event objectives. However there are two
aspects not usually found in such a diagram. The process is subject to absolute time
constraints. The process has a fundamental element of change.
Complexity and Uncertainty
The closest current project management model for events comes from two streams
1. Project Complexity
2. Uncertainty and Product Innovation
Using Wideman’s Comparative Glossary of Project Management terms v3.1 (n.d.) Project
Complexity can be defined as:
"The extent to which a project, or one of its components, involves a large number of parts,
and/or a large number of people, to be coordinated and/or interfaced. In project management,
project complexity is typically a reflection of the number of work packages involved and the
number of different people required to carry them out."
This practical and working definition can be compared with other authors who define
complexity in terms of the number of relationships between tasks, rather than the number of
tasks.
"we define project complexity as the nature, quantity and magnitude of organizational
subtasks and subtask interactions posed by the project" (Tatikonda & Rosenthal 2000, p. 75)
Both definitions suffer from the need to know when the task analysis needs to stop. That is,
the granularity of the tasks or the level of the Work Breakdown Structure. This implies that the
complexity of a project is related to unfamiliarity of the management with the type of project.
Given that novelty and innovation are part of the product, therefore, ipso facto, events are
complex.
Using Williams' division into Structure Complexity and Product Complexity, the product of
event management - the event itself - is complex. In particular, it is a result of the intangible
nature of event outcomes and the multi-objectives of the event, introduced by the numerous
stakeholders. It is reflected back and contributes to the structure complexity of the event
management. Williams measures structural complexity by the number of reciprocal
dependencies and the number of stakeholders.
Summarizing Williams, the characteristics of Project Complexity are:
1. Number of stakeholders
2. Number of reciprocal dependencies
3. Multi objectives
4. Number of changes or modifications to both the product and the project.

5. Uncertainty of goals
6. Uncertainty of methods
Each one of these characteristics is mentioned by the texts on event management as part of
the standard event management environment (O’Toole 2003; Silvers 2004). A summary of
the factors that contribute to the complexity of the process of event management and the
strategies recommended by the event texts are shown in Figure 1.2.
Figure 1.2 Process Complexity

The writings on product innovation address similar problems faced by events when trying to
capture the product and process. In particular novelty corresponds to the Wow factor in
events (Harris & Allen 2002) or innovation in event design (Malouf 1999). It is an essential
component that differentiates each event and becomes the Unique Selling Point (UPI) for the
marketing of the event (Harris & Allen 2002). It is a result of a creative process, such as
brainstorming and storyboarding (O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002; Allen et al 2002). The complexity
of the product i.e. the event itself, is often an attraction for the attendees. Figure 1.3 illustrates
some of the aspects of the event management environment that contribute to this complexity.

Figure 1.3. Product Complexity
Combining Williams' project complexity characterized by 'multi-objectives' with Checkland's
necessity of ambiguity in ill-defined objectives, produces a general description of the event
environment as uncertain. In such an uncertain environment, management flexibility is
required. Shone uses the two dimensions of complexity and uncertainty, to provide a
classification framework for events.
Their taxonomy of events divides them into:
• Individual
• Group
• Organizational
• Multi organizational
• National
• International (Shone 2001)
Figure 1.4 is a map of types of events according to their complexity and uncertainty. The
events that have low uncertainty are the ones that seem to be able to use traditional project
management tools and techniques.

Figure 1.4. Mapping of events according to complexity and uncertainty (after Shone 2001)
Special events - that is, one-off or unique events – are highly uncertain in many areas of
management, such as finance, marketability and sponsorship commitment. The financial risk
involved in this uncertainly is also their attraction for entrepreneurs and promoters (O’Toole
2003) as the risk gives a higher return and keeps out competitors. Annual events that have
little or changes in suppliers, finance, stakeholders or venue have low uncertainty and low
complexity.
The East Timor handover celebrations involved multi-agencies from many countries, a short
time frame, intangible outcomes and a unique program (Johnson 2000). Such an event has
many area of uncertainty and is highly complex.
Although it is outside the scope of this thesis, the map (figure 1.4) corresponds to the
applicability of current project management software to an event or festival.. Events with low
uncertainty and low complexity, such as conferences and exhibitions, have many commercial
software packages to manage the event available to them. Events with low uncertainty and
high complexity, such as the Olympics (Timmins 2000) and International Grand Prix use
event or project management software. However the applicability of event or project
management software diminishes rapidly with the events in the upper region of the graph
(O’Toole 2003).
The complexity and uncertainty found in event management can be characterized by the
model suggested by Sterman (2000, p. 22) as a dynamic system. Such a system has the
characteristics of:
• Dynamic – change on many levels
• Tightly coupled – changes in one area of the management will quickly affect other
areas
• Governed by Feedback – any action will have a result that will influence other similar
actions
• Nonlinear – effect and cause are rarely proportional
• History dependent – actions are mostly irreversible
• Self organizing – semi autonomous groups or teams
• Adaptive – can quickly respond to changes to minimize their negative impact
• Counterintuitive – difficult to exactly predict
• Policy resistive – difficult to comprehend and therefore control using linear methods

• Characterized by trade-offs – the effects of a decision in one area of event
management will be traded against the results in other areas.
The model for event management can therefore be described as a dynamic system made up
of interlocking processes. The applicability of traditional project management of this system is
characterized by its degree of uncertainty and complexity. These processes are found as flow
charts in each chapter of this thesis.
Phases of event management and the event life cycle.
PMBOK ™ (2000) recognizes the different models for the project life cycle according to the
industry to which it is applied. Although the four examples cited in this reference do not
provide a model for event management, aspects of each are found in the model for event
phases. The phases described in O’Toole & Mikolaitis (2002) are:
1. Idea - concept development
2. Feasibility
3. Planning
4. Implementation
5. Setup
6. Event
7. Shutdown
Watt (1998) describes the life cycle as one process made up of: objectives leading to
feasibility; method and timeline finance/approvals; public launch; operating structure and key
personnel; control system; pre-event preparation; publicise event; double check; carryout
event; review/evaluate and final report.
As there is no handover of a tangible asset and the intangible asset is a result of the event
experience, the event itself is seen as a separate phase. O'Toole (2002) and Allen (2002)
point out the different management environment during the event itself. In some events, a
new management configuration is created, with a stage or production manager having
complete control once the event starts. The new staff will include production staff, volunteers
in large numbers, operations or logistics staff and subcontractors. The OHS issues are
different on an event site.
The Sydney Olympics prepared for this by restructuring their management from function or
department based to venue based (Allen et al 2002).
Intangibility of outcomes
The inability to simply measure the event outcomes is a major limitation to a strict engineering
approach to event management. In particular, events for celebrations have highly intangible
objectives, as quoted by Cameron:
"The festival is an extension onto the present of the world-creating mythological events… the
whole purpose of entering a sanctuary or participating in a festival is that one should be
overtaken by that state in India known as 'the other mind', where one is 'beside oneself',
spellbound, set apart from one's logic of self-possession. We enter the play sphere in the
festival, acquiescing in the game of belief, where fun, joy and rapture rule and the laws in time
and space dissolve" Joseph Campbell in Cameron (1995, p. 139)
Further, Cameron makes the plea:
" We need festivals which nourish our spirits, which lead us to a shared sense of joy and
understanding, where the creative arts can express our feelings" (ibid, p. 148)
Getz (1997, p. 163) makes the observation;
"This (style) is the core of festivals, and it is the spirit that the organizers want to instil in all
types of special events. Drawing from our earlier discussion of the cultural meanings of
festivals, it can be stated that the essence of celebration, commemoration, and carnival is the
public sharing of themes having common cultural significance to participants. Belonging and
contributing to the cause is also an important motivator for the volunteers and organizers.
Once their atmosphere or mood is established, merry making can become infectious."

For these types of events. artistic expression and creativity are regarded as essential (Getz
1997; Allen et al 2002; Harris & Allen 2002). Getz (1997) extends this to repeat events and
the product life cycle of the event, whereby the product life cycle strategy for success is
constant innovation in the program elements. Innovation and creativity are related to the
creation of the 'Wow' factor (Harris & Allen 2002). The serendipity, or surprise element of an
event is identified by the recent study of UK Folk Festivals (AFO 2003) as a key driver for
festival attendance.
Intangible outcomes are common across all types of events. The ACT Auditor General's
report (2002, p.22) on the V8 car races in Canberra makes the observation that benefits of
publicity value and civic pride claimed by the proponents of the V8 races is “necessarily
speculative and involves assumptions that are difficult to verify objectively".
The lack of a direct measure of event outcomes and therefore the inability to set realistic
measurable objectives lead Goldblatt (n.d.) to propose the term Return on Event (ROE). He
links the ability to measure return on event with the ability to forecast. The ROE is made up
of:
• Measure financial return through advertising impression and through capita spending.
The later is related to the multipliers used to assess economic impact.
• Measure of PR through various metrics used in public relations
• Measure word of mouth advertising using focus groups
• Measure success of meeting attendee's expectation though comparative survey
The ROE is a parametric method rather than a direct method of indicating event outcomes.
O'Toole & Mikolaitis (2002, p. 255) in their cost benefit survey results, list the metrics as
suggested by practicing event managers. These range from lack of public complaints for
community events to product awareness. The authors note the importance of measurable
results in decision optimisation, using an overseas trade exhibition as an example.
"Once the parameters that contribute to the cost-benefit of the event have been identified,
then a look at the boundaries will provide an estimate of the cost benefit effect of a small
change in one of the parameters. If more work (cost) is put into attracting higher-level
contacts in the host community, will this additional work (cost) significantly contribute to the
benefits, and if so, by how much?"
The search for measurable event objectives is found in most of the event literature. However,
there is a warning that the measurable objective, due to its ability to be communicated simply,
may obscure the far more important intangible goals (Shone 2001; O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002;
Allen et al 2002).
Conclusion
The event industry has the characteristics of an immature industry. The deficiency in data,
research and lack of the recognition of common management processes are major
constraints to forming an event management body of knowledge. Hence this thesis is
assembling an exploratory model. Of the various management models available to apply to
event management, the dynamic system seems the most appropriate. Each area of event
management is tightly linked to all other areas as the event needs to take place at a fixed
date and place. The two dimensions suggested by Shone (2001) of complexity and
uncertainty are a limitation to the direct application of the PMBOK ™(2000) model. In
particular, the intangibility of outcomes reflects on all aspects of the event management
processes. Therefore the PMBOK ™ (2000) needs to be significantly transformed for it to
realistically model the event management processes.. The following chapters correspond to
the areas of knowledge of event management. Taken together they represent an exploratory
model of the processes of dynamic system.
Each chapter of this theses has a process schema as the central figure. The subject area is
compared to the equivalent area in the PMBOK ™ 2000 and the current standard project
management textbooks. The event management process is mapped by comparing and
summarising the event texts and using the event documentation listed in the bibliography as a
way to validate the texts. This is necessary, as there is so little written describing the actual
processes that makes up event management. Figure 1.1 can be seen as a high level process.
The figures in each chapter are the sub processes that combine to form this high level
process.

Chapter 2 Scope/Integration/feasibility
Contents
Event Feasibility ............................................................................................................... 15

Measuring the Product ..................................................................................................... 16
Project Asset Impact ........................................................................................................ 16
Network of Plans .............................................................................................................. 17
Work Breakdown Structure. ............................................................................................. 19
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 20
The PMBOK ™ devotes two chapters to this section of project management. Integration
management is subdivided into project plan development, execution of these plans and
integrated change control. Scope management is subdivided into initiation, planning,
definition, verification and change control.
Scope, Integration and Feasibility are closely linked in the event management texts. The
terms are rarely used by any of the event literature and the processes are not directly
described. For this reason this chapter relies heavily on the work done by the author and
Silvers (2004). In a dynamic system subject to change, the scope is not static. It is developing
over the phases of the project. Therefore scope is continually being redefined. As a result the
event plans are not fixed. They are subject to development. The integration of the plans is
also evolving with the movement in the scope. The feasibility of the event is, therefore, under
constant reassessment and analysis. Figure 2.1 illustrates the process of scope
management.

Figure 2.1 Scope management process
Event Feasibility
The first phase in event planning is to establish the objectives of the event. Mission and vision
statements are created in consultation with the key stakeholders (Allen et al 2002). From
these arise the measurable objectives. Put more informally this enables the what, where, why
and who of the event to be established (Watt 1998). The measurable objectives are able to
guide the event management through the event project phases and enable the event to
communicate success to its stakeholders (O’Toole 2003). Such a process is not found in
PMBOK ™ as the project management company is rarely in charge of this more strategic
approach to the product.
Scope definition and feasibility are closely related in the event industry. Shone (2001)
emphasizes the importance of the feasibility study for events as there is limited expertise, a
short time frame and a reliance on community support and volunteers. He suggests that the
event proposal be passed through three filters. These concern the proposal's Marketability,
Operability and Financial viability. Getz (1997) lists profitability or affordability, desirability and
suitability. He looks at events form their fit with the destination. O’Toole & Mikolaitis (2002)

describes feasibility from the technical point of view as the creation of comparative event
configuration options or models. The tools of SWOT analysis, Gap analysis and Cost-benefit
analysis are used to support the decision making process on the return on investment (ROI)
of the event. Contained within the feasibility, bidding and proposal preparation is the
assessment of the event management's ability to deliver the event. However this is the only
mention of the assessment of the feasibility of the performing organization to undertake the
event management in the event literature (O’Toole 2002a; Silvers 2004).
There is a similarity in scope development, feasibility and integration between event
management and research projects. As Ernø-Kjølhede (2000, p. 5) points out, when
comparing traditional project management with research projects:
“the need for predicability of project output… versus the unpredictability of research outcome
and new research opportunities arising in the course of the project”.
The research project, therefore, is characterized by an evolving scope and continuous
feasibility and integration management.
Measuring the Product
A major limitation in feasibility and scope definition is the ability to define the asset (or
product). For a corporate event, such as a conference, exhibition or product launch, O’Toole
& Mikolaitis (2002, p. 255) lists the ultimate benefits of an event as:
• Promotional Value
• Media Coverage
• Awareness
• Increase in sales
• Lead generation
• Boost staff morale
• Create a presence in the market place
• Build client relationships
All of these benefits are difficult to measure directly, and do not provide a certainty in the
guidelines on which to base the scope definition and the integration of plans. The ultimate
benefits of the event become part of the cost benefit analysis and the return on investment
(O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002; Silvers 2004). This is variously referred to as ROE - Return on
Event (Goldblatt 2000) or ROEE -Return on Event Entertainment (Sonder 2004).
The difficulty in finding commensurate variables on which to base a feasibility study is

illustrated by the Auditor General's Office (2002) report on the V8 Car races in Canberra,
quoted in chapter 1 of this thesis. It is directly related to the intangible outcomes of the event.
Understanding and continually clarifying the requirements of the client is paramount to
understanding the product and its effects (Malouf 1999; Allen et al 2002). As many of these
requirements may be intangible. This is a major difference with the requirement analysis
described in PMBOK ™ and the reality of event management.
Project Asset Impact
PMBOK ™ does not discuss the impact of the deliverable. It is a important part of event
management. A realistic assessment of the impact of an event is required for a
comprehensive feasibility study. Most of the current major event texts devote a large part to
the impact of the event. Allen et al (2005 pp. 30 – 46) divide the event impact into:
• Social and Cultural
• Physical and environmental
• Political
• Tourism and Economic.
Allen states that the task of the event management is to identify and predict these impacts.
The accurate assessment of the economic impact of an event is regarded as important for
sourcing event finance (Allen et al 2005). The analysis of costs and benefits of an event is
complicated by the intangible benefits and the indirect flow-on from event spending. Various
models are used to estimate this including Equilibrium Models using Input output tables and

multipliers (AFO 2003; Allen et al 2005). However these cannot cover the intangible benefits
such as publicity, civic pride and cultural enhancement. The concept of the “triple bottom line”
(Fredline 2002), whereby other factors are introduced into the measure of an event’s impact,
is one possible solution. These factors include responsibility and environmental sustainability,
as well as direct economic impact.
It is outside the scope of this thesis to assess the literature on economic impact of events.
However this is the one area that has received attention in the event literature. The economic
impact of an event such as a major festival will be the deciding factor for its approval by the
host organization, such as State Government. This strategic decision will filter down and
affect all the decisions made about the event itself and therefore have to be taken into
account by the event management.
Network of Plans
Allen et al (2002) and Getz (1997) describe in detail the numerous plans required by an
event. Perhaps this is because their case studies are major festivals and other tourism
events. A summary of these plans is shown in Figure 2.2. The plans are networked, as they
need to be adapted when there are external changes or developments within the event
project. Some of the standard project plans are found within the operation/logistics plans. The
limitation of this is that many of the increasingly important plans are left out. In particular,
there is no risk management plan.
Figure 2.2 Network of event plans - adapted from Allen et al (2002) and Getz (1997)
Figure 2.2 can be compared Figure 2.3 to the sophisticated system of plans prepared by a
project manager and used by promotional event for Sydney Water.

Gardening Australia Live
Planning Implementation &

Initiation Close-out
Control
Stakeholder
Analysis Display Project
Cost benefit
Performance
analysis
Scope Plan
Built
Lessons Learned
Program Plan
Activity List
Delivered onsite
Cost plan Procurement

WBS
HR
Sponsor Initiation Task Contract appraisal

Responsibility
Chart Manual Distribtion
Payback Analysis Project Plan Contract closeout
Training
Event Charter Cost

Budget estimates
Cost
Risk Plan Final Cost

HR plan Statement
Expenditure
Reports
Risk Analysis
Event Team
Mission Cost Progress
Risk Assessment Reports
Organisational
Chart Risk Register Payment
Schedules
Resource
Requirements Procurement Plan Earned Value
Analysis
Solicitation
Market Analysis Planning Communications
Identify Contract
opportunties Preparation Status Meetings
SWOT Analysis Procurement

Contract Award
Contract
Target Market Payments
Marketing Plan
Develop Product Time

mix
Develop Event GANT Chart

Marketing Analysis
Strategy
Marketing
HR Plan
Roles & Publication

Responsibilities Preparation
Team Directory
Quality
Management
Manual
Preparation
QM Plan
Development
QM Plan
Acceptance
Checklist
Preparation
Figure 2.3 Work breakdown structure from Pabst (2004)
Each of the plans in Figure 2.2. represent the event subcommittees i.e. the functional division
of an event organizing committee (Tonge 2000). Therefore project integration is a high-level
organization issue for many events. It is reflected in the structure of the event organization, as
the integration of the various plans is a fundamental objective of the event committee. Getz
(1997, p.136) regards this as a strategy to control the inherent complexity:
" Almost all events will establish a committee system, given that the complexity of event
management and production requires multiple talents and division of labor"

The committee system, as well as integrating the plans, has the advantage of scalability. The
committee can be resized according to the growth of the event and the changes in the plans
(Tonge 2000; Allen et al 2002; Harris & Allen 2002,). Changes in the committee system can
accommodate the development of the scope as the project passes through its phases. Hence
the committee system is the most common form or event organization structure for large
events.
The short time frame, scope development, the fact of the deadline and the highly coupled
system results in every aspect of the event project being part of project integration. According
to Allen et al (2002) and confirmed by Bowdin et al (2001) and O’Toole (2003), the event
company takes on the role of coordination as the event deadline nears. In this role, the event
team’s work concerns the integration of the plans of subcontractors. During the co-ordination
phase, the event company will manage by exception (O’Toole 2003). This is similar to the
Mintzberg (1994) model of an Adhocracy organization, whereby the work is primarily
coordination of the experts in a highly dynamic setting. The suppliers can be partners with the
event company. This is a technique of scope control through partnering - i.e. a two-way
communication with mutual agreement on event/contractor requirements and benefits.
Partnering implies sharing the risks and opportunities afforded by the event.
Performance Measurement
The PMBOK ™ chapter on Scope (Chapter five) makes the statement
Constituent components should be described in terms of tangible, verifiable results to
facilitate performance measurement.”
The term “performance measurement” is used throughout the project management texts.
However, as discussed in the various chapters of this thesis, specific quantifiable
performance measures of events and festivals is difficult when so much of the event concerns
intangible outcomes. The more general characteristics of a dynamic system with a deadline,
mitigate against the use of quantifiable performance measures. Specific aspects of event
management, such as use of volunteers, lack of a initial measurable business criteria,
changing scope and numerous stakeholders contribute to the lack of efficacy of quantifiable
performance measurement.
Work Breakdown Structure
The Work breakdown Structure is a term only used by five of the event textbooks; Allen 1999,
McCabe et al 2000, O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002, Harris & Allen 2002 and Silvers 2004. Thee of
these texts are co-authored by the author of this thesis. The other event literature has no
systematic way to scope the events. The budget is regarded as the formal plan and control
device for the event scope (Malouf 1999; Goldblatt 2002). Most of the event texts take a
bottom up approach to the scope.
The budget is the major reporting tool to the client. However only using the budget as the
planning tool will miss other critical tasks. In particular the tasks that are low cost but high risk
such as those on the critical path. The existence of a deadline means that there must be a
priority of tasks; the low cost task may be seen as low priority. The danger of this is illustrated
when considering compliance issues, such as licensing. These are low cost task with a high
risk if not completed (O’Toole 2003). In the part of the event industry that has a single client,
the primary financial responsibility of the event manager is to control the costs (Malouf 1999).
Historically the clients would also be responsibly for all liability issues such as insurance.
However new laws and regulations, such as the Australian Commonwealth Criminal Code,
the finding of the Jessica Malik Inquest (Milledge 2002) and the findings of the inquest into the
deaths at the Sydney to Hobart Yacht race 1998 (State Coroner 2000) pass the risk
responsibility onto the event company (Business Excellence Australia 2003).
The work breakdown structure becomes an essential tool in modern event management. It is
used to generate the deliverables of the event project (O’Toole 2000; Silvers 2004). Its ability
to be scaled up or down, to be changed easily and its mirroring the files structure used in
current event management, means that it is the major tool in project integration (O’Toole &
Mikolaitis 2002).

The work breakdown structure for large public events corresponds to its committee system.
Schmader (1997) describes the management system of the Boise River Festival as a Festival
Production Committee that oversees the work of the subcommittee. This high level committee
is integrates the work of the sub-committees. The sub-committees correspond to a festival
WBS and include: marketing, risk management, security, merchandise, inventory and
entertainment.
Summary
In a dynamic setting, the scope, feasibility and integration are closely linked. Scope definition
and feasibility are limited by the inability to describe the asset of the project with a degree of
certainty. Integration, rather than being a separate function of event management is found in
every area of event management.
A closely coupled system with a short timeframe means each area of the work breakdown
structure is integrated with the other areas. Integration is a sub function of all other areas of
event management. The work breakdown structure is the major tool of integration for event
management.

