London 2012 — Coherent, Affordable Security Architecture for a £358m Programme

Transforming fragmented designs into a unified, effective, defence-grade security system.

Situation

As the London 2012 Olympic Park approached completion, multiple siloed teams were designing the security systems:

  • CCTV
  • Access control
  • Perimeter fencing
  • Vehicle control points
  • Man-guarding
  • Command & control rooms
  • Intrusion detection systems

Each specialist had built their solution independently. Taken together, these systems formed a complex, unaffordable, unintegrated, and operationally incoherent security architecture.

Costs had spiralled. The design didn't meet operational requirements. And with rapidly approaching deadlines, there was no unified plan to secure a site designed to host millions of people under intense global scrutiny.

I was initially brought in to manage construction-phase risk — but quickly identified that the real threat lay in the system-level incoherence of the security solution.

This became a high-stakes systems engineering challenge involving safety, security, cost, procurement, politics, and coordination of diverse experts.

Challenges

Independent sub-systems designed in isolation

No integrated concept of operations

Costs far beyond budget

Conflicting operational assumptions

High political pressure and intense media scrutiny

Multiple engineering and security disciplines with entrenched positions

Imminent deadlines with no time for a long redesign

A requirement for world-class security that still had to be deliverable

This was a classic "big system, many designers, no architect" problem.

What We Did

Facilitated a one-day, defence-grade COEIA workshop

Using Combined Operational Effectiveness and Investment Appraisal (COEIA) — a methodology normally reserved for defence procurement — I brought together:

  • • Security experts
  • • Engineers
  • • Construction leaders
  • • Emergency planners
  • • Operational supervisors
  • • Police and security services stakeholders

For the first time, everyone saw the entire problem laid out clearly.

Defined a single integrated operational concept

We clarified:

  • • what threats mattered most
  • • when and how systems needed to coordinate
  • • which functions were essential
  • • what must happen under emergency conditions

Eliminated unnecessary gold-plating

Many design elements had no operational value. Others were duplicated across disciplines. By stripping away unnecessary complexity, the design became far more effective and far more affordable.

Created a coherent, affordable system architecture

The team agreed — for the first time — on:

  • • unified zones
  • • integrated detection and response
  • • compatible technologies
  • • simplified control
  • • aligned operational procedures

Prepared procurement and delivery

With clarity came confidence. Now procurement could proceed using a single, unified specification grounded in reality, not theory.

Results

A coherent security architecture

All subsystems now worked as one.

£358m of security systems aligned with a single concept

No waste, no duplication, no contradictory assumptions.

Massive cost reduction compared to original plans

Savings created by eliminating unnecessary and conflicting designs.

Operational effectiveness dramatically improved

Clearer responsibilities, smoother command-and-control, better detection and response.

Political and stakeholder confidence restored

A clear plan that everyone understood — and could execute.

Procurement accelerated with fewer risks

A unified specification reduced uncertainty and cost.

This was a textbook example of systems engineering applied to a high-pressure, multi-stakeholder civilian environment — with global visibility and no margin for error.

Need Help Aligning Experts Around a Coherent Solution?

If you need help aligning experts around a coherent, affordable and effective solution, let's discuss how systems engineering can cut through complexity.