IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/indinn/v22y2015i3p229-249.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crossing Boundaries: Exploring the London Olympics 2012 as a Field-Configuring Event

Author

Listed:
  • Joachim Thiel
  • Gernot Grabher

Abstract

The paper seeks to unravel the field-configuring capacity of Olympic Games, as a large-scale event located at the intersection of several organizational fields. The initial argument is that the Olympics, besides being a cyclically recurring "tournament ritual" in the sports field, constitute a singular flagship project in those fields connected to the preparation and legacy implementation of the event. Conceptually the paper connects, therefore, the literature on field-configuration with a particular branch of project management research. Empirically it builds upon selected results of a major case study of the London Summer Games in 2012, in particular of the massive program of venue construction and urban regeneration linked to this event. The authors maintain that the cross-field-configuring capacity of a global and publicly visible venture like the Olympics is based on the interaction of its public prominence and the performance of involved actors. However, the configuration across field boundaries exhibits a specific temporality. For one thing, this is based on the singularity of the flagship projects within their fields. For another, it refers to the timescale in which the actual performance takes place.

Suggested Citation

  • Joachim Thiel & Gernot Grabher, 2015. "Crossing Boundaries: Exploring the London Olympics 2012 as a Field-Configuring Event," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 229-249, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:22:y:2015:i:3:p:229-249
    DOI: 10.1080/13662716.2015.1033841
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13662716.2015.1033841
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13662716.2015.1033841?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bent Flyvbjerg (ed.), 2014. "Megaproject Planning and Management: Essential Readings," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 14769.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Papachristos, George & Papadonikolaki, Eleni & Morgan, Bethan, 2024. "Projects as a speciation and aggregation mechanism in transitions: Bridging project management and transitions research in the digitalization of UK architecture, engineering, and construction industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nuno Oliveira & Fabrice Lumineau, 2017. "How Coordination Trajectories Influence the Performance of Interorganizational Project Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 1029-1060, December.
    2. Harry T. Dimitriou & Nicholas Low & Sophie Sturup & Genevieve Zembri & Elisabeth Campagnac & George Kaparos & Pantoleon Skayannis & Yasunori Muromachi & Seiji Iwakura & Kazuya Itaya & Mendel Giezen & , 2014. "What constitutes a "successful" mega transport project?/Leadership, risk and storylines: The case of the Sydney Cross City Tunnel/The case of the LGV Méditerranée high speed railway line/Dea," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 389-430, September.
    3. Flyvbjerg, Bent & Bester, Dirk W., 2021. "The Cost-Benefit Fallacy: Why Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Broken and How to Fix It," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 395-419, October.
    4. Bent Flyvbjerg & Cass R. Sunstein, 2015. "The Principle of the Malevolent Hiding Hand; or, the Planning Fallacy Writ Large," Papers 1509.01526, arXiv.org.
    5. Kai-Kristina Lattrich & Marion Büttgen, 2020. "Project leaders’ control resources and role overload as predictors of project success: developing the job demands–resources model," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(2), pages 767-788, July.
    6. Salvador Bertomeu & Antonio Estache, 2016. "Unbundling Political and Economic Rationality: a Non-Parametric Approach Tested on Spain," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2016-17, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:22:y:2015:i:3:p:229-249. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIAI20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.