Chapter 3 Stakeholder Management
Contents
Stakeholder classification................................................................................................. 22
Sponsorship...................................................................................................................... 23
Sponsor Management ...................................................................................................... 24
Other Stakeholders .......................................................................................................... 26
Stakeholder Management of the Event............................................................................ 31
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 33
PMBOK ™ recognizes the management of stakeholders as being essential to the success of

the project. When compared to the other areas of knowledge, it devotes only a small section
to stakeholders (PMBOK ™ 2000, Section 2.2). It is within the Stakeholder Management
section that resides a small discussion of the management of change. In dealing with change
PMBOK ™ (2000, p. 18) recommends:
"In general, differences between or among stakeholders should be resolved in favor of the
customer.”
In the event industry, as will be discussed in this chapter, this is a difficult solution. In most
cases, the customer for events is a complex entity. The event, such as a festival or a
conference is a portfolio of products, made up of the numerous sponsors as well as the
audience and the client. Each customer may have different objectives, which may change
over the course of the management of the event and conflict with other customers. Chapter 5
on Marketing describes this in more detail.
According to Smith (2000), the traditional project management position may be characterized
by establishing clear needs at the initiation phase of the project:
"A project is more likely to be successful if it begins well. A good beginning includes time at
the outset to discuss project stakeholders' key needs and expectations. This should be
augmented with a documented plan to meet these requirements, deal with potential risks, and
define project information communication routes to stakeholders."
The major difference between the traditional description of stakeholder management and that
of the event industry is the quantity of stakeholders and objectives that may change in a
complex environment. In other words, the number of stakeholders and the number of changes
in the normal course of event management, when compared to the PMBOK ™ model
projects. A change in quantity produces a change in quality and priority. As is pointed out in
other sections of this thesis (Chapters 1, 2, 7 and 8), in a deadline situation, core
management process must have preference. For this reason, proactive stakeholder
management is a core process for event management. This will be demonstrated by a review
of the current literature and a comparison to the event documentation. Figure 3.1 illustrates
the stakeholder management process for events.

Figure 3.1 Stakeholder management process
Stakeholder classification
A large part of the standard event literature deals with the role of the stakeholders. It tends to
be used in a specific sense of the type of stakeholder. In the first edition of the Dictionary of
Event Management, the term “stakeholder” is not found. (Goldblatt 1996).
The process of stakeholder management is generally distributed between
1. Sponsorship
2. Suppliers
3. Audience
4. Legal issues
Allen et al (2002)classifies the stakeholders into:

• Host Organization
• Host Community
• Sponsors
• Media
• Co workers
• Participants and Spectators
Allen et al (2002) states that the need for stakeholder management is a result of the growth of
events, their professionalization and the increasing support from governments and
corporations. Therefore events need to serve multiple agendas and a plethora of other
requirements.
Such a classification tends to identify only primary stakeholders. Secondary stakeholders,
such as government agencies and licensing bodies, who have an interest in the event if it
passes a threshold of interest (Business Excellence Australia 2003), may not be captured by
Allen's classification.

Although all the above are managed by the same process, it is one of the unrecognized
processes in the event management literature. It is important to point out that the term event
management used in this chapter (and the thesis) refers to the internal management of the
event rather than the looser term used in tourism literature of the external management of the
events such as from a sponsor's point of view. See Event Management in the glossary
section of this thesis for further explanation of the use of this term.
Sponsorship
The most developed stakeholder management process description is found in the numerous
articles and books on the event sponsors. As the sponsors provide the finance, or defray the
costs by providing in-kind services, they are seen as primary stakeholders. According to the
Dictionary of Events Management (1996) the term 'sponsor' in event management means:
"1. One who assumes all or part of the financial responsibility for an event
2. A commercial sponsor that provides financial backing for an aspect(s) of an event and
who in return receives visibility, advertising, or other remunerations in lieu of cash"
As is revealed by the definition, sponsorship management is in part a risk management

strategy to minimize the uncertainty of event finance.
The number of sponsors for even the smallest event may be huge, when compared to other
types of projects. A small regional event in rural Australia, the Ulladulla Summer Games, lists
93 minor sponsors and 12 major sponsors. The later had in-kind or cash contribution of over
$1000 (Ulladulla Summer Games 1999 Report). Using the stakeholder classification matrix
(Business Excellence Australia 2003) all these sponsors can be designated as external and
primary. They can exert a positive or negative influence on an event. The likelihood of
business change occurring to such a large number of sponsors is high and therefore leads to
an uncertainty in event finance. Their strategy for risk minimization is to spread the risk by
increasing the number of sponsors. This is further discussed in Chapter 8 Risk Management.
An additional difference between the project management model and events is the job of
seeking and developing sponsorship. This is seen as a critical function of event management.
The PMBOK ™ model of stakeholder management assumes that the project manager does
not actively seek out the stakeholders. However a large part of the role of event management
is to seek and develop sponsorship (Goldblatt 2002; Allen et al 2002; Jackson and Schmader
1990). Sponsors are often the initiator and client of the event. The event is a part of the
marketing strategy of the sponsor. This adds an essential task to the stakeholder flowchart -
the development of a sponsorship invitation or proposal. Figure 3.2 illustrates the process
involved in this aspect of stakeholder management.

Figure 3.2 Sponsorship management process
Hospitality plays an important role in sponsorship development (Geldard & Sinclair 1996;
Allen et al 2002). It is can be an essential part of the event product.
Sponsor Management
The monitoring and controlling of the sponsors is the same process in both stakeholder
management and sponsor management. One technique employed be event management is
to set up levels of sponsorship. This establishes a standard and therefore assists controlling
the relationship between the sponsor and the event. The levels of sponsorship are related to
the types of sponsorship. Jackson and Schmader (1990) suggest these categories:
• Exclusive sponsor - also called the naming sponsor
• Presenting sponsor - sponsoring a part of the event
• Co -sponsor - share sponsorship of an area of the event
• Media Sponsor
• In Kind sponsor
The level of sponsorship enables the stakeholder to establish an initial commitment to the
event while minimizing their possible financial exposure (Van Der Wagen 2001). It allows the
sponsor to change their level of sponsorship in a planned manner. In many cases the event
will grade their sponsorship by using marketing terms. Sporting events may use the terms
gold, silver, and bronze to signify the level of sponsorship. The comparison to project

stakeholder management is evident that each of these levels can be mapped to the
classification of project stakeholders as primary, secondary, direct and indirect (Business
Excellence Australia 2003).
The Sydney Olympics used the competitive tendering process to fill the three levels of
sponsorship (Operations and Services : Sponsorship and Marketing : Page 2):
1. Team Millennium Olympic Partners (TMOP)
2 Supporter - at this level the sponsor was granted the rights for Australia only and was
allowed to use the Sydney 2000 marks in electronic broadcast media
3. Providers
The Sydney Olympics continually sold sponsorship rights during all the phases of the event
project cycle until the beginning of the games. The level of sponsorship allowed the
organization to control the, sometime dramatic, increase in the number of stakeholders in this
area.
A further technique of sponsorship management is the sponsorship of sections of the event.

The East Timor Independence day offered eight sections of the event to sponsors. These
component events included:
• Pyrotechnic Display
• Hospitality and Services to the International Delegation of Heads of Government
Cultural Spectacle & Ceremony to Celebrate the Independence of the Republic of
East Timor
The sponsorship rights sold included:
• Naming rights
• Hospitality, such as access to VIP functions
• Signage and Banners
(East Timor Ceremony Sponsorship n.d.)
Many sponsors will not commit to the event until they are sure that it will be a success. In
which case, their support for the event unlikely to happen during the initiation phase of the
project life cycle. Other sponsors will only commit once they have seen the event endorsed by
a large established company or a government body (Allen et al 2002, Geldard & Sinclair
1996). This leads to the common quandary for the event management whereby no company
will sponsor the event until other companies have sponsored it. Such a situation is not dealt
with in any of the standard texts on project management.
Partnering is a common technique for the management of the risk of having too many
sponsors. Partnering has the added advantage of employing the sponsor’s resources, such
as marketing, accounting and legal services as well as cash (Allen et al 2002). According to
Geldard & Sinclair (1996, p. 28):
"A partner may be sought where an event or organization requires substantial funds to
underwrite a project. The partner will enter into an agreement with the seeker of the funds and
will have rights to the project or venue for its useful life, or for an agreed lengthy period.
Usually funding is via a once only payment at the commencement of the project."
The tools of partnering and establishing various levels of sponsorship can be regarded as a
risk management strategy in a climate of change. In the events used in this thesis and the
case studies in the various event texts there was no freeze on selling sponsorship. It
continued throughout the projects cycle and in some cases sponsorship was sold after the
events for the products of the event – such as videos and mementoes (Allen et al 2002).
The conclusion from the literature and the event documents is that the project management
model of stakeholder management is used in the management of event sponsors. However
this model of project management stakeholder management is necessary but not sufficient to
model the process in events management.

Other Stakeholders
Although sponsorship management is vital to the success of many events, there are
numerous other parties with an interest in an event.
The largest group of stakeholders for most events is the attendees. They can be variously
described as spectators, participants, audience, ticket holders, or guests depending on the
type of event. The management of this group of stakeholders is complex and takes a large
part of the event’s budget. However, they are often the primary source of the revenue for
many events. The stakeholder management used for attendees is proactive. It seeks to
manipulate expectation of the attendees prior to the event. This is further explored in the
chapter 5 on Marketing. An example of this is provided by the Communication Plan of the
Sydney 2000 Olympics. One of the primary objectives of the plan was to:
“ensure appropriate levels of attitudinal change amongst the target groups” (Official Report of
the XXVII Olympiad 2001, pg001587.htm)
The Communication plan included “ a mix of key emotional and rational messages; such a
mix is very important in achieving attitudinal and behavioral change” (ibid, pg001593.htm)
The manipulation of the key stakeholder is in contrast to the project management outlined in
the PMBOK ™ and the major texts. As discussed in the chapters on Marketing and
Communication, the ability to change expectations and perceptions of the stakeholders is an
essential tool in event management.
Johnson's study of the east Timor Handover Ceremony lists twenty primary stakeholders.
(Johnson 2002). These include a large number of international organizations such as the UN,
International News Media and Catholic Church His analysis grouped the numerous sponsors
of the ceremony under the one category, International Companies. There are only five
identified secondary stakeholders - those who will be interested in the event if it passes a
threshold of importance (Business Excellence Australia 2003). However these include large
complex organizations such as the Indonesian Government and the US Department of State.
A large part of the risk in stakeholder management arises from the involvement of vastly
different organizational and social cultures. These range from the subsidence farming
economy with little infrastructure to the highly technical requirements of the international
media companies (Johnson 2002a).
Grouping of stakeholders by their common interest in the event, is a management technique.

The NSW Premier's Department and the Olympic Coordination Authority found this to be an
effective strategy and has continued it use after the Olympics.
" In September 1999, the NSW Premier’s Department and the Olympic Co-ordination
Authority established a secretariat for “Government Coordination” or what is now referred to
as “Stakeholder Coordination.” The objective was to improve across Government
communication, coordination and planning and thus minimize the identified risks for
Millennium Celebrations. Forums were established for both operations and media staff of all
relevant Government Agencies, as well as a separate forum for local councils around the
foreshore of the harbor." (Premiers Department NSW 2002).
Further on, the report comments on the success of grouping the stakeholders:
"Due to the success of Stakeholder Coordination and the many major lessons learned from
the Millennium Celebrations, it was decided to expand the concept to strengthen preparations
for the Coordination of the Sydney 2000 Olympic & Paralympic Games" (Premiers
Department NSW 2002).
Finally the report gives more tangible reasons for their success:
"Through greater communication, Stakeholders have the opportunity to learn and listen to the
roles and issues that other Stakeholders face. Although there is frank discussion regarding
some incidents and issues, Stakeholders more openly admit mistakes, issues or problems
that their Agency experienced, thus increasing their ability to learn. Therefore issues can be
looked at as they concern each event and the Government as a whole, rather than how they
affect an individual Stakeholder" (Premiers Department NSW 2002)
The number of stakeholders and complexity of their relationships is shown in Figure 3.3.

Figure 3.3. Centenary of Federation Celebrations, Event Stakeholder list, NSW Premiers Department
ORGANISATION Mktg Funding Access Event Volunteers Event Traffic & Cleansing Decorations Environmental Crowd Invited First Aid/ Emg
& Transport Mngmt Service
Comm Logistics Content Control Guests
NSW State Gov’t *

RTA * *
NSW Taxi Council *
STA * *
Dept Transport * *
Police * * *
NSW Ambulance Service *
ST John *
NSW Emergency *
Services
Dept Health *
Dept Aboriginal *
Affairs
Premier’s Department *
Dept Education *
Disabilities Council * *

Royal Blind Society * *

Ageing & Disability * *
City of Sydney * * * * * * * *
C&MPT * * * * * * *
SOH Trust *
Royal Botanic Gardens & * * *?
Domain Trust
Sydney Foreshores * *? *? *
Eastside Institutions *
SCG Trust *
Ethnic Affairs Com *
Aust.Defence Force *
Dept Defence *
Dept Veterans Affairs *
Civic Aviation Safety *
Auth.
Air Services Aust. *
National Trust *
NCCOF *

South Sydney Council * * * * * * *

Randwick Council * * * * *
Waverley Council * * * * * * *
Woollahra Council * * * * * * *
Sutherland Council * * *
NSW Regional Arts board *
Capital PR *
Channels 7&2 *
News Ltd *
Volunteering NSW * *
Rotary * *
SOCOG *
SES * * *
Rural Fire Services * *
Guides Australia * *
Coles Myer * *
State/Territory COF * *
Friends of the Gardens *
Friends of Cent Park *
NSW Rovers *

Clean-up Australia *
Aust Red Cross *
Royal Lifesaving Aust *
Friends Taronga Zoo *
Art Gallery of NSW *
MCA *
Powerhouse Museum *
SSO *
Youth Music Aust *
Opera Aust *
Aust. Volunteer Coastguard *
Aust. Volunt. Coastal Patrol *
Reproduced with permission EPMS CDROM 2003

Many of the techniques used in these meetings with the stakeholders were risk management
tools. The report mentioned that part of the success of the Stakeholder Coordination was that
the participants learned to use risk management as a group technique. In particular, the
scenario development technique enabled the stakeholders to understand and manage the
interdependencies between the numerous agencies, such as Road and Transport,
Emergency Services, and the Police . Ten disaster scenarios were give to the group to
consider their responses and coordinate these planned actions between the agencies (NSW
Premiers Department November 2001).
Stakeholder Management of the Event
The grouping of stakeholders can be initiated by the stakeholders as well as the event team.
It can be a strategic management decision by major organizations to create a standard
process in order to manage their relationship with a multitude of events. The rules and
regulations regarding the use of public roads means that the stakeholders for a public event
may include:
• Local Council
• Workcover
• Police Service
• Road and Traffic Authority (Road and Traffic Authority 1999)
The complexity of the relationships lead the Road and Traffic Authority to publish "Traffic
Management for Special Events" (Road and Traffic Authority 1999). The USA has a similar
manual dealing with its relationship to the events held within its jurisdiction (US Department of
Transportation 2003). Both these manuals assist the event performing organization (the event
team) with the planning of the events. They start by classifying the event according to its
affect on traffic flow. As stated in the introduction of the Traffic Management for Events (Road
and Traffic Authority 1999, p. 1):
"This guide focuses on the issues, which handled correctly can improve the quality and safety
of public events… Although a comprehensive event planning process cannot guarantee a
problem free event, the involvement of key stakeholders and the commitment of adequate
and suitable resources can greatly reduce the potential concerns. Such planning can also
enhance the ability of event managers to effectively respond to any problems that may occur"
Another initiative by some primary or key stakeholders is to create the planning pro forma
document for the event. The Liquor Licensing Division of the Queensland Department of
Tourism, Sport and Racing produced A Planning Guide for Event Managers (1999). This
online booklet is used to assist with the planning of the event and to comply with the
requirements of the various legal stakeholders in the event. As well, it is a risk management
strategy and enables decision making in the event environment.
The next step for a major client or sponsor of the event is to produce a comprehensive
planning manual for the whole event. As stated in the Event management; Planning Guide
For Event Managers in Victoria (Government of Victoria 2004, p. 6):
“The Victorian Government is concerned that substantial improvements are made to the
planning and running of major events so that the well being of patrons is protected. This
planning guide will help event managers and event organizing committees ensure that events
are safe and enjoyable for all participants”
These primary resource documents illustrate that many of the stakeholders do not expect to
play a passive role in the planning of events. Their requirements are complex and often
involve the active participation in the event management decision making in all the phases of
the event project life cycle.

Figure 3.4 Change control process
The active involvement of key stakeholders in all phases of the event management, lead
Johnson (2002a) to propose a procedure for change during the phases of the East Timor
project. He used this as a way to control the numerous changes. The control flowchart is
illustrated by Figure 3.4. However it is important to note that Johnson mentions that the
signoff procedure became too unwieldy when there were any changes. The deadline of the
event did not allow this process to be followed as it neared. As Johnson states in his analysis
of the independence day event in East Timor:
“The UN in general and UNATET itself are highly bureaucratic with a very hierarchical
responsibility adverse structure …. On the other hand, an event requires creativity and
flexibility” (Johnson 2002b, p. 1)
In outlining the formal methods of stakeholder management it is important that, in a complex
environment governed by a fixed deadline, informal processes can be imperative. As Coons
(1999, p. 69) points out:
"One of your most important tools for staging a successful event is contacts - who you and
members of your event team know (or come to know) among leaders in the community and
the media. The ability to make contacts and use them well is a vital key to your event's
success."

Summary
When compared to the PMBOK ™, event management entails complex relationships with
multiple stakeholders. The use of requirements analysis is not sufficient to establish a stable
setting in which to deliver an event. The number of stakeholders will change over the project
and the intangible nature of the product result in an ever changing and uncertain project
environment. Even the simplest event will have multiple stakeholders. The influence of the
stakeholders will be felt on the event throughout the phases of the project. Each event
attendee is a stakeholder and their objectives and requirements may be unique, changing and
intangible. Event management uses tools to reduce the resulting uncertainty. Marketing is
used to group, influence and manage the changing requirements of the attendees. Event
management has developed sophisticated tools to assist with the management of sponsors.
These tools, such as sponsorship development, marketing, promotion and the manipulation
of stakeholder requirements and expectations, are not found in the PMBOK ™.

Chapter 4 Design Management
Contents
Staging ............................................................................................................................. 35
Wow factor........................................................................................................................ 36
Site /venue location and layout ........................................................................................ 36
Programming and the program ........................................................................................ 37
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 37
For the purpose of this thesis, design is defined as a purposeful arrangement of elements of
an event to maximize the positive impression on the attendees. Therefore it solely concerns
the event itself. The term is generally used in conjunction with the object of the design
process such as lighting design (Allen et al 2002), décor design (Silvers 2004), and site
design (O’Toole 2003). Design has artistic and creative inputs. The design management
process is illustrated by Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1 Design management process

The areas of event management involved in the design process are:
• Staging - including the elements of staging (Allen et al 2002, p. 361) such as lighting,
sound, catering
• Site/venue location and layout
• Theatrical considerations including the look of the event
• Event program or content
• Wow factor - or unique experience (Malouf 1999)

PMBOK ™ (2000) does use the term design in discussion projects. However it is used in the
sense of a separate phase in the project life cycle. The Design phase is found at the
beginning of the cycle after the feasibility. In many cases, traditional projects would be given
the completed design of the end product.
Part of the work of the event management is to create the product as well as managing the
process to create the product. This is an area that is outside most texts on project
management. With the exception of the research and development projects, the project
manager may refine the design of the end product but does not create it.
It is part of the marketing process to assist in the creation and redefinition of the product at
the same time as the project plan is being formulated. Marketing is an ongoing process with
continuous inputs into the organization of the event. Chapter 7 describes the marketing
management process in detail.
Staging
The staging of the event is an example of a term that is hampered by a lack of standards
within the event industry. It is used as a general term for all the activities that make the event
occur. Its use is non-specific and tends to denote all the activities to organize and conduct the
event. The term is used in this sense for the Olympics (Official Report of the XXVII Olympiad
2001).
Allen et al (2002), O’Toole (2003) and Silvers (2004) use the term to mean the arrangement
of staging elements at the event site. These elements are illustrated as circling the theme of
the event in Figure 4.2.The event theme is then the basis of the event design of the staging
and has an input into venue (site) choice and layout.
.
Figure 4.2. Staging elements, source: O’Toole 2003, reproduced with permission
The staging area of the event utilizes a number of tools and techniques that are called mini
logistics by one author (Allen et al 2002). These mirror the tools of project management and
include:
• Schedule
• Task/responsibility list
• Site map or stage plan
• Contact list (Allen et al 2002)
The management used during the event is different in style to the event preparation.

Wow factor
The term is used by Allen et al (2002) and Citrine (1997) to describe the intangible feeling of
the event participant. Using the definition of design above, the Wow is part of the impression
gained by the attendee. It is regarded as essential to many events as it makes them special
and surprising. The Wow factor is related to the creativity and the creation of special ideas
(Surbeck 1991). Goldblatt (2002) states that creativity in the event management is a
requirement from the client for many events. Goldblatt (2002), O’Toole & Mikolaitis (2002) and
Silvers (2004) describe tools and techniques to assist this creative process for events. These
include:
• Brainstorming
• Mind mapping
• Storyboarding
• Attribute analysis and Morphological box.
TRIZ (O'Toole & Mikolaitis 2002)
Malouf (1999), stresses the use of the imagination, and innovation in producing a unique and
memorable event. Getz (1991) states that special events must be perceived to be outside of
normal experience and above the commonplace.
Design is a general term for all the aspects of the actual event rather than the management
functions. For this reason most event manuals and handbooks are concerned with this aspect
of event management.
If the event is regarded as the asset in traditional project management terms, then the event
manager's role is the design of the asset, not just managing the creation of the asset. In a
comparison with the building industry, the construction project manager would also have the
job of the architect. The role of creator, which may include initiator and designer, and project
manager are part of the event manager role, then the design does not have to be fixed. It can
evolve at the same time as the project management. For this reason the concept of change
control and sign off is often impractical, or, at least, cannot be used as a simple tool to control
the changes in event management.
Site /venue location and layout
Site or venue choice and layout is identified by most event authors as an essential element in
event success (Getz 1997; Allen et al 2002;O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002). Citrine (1997) regards
it as important programming and suggests that the layout is integral to the "wow” factor. The
choice of the site crosses all the areas of event management. The site choice involves input
from the stakeholders such as the sponsors. The site choice will be influenced by, and has an
influence on, the risk management decisions and marketing. However the site choice reflects
one of the fixed deliverables of the project management process. Once the site has been
selected it will remain fixed, in a similar way, the date is fixed. For this reason the constraints
of the site are integral to any decision in other areas of event management (O’Toole &
Mikolaitis 2002). Some of the large events prefer to construct the site, in which case the event
project becomes part of a much larger project that includes construction and other aspects of
civil engineering. The result is an interface of two projects (Official Report of the XXVII
Olympiad 2001; Timmins 2002). Figure 10.2 in Chapter 10 Procurement, contains the site
choice flow chart. Once the decision has been committed to, the design of the layout of the
site becomes the major way to minimize risks. The site moves from a variable in the
marketing mix to a parameter.
The changes in marketing will have a significant influence on the design of the layout of the
event. The financial penalty for changing a venue is a major incentive to minimize any
changes (Allen et al 2002).

Programming and the program
Programming is the core of the design process. It originates from the product definition and is
the creative process that blendes many elements into an attractive event. (Getz 1997, p.159).
The program is the deliverable of the programming process. It is "both the substance of the
event and the way in which it is scheduled and produced"(Ibid). Therefore the deliverable is
the schedule of the event itself. It is an output of the product definition and lists what is on at
the event and when it occurs. Harris & Allen (2002, p. 44) notes that the program includes
arranging the elements to create maximum impact on the audience.
"In creating the program, it is important to consider the flow of performances and activities, so
that the interest of the audience is maintained. It will be important to consider the shape of the
program - the rise and fall of intensity and emotion that it evokes in the audience, and the
build-up towards the a final climax."
This quote illustrates the intangible and ephemeral nature of the core of the event. For many
events the audience reaction is the ultimate event product and therefore is a further source of
uncertainty.
Getz (1997) notes that the tightness of the schedule, or the leeway for the times, can vary
according to the type of event. In particular events that are broadcast have tight schedules. At
other events, the schedule may be an indicator of time, rather than followed closely.
Summary
Design of the event offers a significant departure from the PMBOK ™. An event manager will
go from the client’s brief to design the event. The project management process can be seen
as a supporting function that delivers the Design. However the Design is not static and must
respond to changes arising from marketing and risk. Figure 4.1 illustrates that the Design
process concerns three areas that are concurrently managed. These will interact with each
other as the planning progresses. By the definition, events have special or unique
characteristics. Therefore many aspect of the design process and its outputs are necessarily
uncertain.

