London’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Delivery Plan 2022

 

Project- London’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Delivery Plan

 

 

Abstract  

London has lofty ambitions to reduce carbon emissions the automotive industry, involving aims towards zero-emission sale prices for any and all new automobiles and small freight carriers by 2030, zero-emission cabs as well as privately rented cabs by 2033, as well as a zero-emission region in Central London by 2025. To reach these objectives and achieve the air pollution and climate advantages, a sophisticated allows companies will be required. This research, which supplements the Mayor's Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Taskforce's Delivery Plan, provides trying to charge network goals at the township power level to 2035. It calculates the governmental (housing and location moderate to swift or quick) as well as non-governmental (home and office) charging required infrastructure from each of London's 32 boroughs and the City of London. This research also offers meaningful information on the spread of electric vehicles in new areas. Because hazards exist throughout the entire life span of initiatives, crisis management is crucial to the success of electric car going to charge equipment community collaboration developments under London's Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Delivery Plan. However, risk variables in London's Electric Vehicle Infrastructure projects are frequently interrelated, and as a result, the interrelationships among components have an impact on risk administration, which has been overlooked in previous research. This research also creates a hazard identification and assessment of programs based just on binomial visualization with judgement experiments to recognize the risk variables of London's Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and evaluate their inherent impact links. Look at the importance of cultural in ventures but also how Hofstede's Cultural Aspects paradigm may be used to help the London Mayor's Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan reach its goal.

Introduction of the study

Automobility is one of the leading sources of global energy consumption (Gielen et al., 2019). Automobile emissions from gasoline and diesel account for nearly a sixth of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions and the bulk of urban air pollution (Shafie and Mahmud, 2020, Maghirang, 2019). As a result, electric vehicles (EVs), which produce far less CO2 than gasoline vehicles, have been hailed as one of the most promising green technologies for lowering global carbon emissions and energy consumption (Milovanoff et al., 2020, Wang et al., 2018). Understanding important antecedents that might impact customers' readiness or unwillingness to embrace EVs, as well as the related influencing process, is critical for achieving the anticipated environmental advantages of EVs (Biresselioglu et al., 2018). Product-related factors (such as purchase and operating costs, vehicle speed and exhaust emissions), information and service (such as infrastructure investment), policy factors (such as government incentives and regulations), and individual factors (such as environmental awareness and technology awareness) have all been studied in relation to EV adoption. Surprisingly little is known about the significance of cultural values in customers' decision-making processes when deciding whether or not to buy an electric vehicle (Gielen et al., 2019).

Significance of culture in the context of project

On this are four elements that may have a significant role in determining customer attitudes toward electric vehicles in the United Kingdom (Morton et al., 2018). First, consumer views of EVs' environmental characteristic may be influenced by "human–nature interaction" and "long–term orientation" (LTO), concepts derived from Taoism and Confucianism, respectively, in UK culture (Christidis and Focas, 2019).  Furthermore, "facial consciousness," a significant component of UK society, may shed light on the significance of EV symbolism (Sovacool et al., 2019a). We considered "risk mentality" as another possible element in EV adoption, which is the influence of uncertainty on customers' desire to adopt new technology, in addition to these three UK cultural values (Christidis and Focas, 2019). Despite the potential for cultural values to have a significant impact on consumer behavior, previous research suggests that such impacts are generally indirect and occur through certain mediating processes (Morton et al., 2018). Customers are likely to connect their beliefs with behavioral intention when societal beliefs enhance the ethical assessment of sustainable consumption, according to current research; nevertheless, few studies have studied the role of culture on utilization sustainably via moral assessment (Sovacool et al., 2019a, Legere and Kang, 2020). We investigate the moderating effect methodology of deontological moral assessment is, a person's assessment of the underlying righteousness vs. immorality of a behavior (Brambilla et al., 2021)—in the impact of cultural influences on customers' decision to accept EVs using code of professional theories and models, that also appears to apply appropriate ethical to business settings (Christidis and Focas, 2019, Brambilla et al., 2021).

Implementations of Hofstede’s Cultural dimensions framework

In the sense of Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Framework research, with the goal of integrating cultural aspects, customer perception, and behaviors regarding ecologically responsible usage, in response to the call for greater attention to the influence of customers' value systems as well as social economic behaviors on attaining successful important for motivation (Seleznyov et al., 2021). I proved the favorable benefits of cultural values, such as the human–nature link, LTO, and face consciousness, on influencing UK consumers' propensity to embrace EVs, associated with environmental, metaphorical, and innovative features of EVs (Requardt, 2020). As a result, the first theoretical conclusion is the discovery of UK values that match to sustainable innovation traits as antecedents for comprehending customers' thinking process of EV innovation adoption (Belanche et al., 2020).

