On May 12th, 1970, Montreal was appointed to hold the Olympic Games of 1976. Since then, Montreal Mayor Jean Drapeau became the project manager of preparing the city for such gigantic event. Unfortunately, there were risk factors that Drapeau neglected to overcome, which almost led the entire project to a failure. This paper will address what risk factors it had, if they could have been avoided, and what learnings we can acquire from this case. Two of the biggest contributors to keep in mind for this project’s potential failure were Mayor Drapeau and an architect Roger Taillibert. Because of their poor risk managements, Montreal Olympic Stadium almost failed to host the 1976 Olympic Games. Their avoided risk factors include lack of proper
…show more content…
Drapeau disregarded a huge number of objections from Montreal’s people, as he decided a location for Olympic Village. SPR is assumed at 2, for the severity being low and probability being high. According to Michael J. Dixon, “So, instead of striving for physical growth, today a city’s success should be measured by how wisely it uses energy, water, and other resources, how well it maintains a high quality of life for its people, and how smart it is in building prosperity on a sustainable foundation.” Although the city’s relation with its people is crucial, their disagreement in the scope of this particular project is not noticeably affective. Yet, getting rid a unique environment that the people cared a lot about is only assumed to bring negative reactions from them. The biggest reason why Montreal had to suffer through this project was because Drapeau did not value risk management at all. Identifying feasible risks for a project during its planning phase is crucial because it gives all of the stakeholders an opportunity to address what predictable threats there are for the project. Thereafter, mitigation strategies can be generated respectively. And contingency plans are also there to reduce the potential consequence due to failed mitigation strategies. These were obviously not implemented correctly by Drapeau’s project
Drapeau disregarded a huge number of objections from Montreal’s people, as he decided a location for Olympic Village. SPR is assumed at 2, for the severity being low and probability being high. According to Michael J. Dixon, “So, instead of striving for physical growth, today a city’s success should be measured by how wisely it uses energy, water, and other resources, how well it maintains a high quality of life for its people, and how smart it is in building prosperity on a sustainable foundation.” Although the city’s relation with its people is crucial, their disagreement in the scope of this particular project is not noticeably affective. Yet, getting rid a unique environment that the people cared a lot about is only assumed to bring negative reactions from them. The biggest reason why Montreal had to suffer through this project was because Drapeau did not value risk management at all. Identifying feasible risks for a project during its planning phase is crucial because it gives all of the stakeholders an opportunity to address what predictable threats there are for the project. Thereafter, mitigation strategies can be generated respectively. And contingency plans are also there to reduce the potential consequence due to failed mitigation strategies. These were obviously not implemented correctly by Drapeau’s project