Chapter 5 Event Marketing
Contents
Product Quality................................................................................................................. 39
Marketing Process............................................................................................................ 39
Market Segmentation ....................................................................................................... 40
Marketing Mix ................................................................................................................... 40
Promotion ......................................................................................................................... 41
Quality of Management .................................................................................................... 42
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 42
In PMBOK ™ 2000 the closest area of knowledge equivalent to Event Marketing is Project
Quality Management (Chapter 8). The separation of the quality of the product and the quality
of the management is made on the first page. Figure 5.1 illustrates the marketing process for
events.

Figure 5.1 Marketing management process
Product Quality
A large section of event literature is devoted to establishing, monitoring and evaluating the
quality of the product, that is, the event. According to PMBOK ™ Quality is the "totality of
characteristics of an entity that bear on its ability to satisfy stated or implied needs" (p. 96)
Quality planning is established by first identifying standards.
This is similar to the common definition of marketing. Marketing is defined by the Chartered
Institute of Marketing (CIM) as “the management process responsible for identifying,
anticipating and satisfying customer requirements profitably." (Bowdin et al 2001, p. 114)
According to Hall as quoted in Allen et al (2002, p. 162):
“Marketing is that function of event management that can keep in touch with the event's
participants and visitors (consumers), read their needs and motivations, develop products that
meet these needs, and build a communication program which expresses the event's purpose
and objectives.” Note that this definition shows that marketing is active and ongoing. It implies
that the event is responsive to the changing needs and motivations.
Getz (1997) divides event quality into program quality and service quality. Program and
service make up the product. Both of these are seen as part of the customer's experience.
Program quality is seen as an ongoing process in need of evaluation and improvement. The
program can be seen as made of up of style elements. Therefore, style, as found in fashion,
artistic expression and manner of expression, is fundamental to program quality. Service
quality is different from program quality and is a complex mixture of elements ranging from
staff/customer interactions to promptness of the program. The success or failure of program
and service are measured by their comparison to the expectations of the target audience.
Marketing Process
Events and festivals share many of the characteristics of service industries as they require a
different marketing process to that of manufactured goods. Middleton (1994) and Shone
(2001) list these characteristics as:
• Inseparability - the consumption and production of the product take place
simultaneously.
• Perishability - the event occurs at one point in time. If the event does not go ahead,
the marketing expenditure is lost. It is difficult or impossible to resell the event, as can
be the case with manufactured products.
• Intangibility - the experience of the event by the customer happens at the event
itself. It is unique and cannot be experienced before the event. This leads to the
conclusion that the manipulation of customer expectations is an important technique
to event success. Intangibility also means that event experience is difficult to
measure.
• Heterogeneity - each customer of the event may have a different experience.
All these characteristics contribute to the uncertainty and complexity in the management
environment over the event project life cycle.
Using the PMBOK ™ definition of Quality, the problem for the event performing organization
(the event team or company) is discovering and describing the “stated or implied needs'”. As
discussed in the chapter on Stakeholders (Chapter 5), these needs are many, varied and
may change over time. The term the 'customer' will involve the large number of people who
attend the event and those who witness it through the media. Each attendee can have their
own set of motivators for being attracted to the event.
The alternative to using the needs analysis of the key stakeholders is to compare the quality
of the product to an external standard. Currently there are no government-endorsed
standards for the event industry (Silvers et al 2005). Some event industry associations have
created of certification programs such as “Certified Special Events Professional” of the
International Special Events Society (ISES) and the “Accredited Member MIAA” of the
Meetings Industry Association of Australia (MIAA). There are industry awards programs such

as International Festival and Events Association awards and ISES awards recognizing
excellence in their member’s events and event related products. Arcodia and Reid (2000), in
their survey of event associations around the world did not use the term quality. However the
ten categories such as reputation, ethics and education, that were used by Arcodia and Reid
implied a strong interest in improving quality. These are internal industry standards and there
may not be a direct correspondence with those of the various customers.
Market Segmentation
Discovering the needs and motivators of the customer is the major focus of event marketing.
For events that have a large customer base, such as public events, there are a number of
tools to do this. Maslow’s theory of a hierarchy of needs is adapted by Getz (1997) to the
event environment. Market Research techniques are used to match the event product to the
needs of the market. Van Der Wagen (2001) takes this a step further and proposes that the
event marketer should understand the motivational needs of the target market.
The research may be part of the event feasibility study and therefore performed during the
initiation phase of the event project life cycle. In this way the marketing process begins in the
initiation phase and forms part of the scope and product definition.
To assist the discovery process, other tools are used such as Market Segmentation. This is
the division of the potential market into groups with common characteristics that can be
utilized in the event marketing (Getz 1997;Allen et al 2002). It facilitates the management of
the event marketing through clustering.
The needs assessment result is transformed into the event objectives. It is recommended that
these objectives be defined using the SMART criteria. They must be Specific, Measurable,
Agreeable, Realistic and Time specific (Allen et al 2002). The ill-defined needs (Silvers 2004)
may be used as a measure to assess the quality of the event. The SMART criteria may be
seen as a method of reducing the uncertainty inherent in the needs analysis process in a
complex environment. The limitation of the event management by objectives is a result of the
changing event environment and the influence of the deadline. The changing event
environment such as extra sponsors, new opportunities for promotion, legislation, competition
for other events, changes in the objectives of the stakeholders will reduce the efficacy of the
original event objectives. The absolute deadline does not allow time for the whole needs
assessment process to be repeated. Therefore, both these factors, which at are common in
event management, will result in the objectives becoming irrelevant to the new conditions
(O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002).
Marketing Mix
An important tool in event marketing is the Marketing Mix (Getz 1997;Bowdin et al

2001;Goldblatt 2002).
The marketing mix is a group of marketing variables that can be altered and controlled so that
the event achieves its objectives (Getz 1997;Allen et al 2002). The aim of event marketing is
to optimize these variables. The marketing variables included in most event texts are:
• Product - all the elements that make up the event
• Price - the value of the event to the consumer
• Promotion - marketing communication between the consumers and the event
• Place - location of the event and the point of ticket purchase (Van Der Wagen 2001;
Allen et al 2002).
Other authors identify further variables such as people, programming and partnerships (Getz
1997).
The Product, the event, is therefore a variable and part of the marketing mix. Combining this
with the Middleton (1994) description, the event is both intangible and changing in response
to marketing. The marketing mix will be optimized during the event project life cycle. The
significance of this explains a major difference between the PMBOK ™ model of project
management and the event management model. The asset or product is not highly defined at

the beginning of the life cycle. It is a variable, created and developed by its own marketing.
This degree of uncertainty means that the risk management model can be employed.
"Market research can help to reduce uncertainty and therefore the risk of failure" (Watt 1998,
p. 64)
A number of marketing tools are used to reduce the product uncertainty. In particular the
Boston Consulting Group Matrix for product division is employed (Getz 2001). The outcome is
a product analysis of the event portfolio. The Ansoff matrix is utilized to create a strategy for
marketing (Allen et al 2002).
The marketing mix is therefore a feed-forward or predictive control (Allen et al 2002) device
for project definition by reducing the uncertainly inherent in a changeable and intangible
product.
Event management texts such as Getz (1997) and Goldblatt (2002) have large sections
devoted to the adaptation of marketing theory to events. Note that events are both a product
of marketing and often used as a tool of marketing. It is part of the marketing mix of
destinations and corporations (Getz 1997). The term 'event marketing' is used to denote the
advertising or promotion of a product through the use of events Jackson and Schmader
1990).
The purpose of the six million dollar, 1996 series of events called New Horizons, in India was
to market the product and services of Australia (Buchan Communications Group 1997). This
type of event was termed a country wide promotion (Australia India New Horizons - Project
Directory 1996). As a result of the success of the new Horizons events, a similar nationwide
series of events called newImages, was organized by the UK government in Australia. Their
mission statement illustrates how the events are used as part of the marketing mix.
“New Images will be a year long. Australia-wide program of events throughout 1997. New
Images will highlight the modern, evolving relationship between Britain and Australia and the
st
opportunities for forging new partnerships into the 21 century.
Events will cover the full spectrum of this vibrant relationship, including culture, science and
technology, sport, politics , media trade and investment, etc. New Images will promote a fresh
awareness of Britain and Australia as dynamic, innovative nations and will reach millions of
people.” (The British Council 1997, p. 2).
The quote also illustrates the intangible nature of the aims of these events.
Marketing has primary inputs into the event design process. It is also a risk management
technique to reduce the uncertainty related to sponsorship, financial management and
stakeholder management. Marketing can also be viewed as a feed-forward control
mechanism, whereby the product is designed to fit into the results of the marketing process.
The promotion variable of the marketing mix is treated with detail in the various event
literatures. Event handbooks or manual (Tonge 2000, Community Festival Handbook 1991,
Curry, B 2001, Making Dollars and Sense out of Community Events 2001), devote large
section to the promotion of the event. The communication aspect of promotion will be
encompassed by the model for event communication found in chapter 9 Communication.
The risks in event marketing are unique due to the deadline. Ambush Marketing is a
recognized major risk for large sponsored public events. Ambush marketing is the “strategy
employed by non-rights holding companies to create an appearance as if they are the official
event sponsor" (Grahame 1995, p. 102). The marketing campaigns of the competing airline
companies, Ansett and Qantas, provide an example of the importance of these issues to the
Sydney Olympics (Kendall and Curthoys 2001).
Promotion
The promotion variable of the marketing mix is a way to manipulate the customer’s
expectations. This is necessary as a risk management strategy so that the expectations will
be satisfied. This makes promotions a proactive tool in event management, rather than a
responsive tool (Getz 1997). As stated by Shone (2001, p. 181):
"‘What we are seeking to create is the desire for the product, through encouraging people to
feel that the event will fulfill their particular needs and by generating a positive 'buzz' about the
event."

There is no mention of this variable in PMBOK ™ 2000 or any of the project management
texts used for this thesis. The requirements of the stakeholders are not subject to
manipulation by the project company.
Event promotions must be able to respond quickly to changing conditions and recognize
promotional opportunities. There are deadlines within a promotion campaign (Catherwood &
Van Kirk 1992; Tonge 2000). The promotion campaign becomes a sub-project within the
larger event planning with inputs into the event design.
Event evaluation is regarded as part of event marketing, as it primarily concerns itself with
evaluating the customer experience. It is a feedback device and important part of continuous
improvement for repeat events. Unfortunately most event texts use the term evaluation to
mean the evaluation of the event.
Quality of Management
The event management process described in this thesis is unfortunately is not described and
therefore, hidden from view in most event literature. For this reason the ability to assess the
quality by identifying gaps in the management and management best practice is impossible.
Of the primary texts on event management and the current literature in journals, only a
handful describes how to monitor and assess the management of the event (Goldblatt 1999;
Goldblatt 2002; O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002). Although some mention the importance of the
management process, event evaluation is seen as evaluating the impact of the event on the
stakeholders, in particular, the customer satisfaction. Three fundamental types of evaluation
are described by Getz (1997):
• Formative - during the feasibility phase
• Process - during the operations of the event
• Summative - after the event
None of these involve the evaluation of the event management, except indirectly as a result of
the evaluation of the event. There is no framework given to assess the management. Of the
two academic conferences on events, the six papers on event evaluation concern evaluation
of the impact of events on host communities or the customer satisfaction (Events Beyond
2000; Events and Place Making 2002;). In their text on festival management Allen et al (2002,
p. 389) describe event evaluation as 'the process of critically observing, measuring and
monitoring the implementations of an event in order to assess its outcomes accurately” In the
section 'What to Evaluate" Allen et al (2002), only list the impacts of events.
The concept of project evaluation or evaluation of the management is treated only by the
most recent event texts. To some authors, this indicates the lack of maturity of the event
industry ( O’Toole 2002a; Silvers 2004; Silvers et al 2005).
Summary
PMBOK ™ and event management diverge widely on the management area of marketing.
PMBOK ™ encompasses part of marketing in Project Quality management. Event
management however includes the quality of the product as well as the project. The event is
focused on to such a degree that the quality of the management is rarely mentioned in event
literature. Event Marketing is one of the key knowledge areas and a process that is carried
out to align the event with the needs and motivators of the attendees. It is achieved by
optimizing the variables of the marketing mix of product, promotion, place and price. One of
these variables concerns the ability to change the perceptions of the attendees through
promotion. The marketing process then is a method to reduce the inherent uncertainty in
events. It inputs into all other areas of event management and is a fundamental agent of
change and development during the event project life cycle.

Chapter 6 Financial Management
Contents
Revenue ........................................................................................................................... 44
Revenue and Resources.................................................................................................. 46
Sponsorship management ............................................................................................... 47
Cash Flow......................................................................................................................... 47
Cost .................................................................................................................................. 48
Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 48
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 48
"Events are generally extremely expensive, with high expenditure required over a very short
period of time, and there are far higher levels of uncertainty about revenue and profit than
there are with the average business" Van Der Wagen (2001, p. 2)
The PMBOK ™ section on project cost management only describes part of the process of
event finance. One of the important functions of event management is sourcing, monitoring
and reporting on the event finance i.e. revenue or in-kind cost reduction. The incoming
finance may not be a fixed entity decided upon or agreed upon during the initiation phase.
The event revenue may come from a constant stream such as ticket sales or in sudden spurts
due to sponsors joining the event. Figure 6.1 illustrates the financial management process for
events.

Figure 6.1 Financial management process
Revenue
According to the event literature, the sources of revenue are:
• Clients
• Ticket sales

• Selling advertising
• Fundraising
• Sponsorship
• In kind assistance
• Merchandising
• Food and beverage sales at the event
• Government grants
• Broadcasting
• Other onsite revenue such as auctions and competitions.
(Getz 1997; Harris & Allen 2002; Allen et al 2002)
Three of these revenue sources are directly proportional to the number and type of
attendance at the event. Most of the others revenue sources are indirectly related to
attendance.
In all the events studied for this thesis, revenue and cost reduction was sought during all the
phases of the event project cycle. This may includes finance gained after the event has
occurred, as part of the shutdown procedure. The uncertainty with the incoming is reflected in
the uncertainty with the outgoing, that is, the cost of the event. Income is regarded as a
variable by some of the event texts. The term potential income is used and the ability to
source revenue from a wide area is described. It is necessary to estimate the income and
look for ancillary income (Allen et al 2002). At the same time, the uncertainty means that the
event company needs to be constantly aware of methods to reduce costs, should the
necessity arise (Allen et al 2002; O’Toole 2003).
The level of uncertainty needs to be established so that a dynamic costing system can be
used. Incremental planning, such as that recommended for software projects (Fichman 1999)
is one solution to the problem of uncertainty in income.
For some types of events, such as fundraisers, the event itself the sole source of finance. The
amount to spend on the event is fluid. The budget is used only as a guide. However the
importance of special events in fundraising is indicated by their cost/benefit ratio of 50%. Note
that the benefits have to be estimated so that the scope of the event can reflect the ratio
(Smallwood 1977; Baruch College's Nonprofit Management Group 1993). This introduces the
concept of value of the event to the participant/attendee. The value of the event to the
attendee must reflect the expected common value of the equivalent cost (O’Toole 2003;
Sonder 2004). Therefore an increase in the number of attendees means that more of the
incoming revenue must be spent on the event experience. The ability to forecast attendee
numbers at many events is highly specialized and gives rise to another cause of financial
uncertainty. Predicting the number of people that could come to an event is an essential part
of revenue and cost estimation (Clark 1997). However, as stated by Wendroff, in describing
fundraising events:
“Estimating how many people will contribute to the event can be an insurmountable task for
an agency that has never produced a special event; it can involve guesswork even for an
agency that holds one every few years.” (Wendroff 1999, p. 59)
In such a situation the budget changes are inevitable. As Clarke (1997, p. 29) points out:
“One thing for certain besides rain at events is changes in the initial revenue and expense
forecast.”
This statement agrees with Goldblatt (2002, p. 120):
" Budget preparation is probably the most challenging part in financial management since the
entire preparation is usually based on limited information or assumptions'."
The revenue for some events will depend on the effectiveness of ticket pricing. The price is a
variable of the marketing mix, as described in Chapter 5, Marketing. This is a further area of
uncertainty as the price of the tickets is difficult to set when the event is unique. The value of
the event is not evident until after the event is experienced. This leads to an impossible
situation of selling a product that cannot be described as it has not occurred.

Revenue and Resources
Resource planning will relate directly to revenue planning. The uncertainty in the amount and
timing of incoming revenue will be reflected in an uncertainty in contracting the suppliers.
"Few event managers have the luxury of guaranteed and sustained revenue to fund their
events. Most have to work hard to acquire necessary resources and manage them efficiently.”
(Getz 1997, p. 205). In some cases the event will reduce the need for finance by offsetting
cost through in-kind sponsorship. Sponsors will not be involved in the event until it has
reached a level of importance and looks like being a success. Figure 6.2, illustrates the flow-
on affect of the inability to estimate attendance numbers.
Figure 6.2 Uncertainty arising from attendees

The uncertainty in the number of attendees will create an uncertainty in revenue. This will
flow-on to the availability of funds for procurement and what facilities will be used for the
event. Procurement uncertainty will affect the program of event and the site layout. The
Marketing of the event may need to change to increase audience numbers .
This can be readily illustrated by a statement from the Sydney Olympics. The Olympics is a
highly refined event, repeated over many years, with numerous test events and complete
government support. Even such a unique event has uncertainly with regard to revenue
sources:
“From early 2000, due to declining income projections, it was evident SOCOG would face
substantial risks pending the early success of ticketing campaigns. By June 2000, it was
evident that underwriting of SOCOG’s budget would be necessary if the quality of the Games
were to be maintained at the highest level.” (Official Report of the XXVII Olympiad 2001,
pg001778.htm).
A further area of uncertainty in revenue and cost estimating arises when approximating the
work of staff when they are mostly volunteers. Without an extensive training session, such as
that provided by the Sydney Olympics, the value of the work by volunteers is difficult to
estimate. Also there is a different attitude with regard to finances. As pointed out by Clarke
(1997, p. 30):
" Volunteers are usually drawn to an event not to worry about finances. Many leave their
financial discretion when they walk into the festival office door. They want to volunteer their
time on projects that are fun and return altruistic benefits to the community."
The event texts recommend a variety of event management strategies to reduce uncertainty
in revenue. Such as:
1. Presales of tickets for public events, pre-registration for conferences, and exhibitions,
ticket scaling;
2. Increasing number of sponsors and levels of sponsorship leverage of current
sponsorship;
3. Alternative on-site sources of revenue such as broadcast rights, merchandising;
4. Sale of secondary event products, post event auction;
5. Consolidating all sales;
6. Event program sensitivity analysis to identify area of savings;

7. Well publicized public profile to attract further sponsorship (Watt 1998).
(Catherwood 1992; Graham et al 1995; McCabe et al 2000; Allen et al 2002)
Many texts recommend creating the event budget by listing all the projected costs and then
deciding on sources of revenue (Getz 1997;IFEA 1997). Cash flow planning and using
breakeven chart is essential in the budgeting (McCabe et al 2000;Van Der Wagen 2001; Allen
et al 2002).
Uncertainty in event costs and revenue can result in panic payment. These are regarded as
common in the event environment (Van Der Wagen 2001).
Figure 6.3 illustrates a summary of the recommended process of event budgeting through
financial management.
Brainstorm Estimate all Create Event Suggest revenue

event content costs Budget sources
Decide Cost sensitivity Leverage

breakeven
Figurepoint analysis - after Allen et alrevenue
6.3 Process of budgeting 2002) sources
Sponsorship management
Sponsorship is defined by Sonder (2004, p. 416) as:

“A cash or in-kind fee paid to a property (typically in sports, arts, entertainment or causes) in
return for access to the exploitable commercial potential associated with that property.”
The management of the sponsorship and the relationship between the event and the sponsor
is an important part of financial management.
The event texts go into great detail on the techniques to source, develop and manage
sponsors. From a project management perspective this is a way to reduce the financial risk
associated with the project. The techniques range from distributing the risk, such as seeking a
number of sponsors, to cash flow planning (Getz 1997; Allen et al 2002). Setting up levels of
sponsorship (Graham et al 1995; Getz 1997; Allen et al 2002) is a recommended strategy for
managing the sponsor/event relationship. It can be viewed as a risk management strategy to
minimize the event exposure to financial risk.
The management of sponsors will have input from the other areas of event management. In
particular the marketing and stakeholder management will significantly interact with the
sponsor management. Watt (1998, p. 51) points out:
"A well-publicized public profile will often be a crucial factor in obtaining financial support from
public and private purposes."
Raising the public profile of the event may be part of the project planning and will be
developed while other areas of management are being implemented. The result is that
sponsors can commit to the event at anytime. This is a further source of uncertainty in event
finance. This aspect of event management is further discussed as part of Stakeholder
management in chapter 3.
Cash Flow
The management of the cash flow is an essential skill in event management (Van Der Wagen
2001; Allen et al 2002; O’Toole 2003; Sonder 2004). There may be multiple sources of
income and the timing of the payments may be distributed over the life cycle. If the event
income is directly dependent on a variable such as the attendees, commitment by sponsors
or exhibition space sold, then the beak-even point must be established. Reaching the
breakeven point becomes a milestone in the event project. This variability of finance
distinguishes the event project from the PMBOK ™ projects.

An important point is made by Van Der Wagen (2001, p. 96) concerning panic payments
" This unusual accounting term is not exclusive to the event industry, but this industry is one
in which inflated panic prices are often paid"
The panic payment is an example of the deadline of event ruling the other variables such as
cost in the interest of quality.
Cost
Event cost is estimated through quotes and expert judgment. Zero based budgets are
common with special events. Estimation becomes more accurate as the event and the scope
of work becomes more defined. However initial cost estimates can vary up to plus or minus
50% due to the uniqueness of the resources (O’Toole 2003). Event cost estimation often uses
parametric methods such as cost per head for conferences (McCabe et al 2000) or cost per
square meter for exhibitions (O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002). In this way the costs can be directly
related to the essential event variable. The variable may also correspond to the event
revenue. Thus revenue for a festival will increase with ticket sales, as will the cost.
Cost planning uses cost classification as a method of predicting, monitoring and controlling
costs. Event costs are divided into Direct or Indirect, Unique or Standard, Fixed or Variable,
Onetime or Recurring. This classification will also indicate the degree of uncertainty in the
estimate of the costs.
Due to the fixed deadline and possible changes in scope, the time of estimating will make a
difference to the degree of accuracy of cost estimate (O’Toole 2003). This is further source of
uncertainty for the management of an event.
A cost found in the event management and not found in PMBOK ™ is the cost of marketing.
This can be a significant cost if part of marketing is to source sponsorship. Shone’s comments
(2001, p. 171) are worth quoting at length, as he makes a number of important points:
"Some commentators suggest that events need to have quite a substantial marketing budget
compared to normal kinds of products, perhaps as much as 10 percent of the total event
expenditure, as opposed to 3-4 percent for most other goods and services, because of their
short duration and unique profiles compared to other types of goods and services, which are
much longer lived. Of all the marketing planning activities, the marketing schedule is the one
most likely to surprise people new to the job. The lead times for preparing some marketing
activities can be shockingly long."
Impacts
The intangible results of an event, such as marketing, raising awareness of issues, cultural
enhancement and political impacts, can mean that the financial aspects of the event are
secondary to these results. That is – the money can always be found. Hence the strategic
objectives of the event can have significant influence on the more measurable cost and
income of the event. This is reflected in the term triple bottom line. As mentioned elsewhere
in this thesis, such intangibles can result in a complex and uncertain event management
environment.
As Shone (2001, p. 171) points out:

"In the events business, there may be some types of events whose purpose is indeed to
make a profit, but we should be careful not to generalize about profit. Perhaps we could more
legitimately say that events are about creating wealth - wealth of experiences, wealth in
socialization, wealth in community spirit - but profit is too limited a concept."
Summary
The event project significantly differs from the PMBOK ™ in this area of knowledge. Cost
management is an integral part of finance management for events. Many events are uncertain
of their income. This uncertainty of income results in an uncertainty in costs and flows into all

other areas of the event. For this reason, sponsorship management is a major part of all texts
on event management. By employing sophisticated techniques in developing and managing
the sponsors such as levels of sponsorship, the event reduces its financial risk. The event
can find revenue in a variety of ways. This can occur prior to, during and after the event. Such
a system is very different to the model proposed in PMBOK ™ 2000.

