Based in Leicester Square, we have witnessed first-hand how quiet London has been during the past two weeks since the Olympics began. Like many commentators, it has been clear that the dire warnings about transport chaos and hordes of visitors thronging our streets had the desired effect of frightening ordinary visitors and commuters away. And so it is equally clear that only a miracle, otherwise known as Government statistics, will translate the impact of this international sporting event into economic benefit for the UK.

However, I was challenged last night to consider whether we might see benefit in terms of international reputation. A very good question because when you consider past Olympics, especially in recent times, it is obvious that international reputation was far more important than economic benefit.

Reputation goals and outcomes of recent Olympics

Beijing 2008 was, without doubt, all about China proving itself on the world stage. As the country invested untold billions to ensure the event’s success, the goal of showcasing a modern, affluent and vibrant China was always centre-stage. Only the bitterest cynic would suggest that this goal was not achieved.

Rewind to Athens 2004 and here was another country trying to show off as the Greeks played on the national heritage of the world’s greatest sporting extravaganza to put itself centre-stage. Here too reputation played a big part as it showed how things can backfire with the media gorging itself with stories of Greek incompetence. One still clearly remembers the stories of overrunning building works, the scent of corruption and bureaucratic ineptitude, and budgets catastrophically blown. Indeed, the failure to secure a proper legacy for the venues still haunts the nation today.

A very different story for Sydney 2000. Often described as the “Best Games Ever”, and not just by the Australians, it was a triumph of the modern era with the Australians showing the world that they were a modern, vibrant and welcoming culture. As an opportunity to promote the country internationally to the widest possible extent, it can surely be argued that those Games were successful in meeting the national goals.

This was not the legacy of Atlanta 1996. Already tainted by accusations of unfairness as the Olympics returned so soon to the USA (Los Angeles had only been three Games earlier), the Atlanta Olympiad was not a great advert for the Americans. As transport chaos saw athletes stuck in traffic and actually miss events, and the IOC fell out with the local organisers over the level of sponsorship and commercialisation, the Games unfortunately reinforced negative stereotypes about the USA. Atlanta 1996 was also marred by the bombing which cannot be ignored when discussing the reputation legacy of a specific Olympics.

While it is tempting to go back indefinitely, I will end by commenting on Barcelona 1992. In the intervening 20 years we will have formed views of Spain that had little bearing to the country at the time (e.g. property boom and bust, and the current debt crisis). However, back then Spain was still emerging from the recent history of fascist dictatorship and was determined to prove itself as a civilised and progressive country. That Olympiad, immortalised by the famous backdrop of divers on the skyline of Barcelona, must surely be seen as a reputational success.

Reputation impact of London 2012

And so back to this year’s event. Do we have any reputation goals that this event can help with? Do we need to transform perceptions about the UK having a modern, progressive society? Do we need make a statement about the UK as a tourist or even business destination?

Of course the answer is ‘yes’ but the real question is whether the Olympics is the vehicle for delivering that change. Will more foreign companies invest in the UK because of the image they have formed from watching the Olympics either on TV or, in a few cases, in person? Perhaps, but this will be near to impossible to quantify. The same goes for tourism, especially when London is already an incredibly popular and famous destination for international travellers.

It is not that this event has not been well conceived to promote our reputation. Far from it, for example the image of the historic Queen’s House in Greenwich Park against the backdrop of the Canary Wharf brilliantly conveys the message of ancient stability, cultural richness and modern dynamism. Equally, the state-of-the-art stadium, architectural splendour of the aquatics centre and clever use of other venues also shows Britain off well. Even parking the HMS Ocean on the Thames could be viewed as boosting our international reputation regards defence.

Is it worth nearly £10bn and two weeks of business disruption? Answers by e-mail please!

Rio 2016

One final postscript, assuming the Brazilians treat Rio 2016 as the Chinese did (perhaps with slightly less investment!) then it is easy to see that enhancing the reputation and global importance of not just Brazil but the whole of South America is a worthwhile goal for the next Olympiad. We should wish them well in that endeavour.