Chapter 7 Time Management
Contents
Event Date........................................................................................................................ 52
Deliverables...................................................................................................................... 53
Deadline Management ..................................................................................................... 54
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 56
“This is the primary difference between event project management and other realms of project
management. The event’s date, which is virtually fixed, not flexible is the starting point of
project time management, rather than the project management process determining the
completion date. Time restrictions will determine the tempo of the event project.” (Silvers
2004, p. 39)
PMBOK ™ describes time management as the tools and techniques of identification of

activities and their optimal sequencing to produce and control the project schedule.
Substantially, this aspect of event management, as evidenced by the texts, literature and
primary documents, is the same. Time management is embedded in all other areas of
management and is rarely mentioned as a separate function of event management. The
management of time for events is one of emphasis and priority of using the tools and
techniques described in PMBOK ™ in a dynamic and uncertain setting. The scheduling of an
event includes what occurs at the event in the form of the event program, and the production
of the program. The later is represented by the production schedule comprising the
supporting activities of the program, such as the catering, audiovisual and security.
Goldblatt (2002, p. 101) describes time management as being the difference between
success and failure:
“Your return on your event investment is in direct proportion to your ability to manage your
time efficiently and meet various deadlines”
In their study of 14 events in the entrainment industry the project managers Hartman, F
Ashrafi, R. & Jergeas, G. (1998, p. 273) remark:
“The live entertainment industry consistently delivers projects on time. Their overall
commercial success is better that some traditional project management oriented industries,
for example construction, which has a higher bankruptcy and litigation rate"
Their conclusion is that there are strengths in the live entertainment industry that contribute to
their timeliness. These include: that the completion is clearly defined; creativity is embraced;
there is an "espirit de corps" in the event organization and there was 'comfort' with risk and
uncertainty.
Most of these strengths are intangible qualities that may be described as the culture of the
project management company.
The fact of the immoveable deadline means that the planning process must begin by setting
date of the event and work backwards to establish the timelines ( Levy & Marion 1997;
O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002; Silvers 2004).
The complexity of such formal task and time analysis lead the Los Angeles Olympics to revert
to weekly meeting rather than use formal schedules (Bowdin et al 2001).
Figure 7.1 illustrates the time management process used in management of events.

Figure 7.1 Time management process
The input to the process is from the Stakeholder requirements, in particular, the client and the
attendee expectations. Marketing will assist in the decision on the deadline i.e. the date of
the event. The scheduling of the tasks will be initially determined by the design of the event in
particular the content of the event. There are inputs from the Scope and Procurement
processes. The tasks will be scheduled back from the date of the event. Critical tasks are
identified by combination of the inputs from Scope and Procurement with input from the Risk
process. The Risk process will assist establishing the milestones and the time contingency
such as buffers. When the changes occur, they will be assessed by the deadline algorithm as
illustrated in Figure 7.2. Time management is performed over time and will be influenced by
the external and internal trends in the other areas of the event management.

Figure 7.2 Deadline algorithm
Event Date
In the strategic planning of an event or festival the choice of the date of the event is crucial to
its success (Getz 1997; Allen et al 2002). In particular, the time of year for events whose
objectives are to attract tourists to a region, needs to be carefully thought out to maximize its

impact. The decision to stage an event in either off-peak or on-peak tourism season is
regarded by some authors as crucial to its success (Tonge 2000). For most ceremonies and
anniversary events, such as New Years Eve, the date will already be decided by tradition.
For corporate events, such as conferences, award nights and exhibitions, the date must be
chosen to optimize its commercial objectives. McCabe et al (2000) mention that there is a
peak in the number of conferences during the May and June in Australia due to the date’s
nearness to the end of the financial year.
Hence the date of the event is generally discussed and confirmed during the initiation phase
of the event project life cycle or the decision is outside of the event management process.
Once it is decided, the date of the event henceforth becomes a fixed constraint on the
management process.
Deliverables
The deliverables of the time management process are the schedules, runs sheets and
planning programs. These can be divided according to the phase of the event project. The
most common term used is the “timeline” (Malouf 1999; Goldblatt 2002). The timeline
represents the planning and implementation phases of the event project. Constructing a
timeline is done by deciding on key dates and optimizing the lead times.
Shone (2001, p. 171) emphasizes the ability to identify the “lead time”: First concern is
“Of all the marketing planning activities, the marketing schedule is the one most likely to
surprise people new to the job. The lead times for preparing some marketing activities can be
shockingly long."
Reading this quote in the light of the work of Sterman (2000) on dynamic systems and delay,
illustrate a fundamental contribution to uncertainty. The identification of a lead time is an
attempt to manage the work flow delay and therefore manage the inherent uncertainty.
A number of event texts and the event manuals include a sample of a timeline or a suggested
timeline for the planning of events (Community Festival Handbook 1991; Coons 1999; Malouf
1999). The event stakeholders publish sample timelines and include the lead times or key
dates that must be met (Major and Special Events Planning: A Guide for Promoters and
Councils 1997; Edgecombe 1999; Road and Traffic Authority 1999; A Planning Guide for
Event Managers 1999; Government of Victoria 2004). The event stakeholders represented by
these manuals include the local council, police, roads authority, state government and the
event site operations staff.
The highly coupled software scheduling system, such as project management software, is not
recommended by any of the event texts. Scheduling software has a major limitation in that it
cannot respond to rapid changes in its linked resources (O’Toole 2003). The scheduling
software used by the Sydney Olympics was transferred into a more familiar system for the
staff (Allen et al 2002). Gantt Charts, PERT Charts and Critical Path Analysis are
recommended in a simpler form than is found in software packages. All the software
programs are assessed in terms of their ability to change within the constraints of a deadline
(O’Toole 2003; Silvers 2004).
The other deliverables of time management are the schedules for staging the event. They
include:
• Program – this is described in the Chapter 4 Design
• Production schedule
• Run sheets
• Cue sheets (Allen et al 2002; Malouf 1999; O’Toole 2003)
These are an output of the sub-process of staging in event design. They are not described in
PMBOK ™. Unlike the event planning timeline, the staging schedules are often critical down
to the minute (Allen et al 2002; Silvers 2004). They are used to coordinate the program on the
day of the event and involve a number of key contractors, such as the media broadcast
company and the fireworks suppliers.
The production schedule for some events may include the tasks and times for the preparation
of the venue or site. In this sense, the production schedule is employed as an operations
manual. The complexity of tasks and times on the day of the event is illustrated by the system

recommended by Sonder (2004, p.123), when explaining how to decide on the preparation
time:
“ Subtract the time a task takes to accomplish from that time it needs to be finished to
determine the time it should start. Then factor in other conflicting activities and adjust the
schedule accordingly. Submit the schedule to all relevant parties and adjust as needed.
Repeat this process until consensus is achieved. All involved should feel that they have
sufficient time to complete their tasks in a manner that does justice to their skills and
experience.”
In this quote Sonder is recommends to the event manager that they work backward from the
deadline, use quality control, allow expert opinion and, at the same time, enhance the work as
a team.
Deadline Management
The delivery of the event on time is the major priority and every aspect of the event
management process is assessed according to its possible affect on the deadline. Each of the
processes that are described in this thesis must undergo assessment according to the
deadline. It is a simple algorithm as illustrated by figure 7.2. Figure 7.3 contains an
explanation of the algorithm.

Figure 7.3. Terms used in Figure 7.2
Change Descriptor
The change can be internal or external. The descriptor must contain its sources as well as an
exact description.
Will it influence the deadline?
This decision may not be obvious at first and therefore may be a draft decision until the next stage
is used.
No
Many changes will be a matter of adjusting aspects of the event and therefore adjusting the
scope. They may not have any bearing on the event deadline.
Yes
Initially accepting that the change will impinge on the deadline.
Assessment tools
These are a number of techniques to assess the consequence of the change and the strategy
required to management it. These include:
• Sensitivity analysis - testing the affect on the event by a small change in a parameter.
• Expert Opinion - using the experience of event experts .The dynamic and unique nature
of many events and the immaturity of the industry give value to experience in previous
similar events..
• Systems Analysis - the interconnected nature of event management means that the
tools of systems analysis such as fault trees and flow diagrams can be employed.
• Crucial tasks and the CPA - the critical, or more correctly crucial, tasks will be affected
by any change.
Comparison to Tolerances - the tolerance of the stakeholders will be a significant part of the
assessment of the change.
Direct - the change will have a direct influence on the deadline.
Indirect - the change will have a flow-on to the deadline. The strategy to deal with this comes
from the risk management process.
Immediate action - the assessment calls for action to manage the change.
Identify and employ contingency - the assessment calls for the implementation of a
contingency plan. This is occurs when the change was expected and allowed for in the risk
management planning.
Cancel Event - the extreme solution to the change. Cancelling would require a variety of further
tasks and is part of contingency planning arising from the risk management process.
Cancel secondary products - sections of the event are cancelled to allow to continuation of the
main product. This will have implications on Event Design and the Marketing of the event. Also
there would be inputs form the Marketing in order to make the best decision on what parts of the
event to cancel.
Extra resources/finance- extra resources area engaged to deal with the change. This is a
common solution to changes and is a characteristic of the dynamic nature of event management.
The time overruns experienced in other projects, such as the 30 % of time over runs in
software projects (Standish Report 1995, 2004), is an impossible situation for event
management. The fact of that the event must occur at the scheduled date is so implanted in
event management that only the recent event texts mention it.

Summary
The process and tools and techniques described in PMBOK ™ are necessary but not
sufficient to describe the time management for events. The major difference is that the date of
the event is fixed and the planning must work backwards from the event date. This becomes
the ultimate deadline that must be taken into account by all decisions made during the event
project. The time management during the event which involves tightly scheduled activities
with little buffer time, is not covered by PMBOK ™ 2000.

Chapter 8 Risk Management
Contents
Risk in event literature...................................................................................................... 59

Qualitative Risk assessment ............................................................................................ 61
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 61
The PMBOK ™ process of risk management is summarized by Figure 8.1.
Establish the context

Communicate and consult
Identify risks
Monitor and review

Analyse risks
Evaluate risks
Assess risk
Treat risks
Figure 8.1 Source AS/NSZ 4360:1999, O’Toole (2003) – reproduced with permission
Unlike most of the areas of knowledge described in PMBOK ™, the risk management is a
cross functional process, that is applied to all the other knowledge areas.
An important statement in the PMBOK ™ (2000, p. 27) for the content of this chapter is:
"Project risk includes both threats to the project's objectives and opportunities to improve on
those objectives. It has its origins in the uncertainty that is present in all projects. Known risks
are those that have been identified and analyzed, and it may be possible to plan for them.
Unknown risks cannot be managed, although project managers may address them by
applying a general contingency based on past experience with similar projects."
This quote illustrates the limitations in the ability to directly apply the PMBOK ™ risk
management model to events. These include:
• Measuring the risk against project objectives. Events are multi-objective. Many of
these objectives are intangible and varying over the event project life cycle in
response to external and internal developments. As set out in Chapter 4 Design of
this thesis, the qualities of surprise and the unexpected are an essential part of the
event experience.
• In a complex environment, the ability to predict is severely limited. Therefore the
unknown risks, those that cannot be managed in the PMBOK ™ sense, are more
common.
• The risk management process takes time and therefore is subject to the time
constraints under a deadline. In such a situation, the risks must be highly prioritized.

In a dynamic system with uncertainty that characterizes event management, this is a
major risk in itself.
The application of the model for event management is recognized by all the recent event texts
(O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002; Harris & Allen 2002; Goldblatt 2002; Tarlow 2002; Silvers 2004;
Allen et al 2005). Many of the earlier texts tend to characterize risk management as useful in
specific areas of event management such as:
• Safety on site and Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) issues (Tonge 2000;
Department of Tourism Sport and Racing 1999)
• Financial (Catherwood et al 1992; Getz 1997)
• Legal (McCabe et al 2000).
This is further proof of the lack of identification of the fundamental management process in
event management literature. The outstanding exception is Berlonghi who comprehensively
described the process and its application to all areas of event management (Berlonghi 1990).
Each of the modern texts refers to Berlonghi's work.
Figure 8.2 illustrates the risk management process as applied to events.
Figure 8.2. Risk management process

This figure is substantially the same as the figure in the Australian Standards. Figure 8.1 is a
representation of the PMBOK ™ process. The major difference is:

The inputs and outputs to other event management processes and knowledge areas. In
particular the areas of Marketing, Scope and Design
• The introduction of internal change as an integral part of the risk management
process and external change in terms of trends
• The introduction of the deadline as a major constraint on the process.
Risk in event literature
A large part of the sections on risk management describe the common risks found at events.
These may be termed staging or event operational risks. The risks to the project, that is the
process of management, are only covered in a small number of recent event texts. According
to O’Toole & Mikolaitis (2002), Allen et al (2002), the special circumstances of an event give
rise to risks unique to the industry. These include:
• Crowds
• Volunteers
• New venues/sites
• Attractions that appear risky
• Untried combinations of vendors
• Media
The area of concern for risk management in the various event texts is the risk to the
attendees. These are:
1. Unfamiliarity - environment, site, staff
2. Crowds
3. Logistics - movement
4. Temporary structures
5. Security (EMA 1999)
Each type of event, such as festivals, exhibitions and conferences, will have further risks
associated with the industry. As headings for sports event risk, Graham (1995) lists:
• Athlete protection
• Loss prevention
• Storage
• Access to events -such as credentialing
• Hiring and training staff
• Transporting goods
• Safety
• Insurance
These lists are a mixture of risk origin ( the area of event management), and risk action
description. The granularity or fineness of the description of the risk management is not
described. This gives rise to the question of when to stop the risk management. There is no
concept that the event has a deadline and therefore the risk management has to have a level
where it stops. The recently released Australian Standard (Standards Australia International
(2004, p. 58) recognizes this limitation of the process outlined in Figure 8.1:
“… it is important to strike a balance between the effort required to obtain further information
and the value of the information to the decision process. Consultation and communication
may help to determine which aspects of uncertainty require greatest effort. In some
circumstances it will not be possible to obtain further information, or ignorance may mean that
uncertainty cannot be resolved.”
Within the event management environment, the timeliness of the risk analysis and the
mitigation strategies has to be taken into account.
The risks are categorized by origin or effect. However it is recognized that, in a dynamic
system such as event management, the risks can cascade (Parry 2003) and may require
various tools to find their origin, Fault tables and Ishikawa diagrams (O’Toole & Mikolaitis
2002; Parry 2003; Silvers 2004) are recommended to assist this process. The specialty of

events such as their purposeful uncertainty and the event uniqueness, leads some authors to
recommended wide consultation as a means to identify risk and ensure the staff understand
the importance of risk management (Hatton 2000; O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002; Business
Excellence Australia 2003).
Most of the above represent areas of uncertainty that arise out of unfamiliarity of a new
configuration of suppliers, attendees, staff and site. These can be regarded as the variables
on which the event management acts. There is little written on the risk involved in the event
management process.
Problems, as perceived at the event itself, may be a symptom of hidden management
problems O’Toole (2003b, p.1) illustrates the limitation of only analyzing risks at the event:
“A description of event operations often concerns only the most immediate aspects of it such
as the food, waste, toilets and pathways. Because the operations are physically evident at the
event, they can easily distract from the real issues. They are the outcome of a process. In
most cases their success or failure will depend on the effectiveness this process - the
planning and ongoing management. In other words, they should be seen as the visible result
of event management. When there is a problem at an event this most often is a symptom or
an outcome of a management process. Each aspect of event operation can be traced back to
the management system.”
It is important to point out that the superficial response to this cluster of risks would be to
reduce the unfamiliarity of the configuration. However a basic objective of events is the
presentation of novelty (Malouf 1999; Allen et al 2002). Different authors express this novelty
as the “Wow factor” (Allen et al 2002), the “Reveal”, changing the attendee's attitudes or
serendipity. The novelty is one of the intangibles and, therefore, immeasurable outcomes of
the event management process. Hence the solution of running the event to test the system
would not allow the event to meet its primary objective.
Summarized as a qualitative model, event uncertainty can be expressed as a function of

variables volunteer competency, novelty or newness of the event, stakeholder objectives,
event management competency and the ability to measure event outcomes (intangibility).
Each of these characteristics may be related to the other variables. The ability to define and
sustain the stakeholder objectives can be related to the ability to measure the event
outcomes. To be able to measure this successfully would require data that is currently
unavailable.
Attendees
The other characteristic of the risks listed above is that they concern the attendees. The
liability of safety issues is large and ever-present in all the event literature that deals with risk
(Tatrai 2001; Tarlow 2002). The attendees will be the origin of primary and secondary (or
flow on) risk. If some of the risks eventuate it will result in intervention of outside agencies -
such as police or emergency service - and remove the authority of the event from the event
management (Davies n.d. ) Therefore the consequence of risks to the attendees is extreme.
This is not covered specifically in the PMBOK ™. Using the PMBOK ™ model of risk
assessment would involve measuring the objectives of the stakeholders , i.e. the attendees
against the expected outcomes. However, not only are their numerous attendees, their
objectives are many, varied and difficult, if not impossible, to measure. For example some
events such as extreme sports, are meant to be risky (Office of Sport and Recreation
Tasmania 1999).
.
All the event risk management documents such as the risk management plans, used to
validate this thesis have the risk to the attendees as their primary concern (Symonds Group
Ltd 1999; Hatton 2000; Tatrai 2001b; Avert Risk Management 2001; NSW Premiers
Department 2001; Perkins 2001). The legal decisions and legislations that have substantially
affected event management has arisen from disasters at events. The 1998 Sydney to Hobart
Yacht race (State Coroner 2000), the inquest into the Death of Jessica Malik (Milledge 2002)
have had lasting affects on event management in Australia. The stampede at Ellis Park

stadium in Johannesburg in 2001 lead to wide ranging changes in national legislations for
events (Ellis Park Stadium Disaster 2001). Many of these disasters are, at the time of writing
(December 2004), still in the courts. The charge of Criminal Nuisance against the event
manager of the Le Race 2001 cycle race in New Zealand is still being contested (O’Toole
2003a). The West Warwick club fire in February in the USA is under investigation as to the
affect on event management.
Qualitative risk assessment
A number of factors mitigate against the comprehensive use of quantitative methods of risk
assessment for events. Parry (2003) illustrates the “poverty of quantification” by comparing
the reassessment of insurance that results from disasters. In particular, the appearance of
accuracy may diminish the risk awareness of the organization through misplaced confidence.
This is further stressed in the latest edition of the Australian and New Zealand Standard on
Risk Management (2004, p. 58):
“The availability of simple-to-use software tools can give the appearance of robust analysis of
uncertainty even where the underlying logic is flawed.”
Parry (2003) comments on the importance of the business environment and the risk
philosophy of the organization in the interpretation of risk. He emphasizes that the risk
awareness of the organization is essential to each phase of the risk management process.
The centrality of risk awareness is stressed by many of the texts. Risk awareness is not
treated by PMBOK ™, although a case could be made that the chapter in PMBOK ™ is part
of the risk awareness. The risk assessment meeting is essential in the risk management
process (Berlonghi 1990; Goldblatt 2002; Allen et al 2002). There are three functions of a risk
assessment meeting:
1. Empower the staff and volunteers to take responsibility
2. Employ the combined expertise to identify risks
3. Demonstrate the duty of care (Graham 1995)
The first two of these concern raising the risk awareness of the event team.
Due to the nature of events in that they deal with crowds, emergency management is an
important part of any risk management process. EMA (1999) contains a chapter on the
psychological dimension of any risk situation. The secondary risk can create greater loss than
the primary risk. This is closely linked to the risk awareness of the event team.
A number of the primary event documents used for this thesis illustrate that scenario
development or table top exercises are used in preference to, or to validate the application of,
the Australian Standards approach to the unique situation at events (NSW Premiers
Department November 2001; Table Top Exercise Major Event 20.11.01 Responses To
Scenarios 2001; Business Excellence Australia 2003). The table top exercise used by the
Office of Protocol and Special Events or the NSW Premiers Department originate from the
methodology used by the armed forces and disaster management organizations such as
Emergency Management Australia (EMA1999; EMA 2000). These exercises concern
disasters at large events where the responsibility is complex due to the involvement of multi-
agencies such as Police, Roads and Transport Authorities
Summary
The model presented in the PMBOK ™ represents risk management in a more stable and
certain management environment than is found in most event management. The need to
reduce the uncertainty is in opposition to these three fundamental characteristics of event
management:
1. serendipity or surprise that is part of the definition of the word ‘event’;
2. inability to fix (freeze) the stakeholder requirements over the event project life cycle;
3. intangible nature of the asset itself – the event – and its future effects.
The crowds at events require a special risk management process that is not described in
PMBOK ™. All the event literature, when dealing with risk, has crowd management as a
major priority. However, with some notable exceptions, the event literature does not describe
the generic process of risk management. The literature predominately describes specific risks

at the event and ignores the generic risk management process. It does describe the
fundamental cross-functional process that applies throughout the phases of the event project.

Chapter 9 Communication
Contents
Event manuals.................................................................................................................. 64
Tools................................................................................................................................. 65
External Communication - Promotion .............................................................................. 65
Onsite communications (OSC)......................................................................................... 67
Event Documentation, Filing and Archiving ..................................................................... 67
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 68
The PMBOK ™ 2000 section on project communication follows its general model shown in
Figure 9.1.
Requirements Plan Implement Monitor Close

Figure 9.1 Simplified PMBOK ™ process
Within this process are a number of feedback loops to refine the applicability of the model.
This chapter will demonstrate that this model, with the tools and techniques summarized by
PMBOK ™, is necessary but not sufficient to represent event management communication.
The PMBOK ™ process is performed under the three conditions of the event environment, as
evidenced by the current texts and the case studies:
1. Deadline
2 Complexity
3 Uncertainty
As presented in the various event texts (Getz 1997; Allen et al 2002 ; Goldblatt 2002; Malouf
2002; Silvers 2004; Sonder 2004) the communications involved in event management can be
categorized as shown in Figure 9.2.
Figure 9.2 Categories of event management communication

• Internal Staff – including:
o Documentation/Office
o Administration Manual
o IT system
• Internal Volunteers – including:
o Meetings, briefings
• Internal - during event including:
o Onsite Communication systems
o Operation manual
• External - stakeholders including:
o Progress Reporting such as legal requirements
o Promoting (audience)
o Development (sponsors)
As well as these formal means and processes of communication there are informal means of
communication made up of social networks. This is dealt with elsewhere in this thesis. The
informal communication channels provide mutual understanding, a common language and
shared experience that are important in team development (Drucker 1974). These points
were made in the early texts on management. Oral communication also provides an
explanation of formal communication. It places the formal communication into context and
clarifies issues. This is missing from many aspects of formal communication such as reports,
and templates (Mintzberg 1994).

Of the event communication categories list in Figure 9.2, Promotion, Stakeholder
Development and Onsite communication are not covered in the PMBOK ™.
Hartman et al (1998, p. 277) recommend that “all parties have to be involved from the
definition phase onward in order to assure proper communication in project teams during all
phases of the project life cycle.” However there is no reason given for this, which is
particularly surprising as all the events used in the study were a success. The general term
“all parties” does not give any limit on the stakeholders that are included. As shown in the
chapter 3 of this thesis, the number of stakeholders can easily exceed one hundred. It is a
physical impossibility to include them. The buy-in or including all parties in the decision
making is a common suggested solution to management problems. However there are many
problems with including all the stakeholders in every phase. It needs to be traded off against
the risk that may arise, such as the conflict of stakeholder requirements, as well as its affect
on the deadline. New stakeholders will be introduced as the event project progresses though
its phases. In particular, sponsors and the audience will, ideally, increase as the event nears.
Having all parties “involved from the definition phase” is impossible for many types of events.
Event manuals
The use of a manual in event management is stressed by a number of authors (O’Toole &
Mikolaitis 2002; Silvers 2004). A sample of actual manuals are used as evidence of the
management system by this thesis (See Bibliography for a list of the manuals used in this
thesis). Event manuals can be of various types. Due to the transitory nature of events, they
do not correspond to the operation or procedural manuals recommended by the International
Organization for Standardization ISO (Seddon 2000). These types of manuals commonly
used in events are not described by PMBOK ™.
The manual is an important communication medium and different types are used extensively
in events. The manuals can be categorized into:
• Master Event manual
• Report manual
• Operation/production manual
• Staff manual
The relevance of the information in the manual is time dependent (O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002).
Therefore the manuals applicability is deadline dependent. For some of the types of manuals,
their life is over once the event has finished. This has lead some authors to suggest the use
of a template system for event manuals (O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002; Silvers 2004).
The event environment characterized by the deadline, complexity and uncertainty, has been
compared to the military environment when conducting a campaign (Allen et al 2002). In such
a situation of change, the concept of information inertia is useful to describe the characteristic
of information's resistance to move in complex environments.( Sterman 2000; Tolle 2002).
Factors that contribute to the lack of dissemination of relevant information are:
• Number of people or work units (teams) and related to the organization structure set
up for the event
• The staff/contractor experience in events
• Staff's and subcontractors ability to work together
• The communication technology available and the staffs/contractors competence
• The number of communication channels and their network ability
• The information's relevance and interconnectedness.
All of these factors contribute to the delay in the relevant application of information. As
Sterman (2000) has demonstrated, delay significantly contributes to uncertainty in a dynamic
system.

Tools
Checklists, as they are easily created and common to most work cultures, are used as the
most prolific form of management communication tool ( Malouf 1999; Coons 1999; Harris &
Allen 2001; Allen et al 2002; O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002). All the listed event manuals contain
checklists (see Bibliography). The characteristics of the checklist are:
1. They represent the combined experience and knowledge of the event team
2. The checklist is the final output of the work breakdown structure and therefore is a
tool of management integration
3. They can represent mini milestones
4. A checklist is easy to read by staff and volunteers
5. They can be adapted to future events
6. They are quick and simple to create
7. They can be used in a variety of communication channels - paper and web
(O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002)
The checklist is a solution to the problem of ‘information inertia’ outlined above.
Although most of the event texts have checklist for various areas of event management, few
mention their use as a management tool.
The emphasis is on the flexibility of the checklist. It therefore solves the problem of project
documentation being quickly out of date as the event internal and external environment
changes.
External Communication - Promotion
Promotion contains two dimensions:

1. Communicating information to the major stakeholders in the event - in
particular the attendees.
2. Creating a favorable image of the event to influence stakeholder's decisions. In
particular, manipulating the buying choice of the target market. (Getz 1997; Allen et al 2002 ).
As stated by Van Der Wagen (2001, p. 69):

"As part of the marketing strategy, event promotion involves communicating the image and
content of the event program to the potential audience. Broadly speaking the aim of the
promotional strategy is to ensure that the consumer makes a decision to purchase and
follows up with the action of actually making the purchase. It is essential to turn intention into
action and this is often the biggest obstacle of a promotional campaign."
Point 2 can also be interpreted as advancing sales (Bowdin et al 2001). However this applies
to events that depend on sales for their funding. Promotion can also be part of the cross
promotion for the sponsor, when the event is used as a tool of marketing (Jackson et al 1990;
Geldhard et al 1996; Getz 1997).
The effectiveness of promotion is a result of optimizing the allocation of resources to the

variables in the communication mix (Getz 1997). These variables are:
• Advertising
• Sales and personal selling
• Public Relations
• Cross promotions
• Direct marketing and Invitations
• Street promotions
(McCabe 2000; Goldblatt 2002; Allen et al 2002 ;)
The inputs to the event promotion come from the marketing function.
The tools and techniques used include:
• Constructing a Press campaign
• Media kit
• Press release
(Tonge 2000)

The external communication process is illustrated in Figure 9.3.
Figure 9.3. External Communication management

The promotion of the event needs to be flexible so that it can take advantage of opportunities.
Whereas the advertising variable of the promotion, or communication (Van Der Wagen 2000)
mix can be planned with set media deadlines, the public relations (PR) campaign has to look
for opportunities provided by occurrences outside the control of the event management. The
PR, therefore, is inherently uncertain.
It is within the promotion element of an event that a major discrepancy of PMBOK ™ and
event practice is found. Marketing, including promotion, is not regarded as an area of
knowledge by any of the major texts on project management. Of interest, there is on text on
the value of marketing the project proposal (Cova et al 2002).
Promotion also will feed back to the event design thereby assisting in the development of the
event product. As pointed out by Lloyd (1997), the event manager must assist the media by
developing visual opportunities for impact on television. Allen et al (2002) discusses the way
the media can disrupt the live event through broadcasting. However they both agree that the
involvement of the media can make large changes to the financial management. Also, in

many events, the media do not make an early commitment to an event. In this situation the
media become another source of uncertainly for the management of the event.
An input into the Marketing function of the event is the projected attendance numbers. As the
event finance will depend on the size and composition of the potential audience, the
promotion campaign must be able to respond to the need for more or less promotion, or a
change in the promotional message.
The promotion campaign for a public festival or events is tightly coupled to the other event
plans. It is an example of event management integration being embedded in each of the
processes of event management . As outlined in the Sydney Olympic Official Report :
“SOCOG’s communication and community relations strategy, supported by its media strategy,
was initially focused on informing and inspiring Australians to embrace Olympism and to
further build support for the Games. These activities were linked closely with the Marketing
and Sponsorship Program and also with specific campaigns relating to Volunteer
Recruitment, the torch relay and, eventually, ticket marketing.” (pg001505.htm)
Promotion (called “Delivering the Message” in the SOCOG documents) , therefore will directly
and immediately affect Marketing, Finance, Stakeholder Management and Human Resource
planning.
Onsite communications (OSC)
All the event handbooks and event operations manual contain a section on onsite
communication. This can be divided into:
• Onsite promotion and sponsor promotions (Allen et al 2002 )
• Signage - Directional, Statutory, Operational and Facility (O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002)
• Voice communication through radio, PA announcements, mobile telephones
• Event operation manual
• Information booths
• Visual and audio cues
• Onsite briefings
• Print - programs, leaflets, newssheets ( Edgecombe 1999; NSW Centenary of
Federation Committee 2000; Scouting Australia 2001; O’Toole 2003a; Silvers 2004)
In an industry that is subject to change, the ability to communicate changes in plan is
essential for success. Part of the OSC function is to monitor the implementation of the design
plan and communicate changes in the plan. For this reason the onsite communication can
take a higher priority than in traditional project management.
The onsite voice communication system is important for announcing last minute changes,
directing crowds and during the occurrence of an emergency (EMA 1999).
An efficient onsite communication strategy and the use of the checklist can be regarded as a
management response to the uncertainty and changeability of the event management
environment. Both tools are able to communicate quickly with the core event stakeholders -
the staff and the attendees - and enable the event management to minimize the secondary
risk resulting from any changes.
Event Documentation, Filing and Archiving
The documents used to support the communication process and record the event
management process include:
1. Budget
2. Tasks lists
3. Responsibility lists
4. Contracts
5. Schedules
6. Proof of compliance documents
7. Reports (Tonge 2000; O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002)

Although the event texts list these documents, they are under different names. This is to be
expected in an immature industry lacking a standard terminology (O'Toole 2002a). For
example, the output of the time management, the schedule, is called by a variety of names
such as production schedule, run sheets, time sheets, cue sheets. Figure 9.4 shows the
document outputs identified by O’Toole (2003a) in an event project management system.
Figure 9.4 Document outputs, Source O’Toole (2003a), reproduced with permission
The filing system used for event management is treated by only two of the texts. O’Toole &
Mikolaitis (2002) recommend using categories of WBS as the basis of all information filing so
that the staff can retrieve the information quickly. They stress that the characteristic of an
event filing system is the easy retrieval of time relevant information. Tonge outlines the need
to consolidate and archive all event documents so that future events managed by the same
organization can benefit from their history (Tonge 2000).
Summary
The PMBOK ™ communication management is necessary but not sufficient to describe the
equivalent area in event management. All the event management processes have to work in
a complex and ever changing environment that needs to meet an absolute deadline.
Therefore, to use a formal process or parts of the process mixed with more informal methods
is a risk management decision. The assessment of the risk to the deadline highlights the
importance of fluid communication within such an environment. Communication with the
attendees prior to an event, is a unique feature to the event industry. The event texts describe
a sophisticated system of promotion that is part of the event marketing process. The event
communication process includes the onsite communication that is indispensable and timely
during the event. This aspect of communication is not found in PMBOK ™.

Chapter 10 Procurement Management
Contents
Site/venue Choice ............................................................................................................ 70

Contract management...................................................................................................... 72
Contract variations ........................................................................................................... 73
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 73
The PMBOK ™ procurement management process is similar to that used in event

management. However, due to the complexity of the event environment and the intangible
product, there is are different emphasizes and priorities. The ability of the suppliers to
accommodate change is stressed by the event literature. Procurement, as a term, is not
common in the event literature, and the description of the procurement process tends to be
distributed into various categories such as:
• Managing Vendor Contracts (Goldblatt 2002)
• Staging, Logistics and Legal and Risk Management (Bowdin et al 2001)
• The 12-Point Management Plan (Malouf 1999)
• Contract Management, Costing, Procurement and Cash Flow (O'Toole & Mikolaitis
2002)
• Managing suppliers to conventions (McCabe et al 2000).
The event manuals place the procurement process into more specific supplier headings such
as ''Booking Entertainment for the Smaller Event'” (IFEA 1997), “Amenities and Equipment”
(Community Festival Handbook 1991). The procurement process for event management is
illustrated in Figure 10.1. It is substantially the same as that described in PMBOK ™.
However it operates under an environment of change; within a short timeframe; under the
major constraint of the deadline; and with the need to forecast external trends.

Figure 10.1 Procurement management process
Site/venue Choice
Most authors regard the sourcing and procurement of the correct venue as essential to event
success. Figure 10.2 illustrates the process involved in the site/venue choice.
'"The choice of venue is a crucial decision that will ultimately determine many of the elements
of staging" (Allen et al 2002, p. 364)
"The selection of the site (location), where you will be holding your event is of primary
importance, it can make or break your event" (Allen 2000, p.37)

Figure 10.2. Site procurement process
It is in this choice and contracting that all the elements of the PMBOK ™ procurement
process are employed. However, site choice is not a consideration in most project
management. Silvers (2004, p. 65) summarizes the central place the choice of the site takes
in event management:
“Site selection is both a science and an art- part investigation and part intuition. The
professional event coordinator will select a site based on the purpose, role, goals, and
objectives of the event, as well as the capabilities, desirability, and safety of the venue or
location. The site where an event is held can have significant impact on the shape and style
of the event, and vice versa, and may or may not require additional development to make it
ready for the guests.”
Once the event management is committed to the venue or site, it becomes a constraint to all
other planning. O’Toole (2003a) points out an example of the influence of site choice on all
other areas of event management with his example of ‘sponsorship clash’. A specific
company may sponsor the venue. This restricts the choice of event sponsorship.

It is regarded as so important that the term ‘clean site’ is used to describe an event venue that
has no sponsorship requirements (Official Report of the XXVII Olympiad 2001).
As it becomes a constraint on all other event activities, it is essential to investigate the
requirements and opportunities afforded by the venue. O’Toole & Mikolaitis (2002), Sonder
(2004) and Silvers (2004) recommend the use of detailed checklists during the site inspection
to ensure all aspects of the site planning are covered. O’Toole & Mikolaitis (2002)
recommends the use of a site map as a way to design the event site and as the deliverable of
the site planning/design process.
The procurement of the site is, therefore, closely linked to the Design process as described in
Chapter 4 of this thesis.
A decision that is not discussed widely in the event literature is the choice of whether to use a
purpose-built venue or a venue that does not normally have events. A purpose built venue
offers the standard features to accommodate the event. It has been built with the
consideration to the flow of attendees and equipment. However, the familiarity of the venue to
the target market can diminish the unique nature of the event. This is aspect of event
management is discussed in Chapter 4, Design.. The organization SUVA (Sydney Unique
Venue Association) promotes the uniqueness of their venues as an advantage to the event.
Contract management.
Of the identified texts about event management, only one has a chapter specifically
describing the contract management process. "It is not surprising in such a young industry
that so little information is available on event related contracts…" (O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002,
p. 153). Most of the texts emphasize the importance to have agreements written down
(Malouf 1999; Goldblatt 2002; Allen et al 2002; Sonder 2004; Silvers 2004).
The uniqueness of some events means that there is a large element of uncertainty in
specifying requirements. This leads Shone (2001) to comment on the use of trade
organizations to minimize the risk associated with a new industry. Malouf (1999) recommends
only using International Special Event Society (ISES) accredited contractors. Further Malouf
recommends that the contractors should be given an overall impression of the event as well
as their specific points of detail. O’Toole & Mikolaitis (2002) advocate using three categories
of specification: function to the event, technical description and performance at the event, to
reduce the misunderstandings. Allen et al (2002), Malouf (1999) both advise establishing a
relationship with the suppliers such as partnering. The use of informal communication is
suggested as a method to ensure clear understanding of specifications and minimizing any
disruption from changing circumstances.
"The use of these various organizations is a matter not only of budget, but also of the
experience (or lack of it) on the part of buyers, of the standard to be achieved at a given
event, of the time available to make arrangements and of the requirements of the organization
making the booking and completing the planning process." (Malouf 1999, p. 170)
Agreeing with Shone, O’Toole (2002, p. 157) notes:
“What separates the corporate event contract from others is the overriding importance of
time"
For this reason negotiation and the process of selling the event to the suppliers is suggested
by some authors (Tilley 1997). Others stress the importance of informal communication to
minimize misunderstandings.
Allen et al (2002) list five categories of event contracts:

• Sponsors
• Venue
• Entertainers
• Broadcast
• Suppliers
• Client

Each of these contracts is made with a supplier whose core business is not necessarily to
supply events. Therefore the event manager needs to have knowledge of a variety of non-
event industry specific terms (Allen et al 2002). The common example of this variety and
uniqueness of contracts is provided by the rider on the entertainment contract. The rider is an
appendix to the contract. Silvers (2004), O’Toole (2003), Allen et al (2002) and Sonder (2004)
warn of the risks involved in the rider. It is unique to entertainment contracts and can cause
significant financial loss as it details the hospitality requirements of the artist and their
accompanying personnel. The requirements may cost more than the original negotiated fee.
The intangible and transitory nature of the event product is reflected in the procurement
process. An important decision is the make, buy or hire the supplies and services. The
contractor may supply goods that only need to last to the last day of the event. The short time
frames and temporary nature of the event infrastructure, means that the comparatively
lengthy PMBOK ™ process cannot be realistically undertaken.
As the event will have unique aspects to it, there will be unique goods and/or services. There
may be a unique combination of suppliers. Some of the suppliers would not be familiar with
events. All of this leads to uncertainty. A small change in one of the suppliers, the goods or
services can influence all other areas of the event (O’Toole & Mikolaitis 2002, Business
Excellence Australia 2003). In particular this leads to uncertainty in costing the event and the
event project. This subject is further explored in Chapter 6 Finance of this thesis.
Contract variations
“Changes are inevitable, but not all changes can be foreseen in the negotiation and awarding
of the contract. These changes could be external to the event and therefore uncontrollable,
ort come from inside the event organization and, if known, controllable.” (O’Toole & Mikolaitis
2002, p. 166)
PMBOK ™ deals with change in its section on contract variations. However, as noted above,
variations are not the exception in event management. The scope is developing as the event
project passes though its phases. The fixed specification recommended in many project
textbook can be detrimental to the overall objectives of the event. The term variation implies a
standard state. However in a dynamic system, change is the standard state. It is the normal
working environment.
Summary
The PMBOK ™ model of procurement needs to be adapted to the environment characterized

by short-term logistics, uncertainty and change. An important decision concerns the choice of
venue that is where the event is to be held. The choice of venue will create opportunities and
constraints on the event. Other contracts used in events are various and numerous. The
result is that the PMBOK ™ procurement process is too unwieldy to be used in the fast
changing event environment in which quicker, more flexible and informal arrangements are
made.

Chapter 11 Human Resources
Contents
Volunteers ........................................................................................................................ 76
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 78
"The event management industry is primarily a service industry, and therefore its vital part
consists of intangible things such as the customer service. You cannot touch it or smell it, but
it exists, and moreover, it can make your events a disaster or a complete success. You are
being paid to create memorable positive experiences, and you and your staff are the critical
resource that makes a guest's experience memorable" Goldblatt 2002, p. 108
This quote from Dr Goldblatt illustrates a fundamental difference between the PMBOK ™ and
event management – the intangible nature of the asset. This is no more evident than in the
management of human resources. The PMBOK ™ HR process is limited in its applicability by
the short time frame of most events and the volunteer management used in many events.
There are two systems of HR running side by side that need to complement each other.
These are the professional staff, part time or fulltime, and the volunteers. Figure 11.1 shows
these two processes in tandem as the event planning and implementation proceeds.

Figure 11.1 Human resource management process
Figure 11.2 shows a simplified version of the PMBOK ™ process for Human Resource
management. This process is also recommended by the texts in event management
Figure 11.2 Standard HR process

The process must work under the constraint of the deadline and in an uncertain and complex
environment.
In addition, the HR process Figure 11.2 will be moderated by these characteristics:
• Event management makes wide use of volunteers (Allen et al 2002; Getz 1997)
• The event is an intangible asset and the value of the asset is directly related to the
service delivered by the staff. The staff during the event is, therefore, part of the
product. (Getz 1997)
• The event is short lived
• Certain events require a high level of creativity.

This is illustrated by Birch (2004, p. 247) when discussing recruitment technique for major
ceremonies, such as the opening of the Barcelona Olympics:
“For Pepo, the selection process started over a meal, because he refused to hire people if he
found they were dull over dinner. It’s not a bad method either. The creative people best suited
to ceremonies have intangible qualities of imagination and ideas that a conversation over
dinner will bring out much better that an interview across a desk.”
Other characteristics of the event environment that affect the HR process are:
1. Importance of customer service
2. High turnover of paid staff and volunteers - the average turn over cycle may be less
than the period of the event project life cycle
3. Importance of a diverse staff to better represent the needs of the attendees.
(Goldblatt 2002)
Volunteers
“Volunteers are the foundation of a successful Olympic Games, and the commitment,
enthusiasm and involvement of all volunteers is essential for the success of the Sydney
2000.“ (Official Report of the XXVII Olympiad 2001)
The use of unpaid staff creates a different training environment compared to the methods
used to train paid staff. Two characteristics for successful volunteer training that are stressed
in the event texts are:
1. Leadership
2. Motivation (Getz1997; Silvers 2004)
Leadership is regarded by many of the event authors as an important aspect of event
management (Getz 1997; Goldblatt 2002; Allen et al 2002).Goldblatt (2005 p. 158) writes
“Professional Event management is truly a leadership process”. This emphasis on leadership
can be regarded as a management solution to a changing environment. Leadership implies
motivation rather than control (Goldblatt 2002). Motivation is suitable to flexibility provided by
teams (Getz 1997). The Cricket World Cup Vlunteers 2003 Training Manual lists as a benefit
of volunteering :
“Participation has long been seen as an essential element of good governance and
development. Volunteering is a key means by which individuals articulate their engagements
as citizens, and by building trust and reciprocity among citizens volunteering contributes to a
more cohesive, stable society.” (ICC 2003 p.1).
There needs to be a substitute in the management of volunteers for many of the incentives
given to the full time paid staff, such as promotion, increase in wages or increase in equity.
Related to this are the disincentives of demotion, financial penalties or decrease in value of
the company, which have no application to temporary volunteers or temporary staff.
The quote from Surbeck illustrates the numerous skills a leader requires in event
management:
"The team leader will have the tasks of keeping the support team positive and productive, as
well as being able to lead and communicate effectively, to compliment and cajole, to push and
prod, to stimulate and most of all to motivate team members to continue to giving their best."
(Surbeck 1991, p. 31)
A Volunteer can be defined as

“A person who agrees to undertake an activity related to the event, either directly or indirectly,
and is not part to an employment contract or other contractual arrangement with regard to the
agreed activity" (Holme 2002, p1)
Volunteers are regarded as central to the success of many events (Harris & Allen 2002; Allen
et al 2002; Barrett 2001).
According to the Director, School of Volunteer Management, the decision to use volunteers
for an event will be based on:

1. Lack of in house resources to undertake the event
2. The service is appropriate for volunteers
3. Volunteers are more flexible (Holmes 2002).
Identification of the motivators for volunteers is essential in volunteer management.

These include:
• A strong belief and enthusiasm for the event
• A desire to contribute to the life of the community
• Opportunities to learn new skills and gain valued experiences
• Work experience and references, with a view to paid employment
• Commitment to interests of family members and friends
• Access to an event otherwise beyond personal means
• Sense of obligation
• Joint action with a group of friends
• Desire for meaningful activity
• Opportunity to be recognized and appreciated
• Fun.
(Barrett 2001; Harris & Allen 2002; ICC 2003)
This presents a complex array. Satisfying one motivator may dissatisfy another. These do not
represent an exact measurable outcome. They can be measured after the event by asking the
volunteers. The skill levels of volunteers will vary (Barrett 2001). Both these factors introduce
a high degree of uncertainty into the HR process.
Creating teams and team leaders is identified as important to volunteer management (Harris
& Allen 2002; Allen et al 2002) .In addition the possible friction between paid staff and
volunteer has to be pre-empted (Allen et al 2002).
A large number of volunteers means that the event organization has to be structured so that
they have a way to define their roles and absorb them as the size of the event teams grow
(Tonge 2000).
There are a number of discussions about the negative side of volunteers. This includes:
1. Depleting the asset
2. Difficulty of succession planning
3. Ownership of event knowledge
4 Incorrect cost/benefit analysis of 'free' labor (Nelson 2002).
Part of the HR planning must include the ability to manage a creative team. This is in
response to the need for innovation at many events (Harris & Allen 2002).
“Early planning was based on anticipated need for 40, 000 volunteers, and the eventual
confirmed number was 46, 967. Finding and preparing this special workforce was a massive
undertaking, assisted by relationships that SOCOG developed with Australia’s volunteering
community, which had a strong interest in the Games and the legacies for volunteering from
this event. Many community-based organizations supported the recruitment of volunteers and
provided invaluable advice on how to conduct the Program. From November 1997 this
happened largely through the Volunteers 2000 Advisory Committee, which included
representatives of high-profile community and service organizations and interest groups.”
(Out and About : Volunteers : Page 1).
Other characteristics of the event management environment that influence the HR include:
1. Short term nature of many event projects that does not allow the time to assimilate
and train event personnel as described in the PMBOK ™.
2. The event organization is ‘pulsating’ (Hanlon 2000) in the size of its human
resources. This means that the size of the workforce can increase and decrease dramatically
over the event projects life. Most of the staff and volunteers are needed during the event
itself. The professional staff are often part-time.
3. Some events are completely run by volunteers (Tonge 2000).
4. The volunteers are often recruited from the key stakeholders such as the sponsors
and local community.

Although the texts discuss the uncertainty associated with volunteers - such as they don’t
turn up and often require extra resources – Silvers (2004) and Allen et al (2005) describe the
work of Janet Landey in South Africa and the use of events to raise the skill of the host
population. The short time frame of event planning and the uncertainty of work in the industry
are reflected in the lack of trained staff. The training of an unemployed workforce as part of
the Black Economic Empowerment, can solve many of these problems. Such training can be
articulated into the national education framework. In this way, volunteering for work on an
event can be part of the education system (ICC 2003). Events Tasmania (2004) has
implemented a similar system.
Summary
The delivery of an event will employ the PMBOK ™ process to the degree limited by the
deadline and the short-term nature of the event project. Many events use volunteers and this
introduces a process outside of that described by PMBOK ™. In particular, leadership and
motivation take over from financial rewards. These soft methods are essential in managing
volunteers. The advantage of these methods is that they are effective in an environment that
is subject to change and requires autonomous teams. The mix of volunteers and paid staff
and the quick growth in the human resources, introduces a further uncertainty in the
management of events.

Conclusion
Figure 12.1 is a summary of the observations and discussion in this thesis. It identifies all the
areas of knowledge needed for the management of an event. On the left hand side area the
aspects of traditional project management used in event management. The right hand side
shows the gap between this and actual event management. According to the definition of a
project given in the standard texts (Dinsmore 1990; Weiss 1992; Burke 1992; Cleland 1998;
Kerzner 1998; Reiss 1999; Turner 1999; Leach 2000; PMBOK ™ 2000; Gray & Larson 2000;
Wilderman n.d.), an event is a project. However, a company employing only the standard
methodology as described in PMBOK ™ and these standard texts, would not be able to
organize an event.
As explained in Chapter 1 of this thesis, I present an exploratory model of event

management. There is not sufficient data about this rapidly emerging industry to enable the
sliding scales of Figure 12.1 to be supported by measurements. Therefore, it is based on
expert opinion supported by the various event textbooks and the event documents listed in
the Bibliography.
From Figure 12.1 arise the process maps used in each chapter. They are the basis of the
exploratory model of event management. They illustrate the processes used in each area of
knowledge. The limitation of these process maps reflect the limitation of any kind of analysis.
They do not show the constant iterations within each process and the continual interaction at
every level between the processes. Like every map or model of reality, they are a summary .
When the process maps are combined with the work of the international EMBOK executive,
as described in the EMBOK paper (Silvers, J, Bowdin, G, O’Toole, W & Nelson K 2005) found
in this thesis, they complete the picture of event management. The EMBOK executive is
currently working on the knowledge areas (data) over the phases of the event project life
cycle (time). This thesis provided the third dimension, processes.
It is the hypothesis of this thesis that the gap between standard project management and
event management is a result of the following:
1. Event management is a dynamic system. Change and continuous integration are part
of the normal management.
2. Event management acts in an management environment of uncertainty and
complexity.
Each section of figure 12.1 can be related to these two conclusions.
There are key characteristics of the event field that limit the applicability of standard project
management. In summary, they include:
• A large number of stakeholders that can increase rapidly. The stakeholders may
commit to the event at any time as the project progresses.
• Many objectives, ill defined objectives and conflicting objectives, which are subject to
internal and external change.
• Intangible nature of the main event products and outcomes, such as customer
satisfaction, community morale, surprise, cultural enhancement and knowledge.
• Temporary nature of many aspects of event management including configuration of
suppliers, event assets, the event site and the unique resources.
• Uncertainty of incoming revenue and cost reduction.
• Fixed deadline which produces a priority for all the management processes over a
short timeline.
• Highly variable human resources that often rely on unpredictable volunteer labor.
This thesis is not a theoretical construct. It is an attempt to find a remedy to the very real
growing pains of a new industry. Large events such as the Olympics are struggling with their
adopted project management system (Timmins 2002, Johnson 2002b). Medium size events
have no or little event management software to assist in their management. Many of them
have tried project management and failed. In the professional experience of the author, local

councils around Australia have trained their event managers in MS Project, only to find that it
is not used. The government of countries such as Saudi Arabia and South Africa are
searching for an event management system that can be integrated into education, training,
legislation and compliance. At first they tried standard project management, only to find that
they had to bring in outside consultants to adapt and assess the results.
At the front end of event management – on the ground – this problem is played out in terms of
jobs and responsibility. In their third edition Allen et all (2005), describe the solution as
“ 1 Expand the skill base of the event manager to include project management.
2. Reduce the responsibilities of the event manager and hire a project manager.
3. Train existing project managers in events management.”
The Future
The next step in the EMBOK project is to publish the EMBOK matrix made up of the three
dimensions of Phases, Areas of Knowledge and Processes. As stated in the aims of the
EMBOK listed in this thesis’ Preface, it will enable an integrated approach to the profession.
Training, software, competency levels, supplier assessment. legislation guidelines, directions
for research, job descriptions and an international standard will be created within the one
international framework, in a similar way to the professions of engineering and project
management.
As well, the inclusion of event management into the project management fold will influence
project management. In much the same way as software development projects influenced
project management in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Event management contains skills , methods
and knowledge that can help other types of projects. These include:
• Events almost always occurs on time, which is unusual in many other fields.
• The ability of event management to be successful in spite of a high degree of
uncertainty.
• The concept of scope development is basic to event management. This is similar to
research and development projects.
• The intangible nature of the outcomes is similar to political and social campaign
management.
• The mix of volunteers and experts and the multiplicity of stakeholders is similar to
international aid projects.
• Many of the more traditional projects such as civil engineering are finding that the
intangible outcomes, such as environment and social impacts, and marketing are as
important as the technical requirements of the stakeholders.
Finally, with the rapid changes in modern business, such as takeovers and shifts in
shareholder value, the general business management environment is now closer to the event
management environment of constant change and development. The incorporation of event
management into the general field of project management is more that just saying “an event
is a project by definition”. There will be the mutual influence, a dialectic of conflict and
agreement reaching a synthesis that benefits both fields. Current project management can
give events the discipline, compliance and an accountable management system. Events can
give project management the ability to work creatively in an uncertain environment arising
from scope development.
“Within every field , there are those individuals who either on purpose or by accident invent a
new theory or practice that in fact revolutionizes the field... (The) careful merger of event and
project management will be recorded by historians of event literature as one of the most
significant advancements in event management during the twenty-first century.”
Dr J Goldblatt, CSEP, Dean and Professor, Johnson & Wales, 2002

Reference List
A Planning Guide for Event Managers 1999, The Liquor Licensing Division of the
Queensland Department of Tourism, Sport and Racing. Retrieved: June 27,
2001, from
http://203.147.169.52/ourproducts/brochures/planning_guide/page_1.asp.
AFO 2003, Association of Festival Organisers, A Report into the Impact of Folk
Festivals on Cultural Tourism, January 2003. Retrieved: March 20 2004 from
http://www.mrcasey.co.uk/afo.
Allen, J 2000, Event Planning, John Wiley, Toronto.
Allen, J Harris R & Huyskens M, 2000, Event Management; An Australian
Bibliography Australian Centre for Event Management UTS Sydney.
Allen, J, O'Toole, W, McDonnell, I, & Harris, R 2002, Festival and Special Event
Management, 2nd edn, John Wiley and sons, Brisbane,
Management, 3nd edn, John Wiley and sons, Brisbane.
Allen, J., Harris, R., Jago, L.K. & Veal, A.J. (eds.) 2000, Events Beyond 2000: Setting
the Agenda. Proceedings of Conference on Event Evaluation, Research and
Education, Sydney, July 2000. Sydney, Australian Centre for Event
Management.
Arcodia, C & Reid, S 2002, ‘Event management associations: goal driven or ad hoc
planning’, Events and Place Making 2002 Australian Centre for Event
Management Conference Proceedings, July 2000. Sydney, Australian Centre
for Event Management.
Arcodia, C & Robb, A 2000, ‘A Taxonomy of Event Management Terms’, Events
Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda. Proceedings of Conference on Event
Evaluation, Research and Education, Sydney, July 2000. Sydney, Australian
Centre for Event Management.
Arts Victoria 2002, Festival DIY Kit, Arts Victoria, Melbourne.
Auditor General's Office 2002 V8 Car Races in Canberra - Costs and Benefits
Performance Audit Report July 2002, ACT.
Australia India New Horizons - Project Directory 1996, 22/07/96 Australian
Department of Foreign Affairs, Canberra.
Australian Bureau of Statistics 1995, Multipliers for Culture Related Industries,
Cultural Ministers Council Statistical Advisory Group, March 1995.
Avert Risk Management 2001, Risk Management proposal for the Asia Pacific
Regional Ministerial Meeting Oct 2001, A.C.E. Services, Sydney.
Barrett, J 2001, Volunteer Management for Events, School of Volunteer
Management. Retrieved: March 21, 2002, from http://www.volunteering.com.au.
Baruch College's Nonprofit Management Group 1993, ‘ROI Analysis’, Philanthropy
Monthly, March, 1993, pp. 23-37.
Beer S, 1985, Diagnosing the System for Organizations, John Wiley & Sons
Chichester.
Belby, A 1986, Festival Manual, Commonwealth Department of Education, Australian
Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Berlonghi, A 1990, Special Event Risk Management Manual, Bookmasters Inc. Ohio.
Betteridge, D 1997, Event Management in Leisure and Tourism, Hodder and
Stoughton, London.
Birch, R 2004, Master of Ceremonies, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest.
Blacktown City Council City 2000, Festival and Parade Manual June 2000, Blacktown
City Council City, Blacktown.
William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc Page 82 of 115.

Bowdin, G, McDonnell, I, Allen, J. & O'Toole, W 2001, Events Management. Oxford,
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Bowker, G & Star, S 1999, Sorting Things Out : Classification and its Consequences,
MIT, USA.
Buchan Communications Group 1997 Australia India New Horizons Evaluation
Report May 1997, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Canberra.
Buckley E, & Newbrun 2001, Event Management - Management and Minimization of
Legal and Commercial Risks, March 2001, Ebsworth and Ebsworth, Sydney
Burke, R 1992, Project Management Planning and Control, J. Wiley, New York.
Business Excellence Australia 2003, Risk Management for Events, Standards
Australia., Sydney.
Cameron, N 1995 Maleny Folk Festival The Art of Celebration, Mimburi Press,
Maleny Queensland.
Campbell, C. 2001, Dairy Farmers 2001 Yass River Festival Report to the Yass River
Festival Committee and the Yass Shire Development Corporation 6th November
2001, Yass Council.
Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute n.d., Capability Maturity Model
http://Retrieved: March 30 2003 from http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmm/cmm.html.
Casti, J 1997, Would-be Worlds, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Catherwood, DW & Van Kirk, RL 1992, The Complete Guide to Special Events
Management, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Celebrate Australia Event Plan 1993, Australian Embassy, Tokyo.
Chappelet, JL 2000, Management Of The Olympic Games: The Lessons Of Sydney.
Retrieved : February 11 2003 from http://www.business.nsw.gov.au/sysfiles/
download/OlympicActivity.pdf
Checkland, P & Scholes, J 1999, Soft Systems Methodology in Action, J. Wiley and
Sons, Chichester England.
Citizens Guide to a Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Albert Park Grand Prix. Retrieved:
September 3, 2003, from http://www.save-albert-
park.org.au/sapweb/SAP%20Grand%20Prix%20Issue.html#DECISION.
Citrine, K 1997, ‘Site planning for events in Kennedy, S (ed) Event Operations,
International Festivals & Events Association Port Angeles. Pp 17–19.
Clark, D 1997, ‘Controlling your event finances’, in Kennedy, S (ed) Event
Operations, International Festival & Events Association, Port Angeles pp 27-30.
Cleland, D (ed.) 1998, Field Guide to Project Management, Van Nostrand Reinhold,
New York.
Collins, T 1998, Crash : Learning form the World's Worst Computer Disasters, Simon
and Schuster, London.
Conference Australia Pty Ltd 1996, New Horizons : The Australia India Business
Mission and Forum, Conference Australia Pty Ltd, Canberra.
Coons, P. 1999, Gala! :The Special Event Planner for Professionals and Volunteers.
USA, Capital Books Inc..
Corporate Voice Shandwick Public Relations 1996, Public Affairs Presentation for the
Australia-India New Horizons Programme, Corporate Voice Shandwick Public
Relations, New Delhi.
Cova, B, Ghauri, P & Salle, R 2002, Project marketing : beyond competitive bidding,
J. Wiley, New York.
Crawford L. & Costello K. 1999, Towards A Transferable Methodology For Managing
Strategic Change by Projects, in Crawford, L & Clarke, C (eds.) IRNOP IV
Conference - Paradoxes of Project Collaboration in the Global Economy:
Interdependence, Complexity and Ambiguity, Sydney, Australia: University of
Technology, Sydney.
Curry, B 2001, A Practical Guide to Organizing a Community Event, Betel Marketing
Solutions, Foster NSW.

Davies, S 1998, ‘A Hazard - Mass Crowd Events’, National Emergency Response
Vol13, No 2, June 1998, pp. 14-25.
Demarco, T. 1978, Structured Analysis and System Specification, Yourdon Press
Prentice Hall, NJ.
Dinsmore, P 1990, Human Factors in Project Management, 2nd edn, AMACOM, New
York.
Drucker, P 1973, Management, Harper and Row, New York.
East Timor Ceremony Sponsorship n.d. Retrieved: April 9, 2002, from
www.easttimor.com/sponsor_pr.pdf.
Edgecombe, M 1999, Victor Harbor Folk Festival Site Manual, South Australian Folk
Federation, Adelaide.
Ellis Park Stadium Disaster 2001, Commission of Inquiry into the 11 April 2001 Ellis
Park Disaster. Retrieved: December 10, 2003, from:
http://www.asosh.org/Legislation/SouthAfrica/SA_online.htm.
EMA 1999, Safe and Healthy Mass Gatherings, Australian Emergency Manuals,
Series part 3, Volume 2, Emergency Management Australia, Dickson ACT.
EMA 2000, Emergency Risk Management Applications Guide, Emergency
Management Australia, Dickson ACT.
Ernø-Kjølhede, E 2000, Project Management Theory and the Management of
Research Projects. Retrieved: May 7, 2003, from
http://ideas.repec.org/p/hhb/cbslpf/2000_003.html.
Events Tasmania 2004. Retrieved: June 10, 2004, from
http://www.eventstasmania.com/.
Exhibition and Event Association of Australia 2002. Exhibitions Work : Exhibition
Industry Guide 2002, Exhibition and Event Association of Australia Executive
Media. Retrieved: March 18, 2003, from http://www.eeaa.com.au.
Fechner, R ‘Event Overlays Test Management Skills’, Australian Project Manager,
June 1999, Vol 19, No2.
Federal Emergency Management Agency 2000, Special Events Contingency
Planning IS-15 Job Aid Manual, August 2000, USA. Retrieved: September 20,
2002, from http://www dispatchmonthly.com/spec_event_plans.pdf.
Fichman, R & Moses, S 1999, An Incremental Process For Software Implementation,
Sloan Management Review Vol. 40, No. 2, 1999, pp. 39-52.
Finnis M & Cooke R, Risk Management : A Practical Resource for Clubs, Yachting
Victoria, Melbourne.
Fredline, L, Jago, L & Deery M 2002 ‘Assessing the Social Impacts of Events: Scale’,
in Jago, L et al Events and Place Making, Proceedings Of International Event
Research Conference AACEM, July 2002, Sydney.
Games Force 2000, Delivering the Dream, NSW Technical and Further Education
Commission, TAFEW NSW Olympic and Paralympic Unit, Sydney.
Geirer, T 1986, Making your Events Special: How to plan and Organize Successful
Special Events Program for Non-profit Organizations, Cause Effect, New York.
Geldard, E & Sinclair, L 1996, The Sponsorship Manual, The Sponsorship Unit,
Olinda Victoria.
Gell-Mann, M 1994, The Quark and the Jaguar : Adventures in the simple and the
complex, Little, Brown and Company, London.
Getz, D 1991 Festivals, Special Events and Tourism Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York.
Getz, D 1997, Event Management and Event Tourism, Cognizant Communication,
New York.
Getz, D 1998, ‘Information Sharing among Festival Managers’, Festival Management
& Event Tourism Vol 5 pp 33-50, Cognizant Communication, New York.
Getz, D 2000, Developing a Research Agenda for the Event Management Field,
Events Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda. Proceedings of Conference on Event

Evaluation, Research and Education, pp. 10 – 21, Sydney, July 2000. Sydney,
Australian Centre for Event Management.
Getz, D 2002, ‘Why Festivals Fail’, Event Management, Vol. 7, pp. 209-219.
Goldblatt, J & Frank Supovitz, F 1999, Dollars and Events: How to Succeed in the
Special Events Business, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Goldblatt, J & McKibben C (eds.) 1996 The Dictionary of Events Management, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Goldblatt, J 1997, Special Events: Best Practices in Modern Event Management, 2nd
edn, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Goldblatt, J 2000, A Future for Event management : The Analysis of Major Trends
Impacting the Emerging Profession, Events Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda.
Proceedings of Conference on Event Evaluation, Research and Education,
Sydney, July 2000. Sydney, Australian Centre for Event Management.
Goldblatt, J 2002, Special Events: Twenty-first century global event management,
New York, John Wiley & Sons.
Goldblatt, J 2005, Special Events: Event Leadership for a New World 4th edn, John
Wiley & Sons, New York.
Goldblatt, J n.d., How do you ROE your Event Boat. Retrieved: October 31, 2004,
from http://www.event-solutions.com/articles/7b1forum.html.
Goldratt E. 1997, Critical Chain, North River Press, MA.
Government of Victoria 2004, Event management ; Planning Guide For Event
Managers in Victoria, Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
Graham, S, Goldblatt, J & Delpy, L 1995, The Ultimate Guide to Sport Event
Management and Marketing, Irwin Professional Publishing, Chicago.
Gray, C & Larson, E 2000, Project management : the managerial process,
Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston.
Hamblyn, R 2001, The Invention of Clouds, Picador, London.
Hanlon, C & Jago, L., 2000, ‘Pulsating sporting events: an organizational structure to
optimize performance’, in Events Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda.
Proceedings of Conference on Event Evaluation, Research and Education, pp.
93- 104, Sydney, July 2000. Sydney, Australian Centre for Event Management.
Harris, R & Allen, J (ed.) 2002, Regional Event Management Handbook, Australian
Centre for Event Management, Sydney.
Hartman, F, Ashrafi, R & Jergeas, G 1998, Project Management in the live
entertainment industry: what is different, International Journal of Project
Management Vol 16 No 5 pp. 269-281.
Hatton, J 2000, Federations day Risk Assessment Report, 8th Nov 2000, NSW
Centenary of Federations Committee, Sydney.
Helde, A Jago, L. & Dreery M 2002 ‘Special Events Research During 1990-2001: Key
Trends and Issues’, in Jago, L et al Events and Place Making, Proceedings Of
International Event Research Conference AACEM, July 2002, Sydney.
Holmes, G 2002, Managing Event Volunteer Safety, Holmes and Reynolds Pty Ltd,
Sydney
Holmes, G 2002, Managing Event Volunteer Safety, Proceedings of Lgov Planning A
Safe Event Seminar. Retrieved: January 21, 2003, from http://www.lgov.org.au/.
ICC 2003, ICC Cricket World Cup Volunteers 2003 Training Manual, ICC,
Johannesburg South Africa.
IFEA 1997, Producing the Small to Midsize Festival, International Festival and
Events Association, Washington.
Jackson, R & Schmader, S 1990, Special Events : Inside and Out, Sagamore
Publishing, IL.
Johnson R 2002, Stakeholder Analysis of the East Timor Handover Ceremony -
paper as part of the requirements for Masters in Project Management.

Johnson R 2002b, Analysis of Independence Day in terms of the Project
Management Body of Knowledge paper as part of the requirements for Masters
in Project Management.
Kendall, C & Curthoys, J 2001, ‘Marketing and the Sydney 2000 Games (Indicia and
Images) Protection Act: A Retrospective E Law’, Electronic Journal of Law, Vol
8, No 2 (June 2001), Murdoch University.
Kerzner, H 1998, Project Management : A Systems Approach to Planning,
Scheduling and Controlling, 6th edn, J. Wiley, New York.
Kliem, R, Ludin, I & Robertson, K 1997, Project Management Methodology - A
Practical Guide for the Next Millennium, Marcel Dekker, New York.
Leach, L 2000, Critical Chain Project Management, Artech House, MA.
Levy, B & Marion, B 1997, ‘The timeline: what should be done by when?’ in
Successful Special Events; Planning, Hosting and Evaluating, Aspen,
Gaithersburg, Md., pp. 57-66.
Lloyd, J 1997, ‘Managing well with the media before, during and after your event of
IFEA’ Producing the Small to Midsize Festival, International Festival and Events
Association, Washington Chapter 9.
Major and Special Events Planning, A Guide for Promoters and Councils 1997.
Retrieved: October 21, 2000, from http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au.
Malouf, L 1999, Behind the Scenes at Special Events, John Wiley, New York.
McCabe, V, Poole, B, Weeks, P & Leiper, N 2000, The Business and Management of
Conventions, John Wiley, Brisbane.
McDonnell, I, Allen, J & O’Toole, W 1999, Festival and Special Event Management,
Jacaranda Wiley, Brisbane.
Middleton, V 1994, Marketing in Travel and Tourism 2nd edn, Butterworth
Heinemann, Oxford.
Milledge, J 2002, , Inquest into the Death of Jessica Malik, 8 November 2002, Senior
Deputy State Coroner
Mintzberg, H 1994, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Prentice Hall, New York.
Monga, M & Treuren, G 2001, 'Employment relations without paid work: An
exploration into commitment and motivation of special event volunteering', in K.
Spooner and C. Innes (eds.) Employment Relations in the New Economy:
Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference of the International Employment
Relations Association, at Singapore 10-12 July 2001 and Kuala Lumpur 7-9
July 2001. Retrieved: February 18, 2002, from
http://business.unisa.edu.au/cae/projects/current/seo/.
Mules, T 1998, ‘Financial and Economic Modelling of Major Sporting Events in
Australia’, The Centre for South Australian Economic Studies December 1998,
Adelaide.
Neighbourhood Arts Unit 1991, Community Festival Handbook, City Of Melbourne.
Nelson Safer Community Council 2002, Planning Safe Events : Safety Guidelines for
Event Managers, Nelson City Council, NZ.
Nelson, D 2002, Do We Need Volunteers In Special Events?. Retrieved: March 20,
2003, from http://www.specialeventsforum.com/library/Volunteers.html.
Note : those documents not available in the public domain can be requested from the
author.
NSW Centenary of Federation Committee 2000, Centennial Ceremony Event
manual, NSW Premiers Department, Sydney.
NSW Department of Local Government 1997, Major and Special Events Planning: A
Guide for Promoters and Councils, NSW Department of Local Government,
Sydney.
NSW Department of State and Regional Development 2001, Making Dollars and
Sense out of Community Events, NSW Department of State and Regional
Development, Sydney.

NSW Premiers Department 2001, Major Habourside Event Table Top Exercise: New
Year's Event Sydney, NSW Premiers Department November 2001, Sydney.
NSW Premiers Department 2001, Table Top Exercise Major Event 20.11.01
Responses To Scenarios, NSW Premiers Department, Sydney.
Office of Sport and Recreation Tasmania 1999, A Sporting Chance : A risk
management framework for the sport and recreation industry, Office of Sport
and Recreation Tasmania, Hobart.
Official Report of the XXVII Olympiad 2001, Sydney Organizing Committee for the
Olympic Games. Retrieved: March 21, 2002 from
http://www.gamesinfo.com.au/postgames.
Operation Risk Management Plan AMP Journey of a Nation A Celebration of our
Federation Expo 14/11/01, 2001, AMP, Sydney.
Operations and Services : Sponsorship and Marketing : Page 2. Retrieved: January
9, 2003, from http://www.gamesinfo.com.au/postgames/en/pg001814.htm.
O'Toole, W & Mikolaitis, P 2002, Corporate Event Project Management, John Wiley,
New York.
O'Toole, W 2000, ‘Towards the Integration of Event Management Best Practice by
the Project Management Process’, Events Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda.
Sydney, July 2000, Australian Centre for Event Management, Sydney,
O'Toole, W 2002a, ‘Competencies and Maturity Models for Events’, Proceedings
from the International Special Event Society Conference, Sydney July 2002.
O'Toole, W 2002b, The Sense of Culture : Events in the Environment, Australian
Centre for Event Management Conference paper, Sydney July 2002.
O'Toole, W 2002c, ‘Special Event Risk from a Project Management Perspective’,
Proceedings from the International Special Event Society Conference : Sydney
July 2002.
O’Toole, W 2003a Event Project Management System, EPMS Sydney.
O’Toole, W 2003b, Analysis of Event Operations – clustering. Retrieved: June 27,
2003, from http://www-personal.usyd.edu.au/~wotoole/clustering.htm.
O’Toole, W 2005, ‘Handover Ceremony and Celebrations in East Timor from a
project management perspective’ in Getz, D 2005, Event Management and
Event Tourism 2nd edn, Cognizant Communication, New York (in press).
Out and About : Volunteers : Page 1. Retrieved: January 9, 2003, from
http://www.gamesinfo.com.au/postgames/en/pg000246.htm
Pabst, L 2004, Gardening Australia Live, Sydney Water’s Event Management
Manual, Sydney Water, Sydney.
Parry, B 2003, ‘Risk Management’, McMahon-Beattie, U. & Yeoman, I Eds. 2003,
Sport and Leisure : Operation Management Continuum, London.
Perkins, L 2001 Day of Event Cancellation Procedures, WCVM Journal and
Resource Data Center. Retrieved: May 7, 2002, from
www.venue.org/journalfile/1010385641DAY_
of_event_cancellation_Oct_25_2001.doc.
Premiers Department NSW 2002 Stakeholder Coordination, Major & Special Events,
Premiers Department NSW, Sydney.
Price Waterhouse 1996, Challenges of India : India Promotion 1996, Price
Waterhouse, Sydney.
Project Management Institute (n.d.), Organizational Project Management Maturity
Model. Retrieved: March 15, 2000, from http://www.pmi.org/opm3/.
Project Management Institute 2000, Guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge, Project Management Institute PA USA.
Queensland Government Office of Sport and Recreation 1998, Playing it Safe: a
guide to risk management for sport and recreation organizations, Queensland
Government Office of Sport and Recreation, Department of Emergency
Services, Brisbane.

Regional Arts Australia 2002, Creative Volunteering Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra.
Reiss, G 1999, Project Management Demystified - Today's tools and techniques, 2nd
edn, E&FN Spoon, London.
Road and Traffic Authority 1999, Traffic Management for Special Events, March
1999, Road and Traffic Authority (RTA), Sydney.
Roundtable Discussions Australia India Relations Second session 14 Feb 1995
Australian High Commission New Delhi.
Schmader, S 1997, Event Operations; Getting Everything Done with Quality, IFEA
Producing the Small to Midsize Festival, International Festival and Events
Association, Washington.
Scouting Australia 2001, 22nd Asia-Pacific/19th Australian Scouting Jamboree Manual
2001.
Seddon, J 2000, The case against ISO 9000, Oak Tree,. Dublin.
Shone, A. with Parry, B. 2001, Successful Event Management, Continuum, London.
Shone, A. with Parry, B. 2004, Successful Event Management 2nd edn, Continuum,
London.
Silvers, J 2004, Professional Event Coordination, John Wiley, New York.
Silvers, J, Bowdin, G, O’Toole, W & Nelson K 2005, Towards An International Event
Management Body of Knowledge (EMBOK) unpublished, included in thesis
Smallwood, S & Levis, W 1977, ‘The Realities of Fund-Raising Costs and
Accountability’, The Philanthropy Monthly, September 1977. Retrieved:
February 10, 2004, from http://www.nonprofits.org/misc/fps/realities.html.
Smith, LW 2000, ‘Project Clarity Through Stakeholder Analysis’, CrossTalk, vol. 13,
no. 12, December 2000. Retrieved: October 19, 2000, from
http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2000/12/smith.html.
Sonder, M 2004, Event Entertainment and Production, John Wiley & Sons, New
York.
Standards Australia 1999, AS/NZS 4360:1999 Risk Management, Standards
Australia Sydney.
Standards Australia International 2004, AS/NZS 4360:2004 Risk Management,
Standards Australia International, Sydney.
Standards Australia International 2004, HB 436: 2004 Risk Management Guidelines,
Companion to ASNZS 4360 2004, Standards Australia International, Sydney.
Standish Report 1995 Chaos, The Standish Group. Retrieved: March 23, 2004, from
http://www.proejctsmart.co.uk/docs/chaos_report.pdf.
State Coroner 2000, Inquest Report on the 1998 Sydney to Hobart yacht race 12 Dec
2000 State Coroner's Court, NSW Attorney General's Department, Sydney.
Stedman, G 1995, The Ultimate Guide to Sports Event Management and Marketing,
Richard Irwin, Chicago.
Sterman, J 2000, Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a
Complex World, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Boston.
Stoner, J, Yetton, P, Craig, J & Johnston, K 1994, Management, 2nd edn, Prentice
Hall, Sydney.
Surbeck, L 1991, Creating Special Events, Master Publications, Denver.
SUVA, Sydney Unique Venue Association. Retrieved: March 10, 2004, from
http://www.suva.com.au/.
Symonds Group Ltd 1999, Big Time London 31/12/1999, Event Safety management
Plan, Vol 1 and 2 September 1999, Symonds Group Ltd, London.
Tarlow, P 2002, Event Risk Management and Safety, John Wiley, New York.
Tasmania Together Progress Board 2001, Tasmania Together 2001 Tasmania
Together Progress Board, Hobart.
Tatikonda, M & Rosenthal, S 2000, ‘Technology novelty, project complexity, and
product development project execution success: a deeper look at task

uncertainty in product innovation’ IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, Volume: 47, Issue: 1, Feb 2000 pp. 74-87.
Tatrai, A 2001a, The Cost of Regret : The Role of Risk management in Event /Venue
safety Planning. Retrieved: July 10, 2002. from http://www.crowdsafe.com.
Tatrai, A 2001b, Red Bull City X Circuit Crow management Plan Darling Harbor 17,
November 2001, A.C.E., Sydney.
The British Council 1997, newImages : Event Overview, The British Council, Sydney
The Project Management Institute 1999, Project Management Software Survey.
Retrieved: September 2, 2002, from http://www.pmi.org.
Tilley, W 1997, ‘Booking Entertainment for the Smaller Event’ Producing the Small to
Midsize Festival, International Festival and Events Association, Washington pp.
65-68.
Timmins, N 2002, Project Managing the Dream, in Allen, J, O'Toole, W, McDonnell, I
& Harris, R, Festival and Special Event Management, 2nd edn, J. Wiley,
Brisbane, pp.313-318.
Tiwana, A. 2000, The Knowledge Management Tools Kit : Practical Techniques for
Building a Knowledge Management System Prentice Hall, NJ.
Tolle, G. 2002, Shaping the Information Environment, Military Review Command &
General Staff College Fort Leavenworth, Kansas May-June 2002 English
Edition. Retrieved: July 23, 2003, from http://www-
cgsc.army.mil/milrev/english/MayJun02/toole.asp.
Tonge, R 2000, How to Organize Special Events and Festivals in Queensland,
Tourism Queensland, Brisbane.
Turner, JR 1999, The Handbook of Project-Based Management, McGraw Hill,
Maidenhead.
Ulladulla Summer Games 1999, Report, Ulladulla Summer Games Committee,
Ulladulla, N.S.W.
US Department of Transportation 2003, Managing Travel for Planned Special
Events, Federal Highway Administration USA.
USA Department of Defence Handbook 1998, Work Breakdown Structure mil-hdbk-
881 2 January 1998. Retrieved: January 23, 2002, from
http://www.acq.osd.mil/pm/newpolicy/wbs/mil_hdbk_881/mil_hdbk_881.htm.
Van Der Wagen, L 2001, Event Management, Hospitality Press, Melbourne.
Verzuh, E 1999, The Fast Forward MBA in Project Management, John Wiley, New
York.
Watt, D. 1998, Event Management in Leisure and Tourism, Addison Wesley
Longman, Harlow UK.
Weiss, J. & Wysocki, R 1992, 5-Phase Project Management - A Practical Planning
and Implementation Guide, Addison -Wiley, Reading MA.
Wendroff, A 1999, ‘Monetary goals and budgets’ in Special events: proven strategies
for nonprofit fund raising, John Wiley, New York, pp 53 –79.
Wideman, M n.d., Wideman’s Comparative Glossary of Project Management terms
v3.1. Retrieved: March 13, 2001, from
http://www.maxwideman.com/pmglossary/PMG_P10.htm.
Williams, T 2002, Modelling Complex Projects, John Wiley, West Sussex UK.
Woodford Folk Festival 1997, Operational and Site Management Plan 1997,
Queensland Folk Federation Incorporated, Woodford.

Bibliography.
Contents
Event Articles.................................................................................................................... 90
Event Books ..................................................................................................................... 92
Event Documents ............................................................................................................. 93
Event Manuals.................................................................................................................. 94
Event Textbooks............................................................................................................... 95
Books and Articles: management, models, systems and dynamics ................................ 97
Project Management Textbooks ...................................................................................... 99
Event Articles
Journal and web articles about event management.(43)
AFO 2003, Association of Festival Organisers, A Report into the Impact of Folk
Festivals on Cultural Tourism, January 2003. Retrieved: March 20 2004 from
http://www.mrcasey.co.uk/afo.
Arcodia, C & Reid, S 2002, ‘Event management associations: goal driven or ad hoc
planning’, Events and Place Making 2002 Australian Centre for Event
Management Conference Proceedings, July 2000. Sydney, Australian Centre
for Event Management.
Arcodia, C & Robb, A 2000, ‘A Taxonomy of Event Management Terms’, Events
Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda. Proceedings of Conference on Event
Evaluation, Research and Education, Sydney, July 2000. Sydney, Australian
Centre for Event Management.
Barrett, J 2001, Volunteer Management for Events, School of Volunteer
Management. Retrieved: March 21, 2002, from http://www.volunteering.com.au.
Baruch College's Nonprofit Management Group 1993, ‘ROI Analysis’, Philanthropy
Monthly, March, 1993, pp. 23-37.
Chappelet, JL 2000, Management Of The Olympic Games: The Lessons Of Sydney.
Retrieved : February 11 2003 from http://www.business.nsw.gov.au/sysfiles/
download/OlympicActivity.pdf
Citrine, K 1997, ‘Site planning for events in Kennedy, S (ed) Event Operations,
International Festivals & Events Association Port Angeles. Pp 17–19.
Clark, D 1997, ‘Controlling your event finances’, in Kennedy, S (ed) Event
Operations, International Festival & Events Association, Port Angeles pp 27-30.
Davies, S 1998, ‘A Hazard - Mass Crowd Events’, National Emergency Response
Vol13, No 2, June 1998, pp. 14-25.
Fechner, R ‘Event Overlays Test Management Skills’, Australian Project Manager,
June 1999, Vol 19, No2.
Fredline, L, Jago, L & Deery M 2002 ‘Assessing the Social Impacts of Events: Scale’,
in Jago, L et al Events and Place Making, Proceedings Of International Event
Research Conference AACEM, July 2002, Sydney.
Games Force 2000, Delivering the Dream, NSW Technical and Further Education
Commission, TAFEW NSW Olympic and Paralympic Unit, Sydney.
Getz, D 1998, ‘Information Sharing among Festival Managers’, Festival Management
& Event Tourism Vol 5 pp 33-50, Cognizant Communication, New York.
Getz, D 2000, Developing a Research Agenda for the Event Management Field,
Events Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda. Proceedings of Conference on Event

Evaluation, Research and Education, pp. 10 – 21, Sydney, July 2000. Sydney,
Australian Centre for Event Management.
Getz, D 2002, ‘Why Festivals Fail’, Event Management, Vol. 7, pp. 209-219.
Goldblatt, J 2000, A Future for Event management : The Analysis of Major Trends
Impacting the Emerging Profession, Events Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda.
Sydney, July 2000. Sydney, Australian Centre for Event Management.
Goldblatt, J n.d., How do you ROE your Event Boat. Retrieved: October 31, 2004,
from http://www.event-solutions.com/articles/7b1forum.html.
Hanlon, C & Jago, L., 2000, ‘Pulsating sporting events: an organizational structure to
optimize performance’, in Events Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda.
Proceedings of Conference on Event Evaluation, Research and Education, pp.
93- 104, Sydney, July 2000. Sydney, Australian Centre for Event Management.
Hartman, F, Ashrafi, R & Jergeas, G 1998, Project Management in the live
entertainment industry: what is different, International Journal of Project
Management Vol 16 No 5 pp. 269-281.
Helde, A Jago, L. & Dreery M 2002 ‘Special Events Research During 1990-2001: Key
Trends and Issues’, in Jago, L et al Events and Place Making, Proceedings Of
International Event Research Conference AACEM, July 2002, Sydney.
Holmes, G 2002, Managing Event Volunteer Safety, Proceedings of Lgov Planning A
Safe Event Seminar. Retrieved: January 21, 2003, from http://www.lgov.org.au/.
ICC 2003, ICC Cricket World Cup Volunteers 2003 Training Manual, ICC,
Johannesburg South Africa.
Kendall, C & Curthoys, J 2001, ‘Marketing and the Sydney 2000 Games (Indicia and
Images) Protection Act: A Retrospective E Law’, Electronic Journal of Law, Vol
8, No 2 (June 2001), Murdoch University.
Levy, B & Marion, B 1997, ‘The timeline: what should be done by when?’ in
Successful Special Events; Planning, Hosting and Evaluating, Aspen,
Gaithersburg, Md., pp. 57-66.
Lloyd, J 1997, ‘Managing well with the media before, during and after your event of
IFEA’ Producing the Small to Midsize Festival, International Festival and Events
Association, Washington Chapter 9.
Monga, M & Treuren, G 2001, 'Employment relations without paid work: An
exploration into commitment and motivation of special event volunteering', in K.
Spooner and C. Innes (eds.) Employment Relations in the New Economy:
Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference of the International Employment
Relations Association, at Singapore 10-12 July 2001 and Kuala Lumpur 7-9
July 2001. Retrieved: February 18, 2002, from
http://business.unisa.edu.au/cae/projects/current/seo/.
Mules, T 1998, ‘Financial and Economic Modelling of Major Sporting Events in
Australia’, The Centre for South Australian Economic Studies December 1998,
Adelaide.
Nelson, D 2002, Do We Need Volunteers In Special Events?. Retrieved: March 20,
2003, from http://www.specialeventsforum.com/library/Volunteers.html.
O’Toole, W 2003b, Analysis of Event Operations – clustering. Retrieved: June 27,
2003, from http://www-personal.usyd.edu.au/~wotoole/clustering.htm.
O’Toole, W 2005, Handover Ceremony and Celebrations in East Timor from a project
management perspective in Getz, D 2005, Event Management and Event
Tourism 2nd edn, Cognizant Communication, New York (in press).
Operations and Services : Sponsorship and Marketing : Page 2. Retrieved: January
9, 2003, from http://www.gamesinfo.com.au/postgames/en/pg001814.htm.
O'Toole, W 2000, ‘Towards the Integration of Event Management Best Practice by
the Project Management Process’, Events Beyond 2000: Setting the Agenda.
Sydney, July 2000, Australian Centre for Event Management, Sydney,

O'Toole, W 2002a, ‘Competencies and Maturity Models for Events’, Proceedings
from the International Special Event Society Conference, Sydney July 2002.
O'Toole, W 2002b, The Sense of Culture : Events in the Environment, Australian
Centre for Event Management Conference paper, Sydney July 2002.
O'Toole, W 2002c, ‘Special Event Risk from a Project Management Perspective’,
Proceedings from the International Special Event Society Conference : Sydney
July 2002.
Parry, B 2003, ‘Risk Management’, McMahon-Beattie, U. & Yeoman, I Eds. 2003,
Sport and Leisure : Operation Management Continuum, London.
Perkins, L 2001 Day of Event Cancellation Procedures, WCVM Journal and
Resource Data Center. Retrieved: May 7, 2002, from
www.venue.org/journalfile/1010385641DAY_
of_event_cancellation_Oct_25_2001.doc.
Schmader, S 1997, Event Operations; Getting Everything Done with Quality, IFEA
Producing the Small to Midsize Festival, International Festival and Events
Association, Washington.
Management Body of Knowledge (EMBOK) unpublished, included in thesis
Smallwood, S & Levis, W 1977, ‘The Realities of Fund-Raising Costs and
Accountability’, The Philanthropy Monthly, September 1977. Retrieved:
February 10, 2004, from http://www.nonprofits.org/misc/fps/realities.html.
Tilley, W 1997, ‘Booking Entertainment for the Smaller Event’ Producing the Small to
Midsize Festival, International Festival and Events Association, Washington pp.
65-68.
Timmins, N 2002, Project Managing the Dream, in Allen, J, O'Toole, W, McDonnell, I
& Harris, R, Festival and Special Event Management, 2nd edn, J. Wiley,
Brisbane, pp.313-318.
Wendroff, A 1999 ‘Monetary goals and budgets’ in Special events: proven strategies
for nonprofit fund raising, John Wiley, New York, pp 53 –79.
Event Books
Books about events (9)
Allen, J Harris R & Huyskens M, 2000, Event Management; An Australian

Bibliography Australian Centre for Event Management UTS Sydney.
Allen, J., Harris, R., Jago, L.K. & Veal, A.J. (eds.) 2000, Events Beyond 2000: Setting
the Agenda. Proceedings of Conference on Event Evaluation, Research and
Education, Sydney, July 2000. Sydney, Australian Centre for Event
Management.
Birch, R 2004, Master of Ceremonies, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest.
Cameron, N 1995 Maleny Folk Festival The Art of Celebration, Mimburi Press,
Maleny Queensland.
Chapman, C 1997, The Complete Wedding Organiser and Record, Foulsham,
England.
Collins, J 1987, Conference Organization in Australia, Reed Books NSW.
Geldard, E & Sinclair, L 1996, The Sponsorship Manual, The Sponsorship Unit,
Olinda Victoria.
Standards Australia 1999, AS/NZS 4360:1999 Risk Management, Standards
Australia Sydney.
Standards Australia International 2004, AS/NZS 4360:2004 Risk Management,
Standards Australia International, Sydney.

Event Documents
Original documents used in the organization and evaluation of events. Those not in
the common domain may be requested from the author. (30)
Auditor General's Office 2002 V8 Car Races in Canberra - Costs and Benefits
Performance Audit Report July 2002, ACT.
Australia India New Horizons - Project Directory 1996, 22/07/96 Australian
Department of Foreign Affairs, Canberra.
Avert Risk Management 2001, Risk Management proposal for the Asia Pacific
Regional Ministerial Meeting Oct 2001, A.C.E. Services, Sydney.
Buchan Communications Group 1997 Australia India New Horizons Evaluation
Report May 1997, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Canberra.
Buckley E, & Newbrun 2001, Event Management - Management and Minimization of
Legal and Commercial Risks, March 2001, Ebsworth and Ebsworth, Sydney
Campbell, C. 2001, Dairy Farmers 2001 Yass River Festival Report to the Yass River
Festival Committee and the Yass Shire Development Corporation 6th November
2001, Yass Council.
Celebrate Australia Event Plan 1993, Australian Embassy, Tokyo.
Citizens Guide to a Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Albert Park Grand Prix. Retrieved:
September 3, 2003, from http://www.save-albert-
park.org.au/sapweb/SAP%20Grand%20Prix%20Issue.html#DECISION.
Conference Australia Pty Ltd 1996, New Horizons : The Australia India Business
Mission and Forum, Conference Australia Pty Ltd, Canberra.
Corporate Voice Shandwick Public Relations 1996, Public Affairs Presentation for the
Australia-India New Horizons Programme, Corporate Voice Shandwick Public
Relations, New Delhi.
East Timor Ceremony Sponsorship n.d. Retrieved: April 9, 2002, from
www.easttimor.com/sponsor_pr.pdf.
Edgecombe, M 1999, Victor Harbor Folk Festival Site Manual, South Australian Folk
Federation, Adelaide.
Ellis Park Stadium Disaster 2001, Commission of Inquiry into the 11 April 2001 Ellis
Park Disaster. Retrieved: December 10, 2003, from:
http://www.asosh.org/Legislation/SouthAfrica/SA_online.htm.
Hatton, J 2000, Federations day Risk Assessment Report, 8th Nov 2000, NSW
Centenary of Federations Committee, Sydney.
Johnson, R 2002, Stakeholder Analysis of the East Timor Handover Ceremony -
paper as part of the requirements for Masters in Project Management.
Johnson, R 2002b, Analysis of Independence Day in terms of the Project
Management Body of Knowledge paper as part of the requirements for Masters
in Project Management.
Milledge, J 2002, , Inquest into the Death of Jessica Malik, 8 November 2002, Senior
Deputy State Coroner
NSW Centenary of Federation Committee 2000, Centennial Ceremony Event
manual, NSW Premiers Department, Sydney.
NSW Premiers Department 2001, Major Habourside Event Table Top Exercise: New
Year's Event Sydney, NSW Premiers Department November 2001, Sydney.
NSW Premiers Department 2001, Table Top Exercise Major Event 20.11.01
Responses To Scenarios, NSW Premiers Department, Sydney.
Operation Risk Management Plan AMP Journey of a Nation A Celebration of our
Federation Expo 14/11/01, 2001, AMP, Sydney.
Pabst, L 2004, Gardening Australia Live, Sydney Water’s Event Management
Manual, Sydney Water, Sydney.
Premiers Department NSW 2002 Stakeholder Coordination, Major & Special Events,
Premiers Department NSW, Sydney.

Price Waterhouse 1996, Challenges of India : India Promotion 1996, Price
Waterhouse, Sydney.
Roundtable Discussions Australia India Relations Second session 14 Feb 1995
Australian High Commission New Delhi.
Symonds Group Ltd 1999, Big Time London 31/12/1999, Event Safety management
Plan, Vol 1 and 2 September 1999, Symonds Group Ltd, London.
Tatrai, A 2001b, Red Bull City X Circuit Crow management Plan Darling Harbor 17,
November 2001, A.C.E., Sydney.
The British Council 1997, newImages : Event Overview, The British Council, Sydney
Ulladulla Summer Games 1999, Report, Ulladulla Summer Games Committee,
Ulladulla, N.S.W.
Woodford Folk Festival 1997, Operational and Site Management Plan 1997,
Queensland Folk Federation Incorporated, Woodford.
Event Manuals
Event specific and generic manuals used to manage events.(30)
A Planning Guide for Event Managers 1999, The Liquor Licensing Division of the
Queensland Department of Tourism, Sport and Racing. Retrieved: June 27,
2001, from
http://203.147.169.52/ourproducts/brochures/planning_guide/page_1.asp.
Arts Victoria 2002, Festival DIY Kit, Arts Victoria, Melbourne.
Australian Bureau of Statistics 1995, Multipliers for Culture Related Industries,
Cultural Ministers Council Statistical Advisory Group, March 1995.
Belby, A 1986, Festival Manual, Commonwealth Department of Education, Australian
Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Blacktown City Council City 2000, Festival and Parade Manual June 2000, Blacktown
City Council City, Blacktown.
Business Excellence Australia 2003, Risk Management for Events, Standards
Australia., Sydney.
Curry, B 2001, A Practical Guide to Organizing a Community Event, Betel Marketing
Solutions, Foster NSW.
Events Tasmania 2004. Retrieved: June 10, 2004, from
http://www.eventstasmania.com/.
Exhibition and Event Association of Australia 2002. Exhibitions Work : Exhibition
Industry Guide 2002, Exhibition and Event Association of Australia Executive
Media. Retrieved: March 18, 2003, from http://www.eeaa.com.au.
Federal Emergency Management Agency 2000, Special Events Contingency
Planning IS-15 Job Aid Manual, August 2000, USA. Retrieved: September 20,
2002, from http://www dispatchmonthly.com/spec_event_plans.pdf.
Finnis M & Cooke R, Risk Management : A Practical Resource for Clubs, Yachting
Victoria, Melbourne.
Government of Victoria 2004, Event management ; Planning Guide For Event
Managers in Victoria, Government of Victoria, Melbourne.
Holmes, G 2002, Managing Event Volunteer Safety, Holmes and Reynolds Pty Ltd,
Sydney
Neighbourhood Arts Unit 1991, Community Festival Handbook, City Of Melbourne.
Nelson Safer Community Council 2002, Planning Safe Events : Safety Guidelines for
Event Managers, Nelson City Council, NZ.
NSW Department of Local Government 1997, Major and Special Events Planning: A
Guide for Promoters and Councils, NSW Department of Local Government,
Sydney.

NSW Department of State and Regional Development 2001, Making Dollars and
Sense out of Community Events, NSW Department of State and Regional
Development, Sydney.
Office of Sport and Recreation Tasmania 1999, A Sporting Chance : A risk
management framework for the sport and recreation industry, Office of Sport
and Recreation Tasmania, Hobart.
Official Report of the XXVII Olympiad 2001, Sydney Organizing Committee for the
Olympic Games. Retrieved: March 21, 2002 from
http://www.gamesinfo.com.au/postgames.
Out and About : Volunteers : Page 1. Retrieved: January 9, 2003, from
http://www.gamesinfo.com.au/postgames/en/pg000246.htm
Queensland Government Office of Sport and Recreation 1998, Playing it Safe: a
guide to risk management for sport and recreation organizations, Queensland
Government Office of Sport and Recreation, Department of Emergency
Services, Brisbane.
Regional Arts Australia 2002, Creative Volunteering Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra.
Road and Traffic Authority 1999, Traffic Management for Special Events, March
1999, Road and Traffic Authority (RTA), Sydney.
Scouting Australia 2001, 22nd Asia-Pacific/19th Australian Scouting Jamboree Manual
2001.
Standards Australia International 2004, HB 436: 2004 Risk Management Guidelines,
Companion to ASNZS 4360 2004, Standards Australia International, Sydney.
State Coroner 2000, Inquest Report on the 1998 Sydney to Hobart yacht race 12 Dec
2000 State Coroner's Court, NSW Attorney General's Department, Sydney.
SUVA, Sydney Unique Venue Association. Retrieved: March 10, 2004, from
http://www.suva.com.au/.
Tasmania Together Progress Board 2001, Tasmania Together 2001 Tasmania
Together Progress Board, Hobart.
Tatrai, A 2001a, The Cost of Regret : The Role of Risk management in Event /Venue
safety Planning. Retrieved: July 10, 2002. from http://www.crowdsafe.com.
US Department of Transportation 2003, Managing Travel for Planned Special
Events, Federal Highway Administration USA.
Event Textbooks
Texts used in the teaching and training of event managers (39)
Allen, J 2000, Event Planning, John Wiley, Toronto.

Management, 2nd edn, John Wiley and sons, Brisbane,
Management, 3nd edn, John Wiley and sons, Brisbane.
Berlonghi, A 1990, Special Event Risk Management Manual, Bookmasters Inc. Ohio.
Betteridge, D 1997, Event Management in Leisure and Tourism, Hodder and
Stoughton, London.
Bowdin, G, McDonnell, I, Allen, J. & O'Toole, W 2001, Events Management. Oxford,
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Catherwood, DW & Van Kirk, RL 1992, The Complete Guide to Special Events
Management, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Coons, P. 1999, Gala! :The Special Event Planner for Professionals and Volunteers.
USA, Capital Books Inc..
EMA 1999, Safe and Healthy Mass Gatherings, Australian Emergency Manuals,
Series part 3, Volume 2, Emergency Management Australia, Dickson ACT.

EMA 2000, Emergency Risk Management Applications Guide, Emergency
Management Australia, Dickson ACT.
Epple, A 1997, Organizing Scientific Meetings, Cambridge University Press, UK.
Geirer, T 1986, Making your Events Special: How to plan and Organize Successful
Special Events Program for Non-profit Organizations, Cause Effect, New York.
Getz, D 1991 Festivals, Special Events and Tourism Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York.
Getz, D 1997, Event Management and Event Tourism, Cognizant Communication,
New York.
Goldblatt, J & Frank Supovitz, F 1999, Dollars and Events: How to Succeed in the
Special Events Business, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Goldblatt, J & McKibben C (eds.) 1996, The Dictionary of Events Management, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Goldblatt, J 1997, Special Events: Best Practices in Modern Event Management, 2nd
edn, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Goldblatt, J 2002, Special Events: Twenty-first century global event management,
New York, John Wiley & Sons.
Goldblatt, J 2005, Special Events: Event Leadership for a New World 4th edn, John
Wiley & Sons, New York.
Graham, S, Goldblatt, J & Delpy, L 1995, The Ultimate Guide to Sport Event
Management and Marketing, Irwin Professional Publishing, Chicago.
Harris, R & Allen, J (ed.) 2002, Regional Event Management Handbook, Australian
Centre for Event Management, Sydney.
IFEA 1997, Producing the Small to Midsize Festival, International Festival and
Events Association, Washington.
Jackson, R & Schmader, S 1990, Special Events : Inside and Out, Sagamore
Publishing, IL.
Major and Special Events Planning, A Guide for Promoters and Councils 1997.
Retrieved: October 21, 2000, from http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au.
Malouf, L 1999, Behind the Scenes at Special Events, John Wiley, New York.
McCabe, V, Poole, B, Weeks, P & Leiper, N 2000, The Business and Management of
Conventions, John Wiley, Brisbane.
McDonnell, I, Allen, J & O’Toole, W 1999, Festival and Special Event Management,
Jacaranda Wiley, Brisbane.
O’Toole, W 2003a Event Project Management System, EPMS Sydney.
O'Toole, W & Mikolaitis, P 2002, Corporate Event Project Management, John Wiley,
New York.
Shone, A. with Parry, B. 2001, Successful Event Management, Continuum, London.
Shone, A. with Parry, B. 2004, Successful Event Management 2nd edn, Continuum,
London.
Silvers, J 2004, Professional Event Coordination, John Wiley, New York.
Sonder, M 2004, Event Entertainment and Production, John Wiley & Sons, New
York.
Stedman, G 1995, The Ultimate Guide to Sports Event Management and Marketing,
Richard Irwin, Chicago.
Surbeck, L 1991, Creating Special Events, Master Publications, Denver.
Tarlow, P 2002, Event Risk Management and Safety, John Wiley, New York.
Tonge, R 2000, How to Organize Special Events and Festivals in Queensland,
Tourism Queensland, Brisbane.
Van Der Wagen, L 2001, Event Management, Hospitality Press, Melbourne.
Watt, D. 1998, Event Management in Leisure and Tourism, Addison Wesley
Longman, Harlow UK.

Books and Articles: management, models, systems and dynamics
Texts used in the construction of the event management process model.
Beer S, 1985, Diagnosing the System for Organizations, John Wiley & Sons
Chichester.
Beniger, J 1986, The Control Revolution : Technological and Economic Origins of the
Information Society, Harvard University Press Cambridge.
Blanchard, B & Fabrycky, W 1998, Systems Engineering and Analysis, 3rd edn,
Prentice-Hall, NJ.
Bowker, G & Star, S 1999, Sorting Things Out : Classification and its Consequences,
MIT, USA.
Brown, W 2000, AntiPatterns in Project Management, J. Wiley, New York.
Calvert, M 1995, Technology contracts : a handbook for law and business,
Butterworths, Sydney.
Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute n.d., Capability Maturity Model
http://Retrieved: March 30 2003 from http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmm/cmm.html.
Casti, J 1997, Would-be Worlds, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Chapman, C & Ward, S 1997, Project Risk Management, John Wiley, Chichester
UK.
Checkland, P & Scholes, J 1999, Soft Systems Methodology in Action, J. Wiley and
Sons, Chichester England.
Chicken, J 1994, Managing Risks and Decisions in Major Projects, Chapman & Hall,
London.
Collins, T 1998, Crash : Learning form the World's Worst Computer Disasters, Simon
and Schuster, London.
Conger, S & Mason, R 1998, Planning and Designing Effective Web Sites Course
Technology Cambridge, MA.
Cooper A 1999, The Inmates are Running the Asylum, Macmillan Computer
Publishing, Indiana.
Cooper, D & Schindler, P 1998, Business Research Methods, 6th edn, McGraw-Hill,
Boston.
Cova, B, Ghauri, P & Salle, R 2002, Project marketing : beyond competitive bidding,
J. Wiley, New York.
Crawford L. & Costello K. 1999, Towards A Transferable Methodology For Managing
Strategic Change by Projects, in Crawford, L & Clarke, C (eds.) IRNOP IV
Conference - Paradoxes of Project Collaboration in the Global Economy:
Interdependence, Complexity and Ambiguity, Sydney, Australia: University of
Technology, Sydney.
Demarco, T. 1978, Structured Analysis and System Specification, Yourdon Press
Prentice Hall, NJ.
Dinsmore, P 1999, ‘From project management to enterprise project management’,
Australian Project Manager June 1999, Vol 19, No 2.
Dorner, D 1997, The Logic of Failure, Addison Wesley, MA.
Drucker, P 1973, Management, Harper and Row, New York.
England, E & Finney, A, 1999, Managing Multimedia : project management for
interactive media, Addison-Wesley, Harlow, England.
Evans, P & Wurster, T 2000, Blown to Bits, Harvard Business School Press Boston,
MA USA.
Fichman, R & Moses, S 1999, An Incremental Process For Software Implementation,
Sloan Management Review Vol. 40, No. 2, 1999, pp. 39-52.
Flake, G 1998, The Computational Beauty of Nature : Computer Explorations of
Fractals, Chaos, Complex Systems and Adaptation, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Frame, J & Block, T 1998, The Project Office-A Key to Managing Projects Effectively,
Crisp Publication Menlo Park, CA.

Frame, JD 1999, Project Management Competence, Jossey Bass, San Francisco.
Gell-Mann, M 1994, The Quark and the Jaguar : Adventures in the simple and the
complex, Little, Brown and Company, London.
Gleick, J 1999, Faster, Little Brown and Company, London UK.
Hamblyn, R 2001, The Invention of Clouds, Picador, London.
IDEF 1993, Integrates Definition for Functional Modelling, Federal Information
Processing Standards Publication 183, National Institute of Standards and
Technology USA. Retrieved: October 20, 2002, from
http://www.idef.com/Downloads/pdf/idef0.pdf.
Jaafari A. & Gunaratnam, DA 2000, Conceptual Model for Inclusion of Soft Variables
in Projects, unpublished.
Jaafari, A 2000, Management of Risks, Uncertainties and Opportunities on Projects,
unpublished paper.
Jackson, MA 1983, System Development Prentice-Hall International Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.
Kirkwood, C 1997, Strategic Decision Making Multiobjective Decision Analysis with
Spreadsheets, Wadsworth Publishing Company, California USA.
Kleindorfer, P, Kunreuther, H & Schoemaker, P 1993, Decision Sciences : An
Integrative Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Koller, G 1999, Risk assessment and decision making in business and industry : a
practical guide, Imprint Boca Raton, CRC Press, Fla.
Marsh, P 1989, Successful Bidding and Tendering, Gower Publishing Company,
Brookfield Vermont.
Middleton, V 1994, Marketing in Travel and Tourism 2nd edn, Butterworth
Heinemann, Oxford.
Mintzberg, H 1994, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Prentice Hall, New York.
Modell, M 1996, A Professional's Guide to Systems Analysis 2nd edn, McGraw-Hill,
New York.
Nielsen, J 2000, Designing Web Usability, New Riders Publishing, Indianna USA.
O'Shea, J & Madigan, C 1997, Dangerous Company, Nicholas Brealey Publishing,
London.
Perlman, A 1999, No Bull Object Technology for Executives, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge UK.
Port-Roth, B 1993, Proposal Development; How to Respond and Win the Bid, Oasis
Press, New York.
Satzinger J & Orvik T 1996.The Object-Oriented Approach : Concepts, Modeling and
System Developmen,t Course Technology International Thomas Publishing,
Cambridge MA USA
Schuyler, J 1996, Decision Analysis in Projects, PMI Communications, North
Carolina.
Seddon, J 2000, The case against ISO 9000, Oak Tree,. Dublin.
Shenk, D 1997, Data Smog, Abacus, London UK.
Sherden, W 1998, The Fortune Sellers, J. Wiley, New York.
Slack, N, Chambers, S & Johnston, R 2001, Operations Management, Pearson
Education, Harrow England.
Sterman, J 2000, Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a
Complex World, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Boston.
Stoll, C 1995, Silicon Snake Oil, Macmillan, London UK.
Stoner, J, Yetton, P, Craig, J & Johnston, K 1994, Management, 2nd edn, Prentice
Hall, Sydney.
Tatikonda, M & Rosenthal, S 2000, ‘Technology novelty, project complexity, and
product development project execution success: a deeper look at task
uncertainty in product innovation’ IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, Volume: 47, Issue: 1, Feb 2000 pp. 74-87.

Tiwana, A. 2000, The Knowledge Management Tools Kit : Practical Techniques for
Building a Knowledge Management System Prentice Hall, NJ.
Tolle, G. 2002, Shaping the Information Environment, Military Review Command &
General Staff College Fort Leavenworth, Kansas May-June 2002 English
Edition. Retrieved: July 23, 2003, from http://www-
cgsc.army.mil/milrev/english/MayJun02/toole.asp.
Walker, S 2001, Operational Risk Management : controlling opportunities and
threats, Connley Walker Pty Ltd, Brighton East, Vic.
Project Management Textbooks and Articles

Project management textbooks used to construct the standard project management
methodology supporting the PMBOK ™ 2000
Badiru, A & Pulat, P 1995, A Comprehensive Project Management; Integrating,

Optimisation Models, Management Principles and Computers, Prentice -Hall
NJ.
Bent, J & Humphreys, K (ed.) 1996, Effective project management through applied
cost and schedule control, M. Dekker, New York.
Burke, R 1992, Project Management Planning and Control, J. Wiley, New York.
Cleland, D & King, W 1975, Systems Analysis and Project Management, McGraw-
Hill, New York.
Cleland, D (ed.) 1998, Field Guide to Project Management, Van Nostrand Reinhold,
New York.
Dinsmore, P 1990, Human Factors in Project Management, 2nd edn, AMACOM, New
York.
Duncan, W 1996 A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, PMI
Publishing, North Carolina. Retrieved: April 12, 2001, from
http://www.eniac.com/whitepap/project.htm.
Ernø-Kjølhede, E 2000, Project Management Theory and the Management of
Research Projects. Retrieved: May 7, 2003, from
http://ideas.repec.org/p/hhb/cbslpf/2000_003.html.
Goldratt E. 1997, Critical Chain, North River Press, MA.
Gray, C & Larson, E 2000, Project management : the managerial process,
Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston.
James, P & Lewis, P 2000, The Project Manager's Desk Reference : A
Comprehensive Guide To Project Planning, Scheduling, Evaluation, and
Systems, 2nd edn, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Kerzner, H 1998, Project Management : A Systems Approach to Planning,
Scheduling and Controlling, 6th edn, J. Wiley, New York.
Kerzner, H 2001, Strategic Planning for Project Management using a Project
Management Maturity Model, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Kharbanda, OP & Stallworthy, EA 1983, How to learn from Project Disasters, Gower,
Aldershot.
Kliem, R & Ludin, S 1999, Tools and Tips for Today's Project Managers, Project
Management Institute Headquarters, Pennsylvania.
Kliem, R, Ludin, I & Robertson, K 1997, Project Management Methodology - A
Practical Guide for the Next Millennium, Marcel Dekker, New York.
Kliem, R. & Ludin, I 1997, Reducing Project Risk, Gower, Brookfield VT.
Leach, L 2000, Critical Chain Project Management, Artech House, MA.
Lientz, B & Rea, K 1995, Project management for the 21st century, Academic Press,
San Diego
Martin, M, Teagarden, C, & Lambreth, C 1990, Contract Administration for the
Project Manager, Project Management Institute, PA USA.

McLeod, G & Smith, D 1996, Managing Information Technology Projects, ITP, MA
USA.
Miranda, E. 2003, Running the successful hi-tech project office, Artech House,
Boston.
Morris P. 1999, ‘Benchmarking Project Management Bodies Of Knowledge’ in
Crawford, L. & Clarke, C (eds.) IRNOP IV Conference - Paradoxes of Project
Collaboration in the Global Economy: Interdependence, Complexity and
Ambiguity, Sydney, Australia: University of Technology, Sydney.
Morris, PW 1999, The Management of Projects : the new model. Retrieved: March
20, 2003, from http://www.umist.ac.uk/CRMP/management_of_projects.htm.
Nicholas, J 1990, Managing business and engineering projects : concepts and
implementation, Prentice-Hall International, London.
Pinto, J & Trailer, J (ed.) 1999, Essentials of project control, Project Management
Institute, PA USA.
Project Management Institute (n.d.), Organizational Project Management Maturity
Model. Retrieved: March 15, 2000, from http://www.pmi.org/opm3/.
Project Management Institute 2000, Guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge, Project Management Institute PA USA.
Reid, A 1999, Project Management : getting it right,: CRC Press Boca Raton, Fl.
Reiss, G 1999, Project Management Demystified - Today's tools and techniques, 2nd
edn, E&FN Spoon, London.
Smith, LW 2000, ‘Project Clarity Through Stakeholder Analysis’, CrossTalk, vol. 13,
no. 12, December 2000. Retrieved: October 19, 2000, from
http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2000/12/smith.html.
Standish Report 1995 Chaos, The Standish Group. Retrieved: March 23, 2004, from
http://www.proejctsmart.co.uk/docs/chaos_report.pdf.
The Project Management Institute 1999, Project Management Software Survey.
Retrieved: September 2, 2002, from http://www.pmi.org.
Thomsett, M 1990, The Little Black Book of Project Management, AMACOM, New
York.
Turner, JR 1999, The Handbook of Project-Based Management, McGraw Hill,
Maidenhead.
USA Department of Defence Handbook 1998, Work Breakdown Structure mil-hdbk-
881 2 January 1998. Retrieved: January 23, 2002, from
http://www.acq.osd.mil/pm/newpolicy/wbs/mil_hdbk_881/mil_hdbk_881.htm.
Verzuh, E 1999, The Fast Forward MBA in Project Management, John Wiley, New
York.
Weiss, J. & Wysocki, R 1992, 5-Phase Project Management - A Practical Planning
and Implementation Guide, Addison -Wiley, Reading MA.
Wideman, M n.d. Wideman’s Comparative Glossary of Project Management terms
v3.1. Retrieved: March 13, 2001, from
http://www.maxwideman.com/pmglossary/PMG_P10.htm.
Williams, T 2002, Modelling Complex Projects, John Wiley, West Sussex UK.
Appendix
The appendix contains work completed during the candidature. It is highly relevant to
the thesis but not easily available. The documents are identified by their listing in the
references of the thesis:
Business Excellence Australia 2003, Risk Management for Events, Standards Australia,
Sydney. Risk Identification.
O'Toole, W 2002a, ‘Competencies and Maturity Models for Events’, Proceedings from the
International Special Event Society Conference, Sydney July 2002.
O’Toole, W 2003b, Analysis of Event Operations – clustering. Retrieved: June 27, 2003,
from http://www-personal.usyd.edu.au/~wotoole/clustering.htm
O’Toole, W 2005, ‘Handover Ceremony and Celebrations in East Timor from a project
management perspective’ in Getz, D 2005, Event Management and Event Tourism 2nd
edn, Cognizant Communication, New York (in press).

Management Body of Knowledge (EMBOK)
END

Otoole Engineering EventsV01

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Otoole Engineering EventsV01

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Otoole Engineering EventsV01

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENGINEERING

A Comparison of the standard

William John O’Toole

To my family whose support has been unyielding.

Bill O’Toole 2005

© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page ii

© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page iii

© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page iv

© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page v

© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page vi

© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page vii

© William J O’Toole 2005 Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page viii

When reviewing the progression of a profession through history, such as medicine,

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page ix

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page x

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page xi

“And so these men of Indostan

EMBOK: statement of intent

The EMBOK Is…

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page xiii

The members of the International Committee are :

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page xiv

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc Page 1 of 115

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc Page 2 of 115

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc Page 3 of 115

"Information infrastructure is a tricky thing to analyse. Good, usable systems disappear

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 4 of 115

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 5 of 115

A model, processes, system or a Body of Knowledge?

This thesis presents a model of event management. It is a management model made up of

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 6 of 115

The objective of a management model is to support management to reach its objectives. It is

Table 1.1 Model Quality

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 7 of 115

Complexity and Uncertainty

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 8 of 115

Figure 1.2 Process Complexity

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 9 of 115

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 10 of 115

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 11 of 115

Phases of event management and the event life cycle.

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 12 of 115

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 13 of 115

Event Feasibility ............................................................................................................... 15

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 14 of 115

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 15 of 115

Measuring the Product

The difficulty in finding commensurate variables on which to base a feasibility study is

Project Asset Impact

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 16 of 115

William J O’Toole SID 7026602, Otoole Engineering EventsV01.doc, Page 17 of 115

Planning Implementation &

Cost plan Procurement

Sponsor Initiation Task Contract appraisal

Payback Analysis Project Plan Contract closeout

Event Charter Cost

Risk Plan Final Cost

SWOT Analysis Procurement

Develop Product Time

Develop Event GANT Chart