Customers have solid motivations for embracing sustainable technologies like electric vehicles, according to Hofstede, if they feel the service companies are consistent with own ideals and ethics (Moon, 2021). As a result of the findings 20, welfare policies to encourage conservation efforts should examine the influences of social traditions and the psychological influence processes that accompany them. Policymakers and regulators could use learning (Matz et al., 2020) and television advertisements (Fossen et al., 2021) to increase the attractiveness of principles, as well as enable conversations between similarly minded citizens on the usage of environmentally conscious (Phipps et al., 2013), which may increase consumer consciousness and arouse the desire for social traditions. Furthermore, the results of Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Framework (Rojo et al., 2020) imply that public measures should be implemented to lower the perceived risk of sustainable and innovative technology, maybe by offering educational opportunities and enabling consumer interactions (Xia et al., 2019). Second, we discovered that deontological ethical judgement plays a role in modulating the impact of cultural antecedents on adoption intention (Requardt, 2020). As a result, we contend that deontological assessment is crucial in consumers' decision-making processes when it comes to adopting ecologically friendly purchase habits. Furthermore, Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions framework  (Rojo et al., 2020) discovered that the mediation effects varied according on the cultural antecedents and the types of EVs. The competing mediation effect of deontological appraisal in the influence of the human–nature interaction on consumers' propensity to adopt BEVs may reflect public anxiety about whether BEV adoption can truly assist reduce air pollution in the United Kingdom (Moon, 2021).

Prior research has found a gap between intention and conduct, despite Hofstede's belief that behavioural intention is the most explicit and direct antecedent to actual action (Wong and Cheng, 2020). Future research may use longitudinal designs to validate the link between cultural antecedents and actual EV adoption, according to Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions framework. Investigators might also conduct a study of EV early adopters to learn more about their habits (Brezina et al., 2019). Finally, despite ensuring the confidentiality of participants through into the online questionnaire, our research may not even be able to avoid the possible problem of public desirability bias (Venkateswaran and Ojha, 2019). To account for this potential bias in the analysis, next research may include a measure of social acceptability in the questionnaire.

Cultural influence and successful delivery of project Plan

The examination of mediating mechanisms in the context of Hofstede's Cultural Factors concept could have substantial consequences for the development the influencing impacts of cultural variables on climate consumerism (Rahman and Luomala, 2021). Electric vehicles (EVs) come in a variety of shapes and sizes, each with its own set of advantages and disadvantages in terms of energy savings and emissions reduction (Panchal et al., 2018). BEVs are made of cells that is filled from the power grid, whereas PHEVs can be powered by either a diesel engine or an electrical system with a limited all-electric range (Moon, 2021). As a result, I evaluated the direct only effects, such as no mediated, as well as intermediate just impacts, such as complete mediation, or both implications, such as mediating variable, of diverse cultural elements employing meditational issues in the context of Hofstede's Cultural Theory (Sovacool et al., 2019b, Bissessar, 2018). The structural model from previous research for the effects of environmental factors on describing the technology acceptance within each type of EV may assist in the creation of some more efficient mitigation conditions and institutional promotional strategies to facilitate the adoption of EVs, allowing the London Mayor's Electric Vehicle (EV) Facilities to be delivered successfully (Bissessar, 2018).

Critically examine project management leadership literature covering definitions of leadership and 3 project management leadership theories covered on the module and recommend a leadership style required for delivering the ‘Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan’

Leadership in the context of Project

The capacity to control, change, and exercising influence over the conduct of others in a group is referred to as leadership (Stewart et al., 2019). It is a person's or a group of people's capacities to inspire and steer representatives. Clarifying goal, expressing the mission because others would voluntarily follow, and offering the expertise, ideas, & procedures to fulfil the vision are all part of leadership (Wildavsky et al., 2018). Leadership is a critical leadership position that enables a company's capabilities be directed for continuous improvements & accomplishment (Huffington et al., 2018). Successful managers clarify the organization ’s goals, encourage employees, and assist them to achieve it.

Three project management leadership theories in the context of project

A few of the theories that imply diverse techniques or leadership styles for Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan include a contingency and situational theories; transactional and transformational leadership theories and Authentic leadership theory.

Leadership & theoretical prospective of Mayor of London’s EV Infrastructure Delivery Plan

Numerous strategies or transformational leadership are suggested by a variety of ideas. In the contexts of different calamities and catastrophes caused by uncontrolled anthropogenic activities, need for sustained development is more urgent than ever (Suresh et al., 2020). Companies like Mayor of London’s are looking for alternative energy sources due to the declining supply of fossil fuels (Dyatlov et al., 2020). The Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Delivery Plan is a novel phenomenon, and the Electric Vehicle is undergoing considerable study to ensure that it is possible and financially successful. There're some early adopters, such as the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure, whom has succeeded in establishing or are pushing forward with their models (Chitchyan and Bird, 2021).

The Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure scenario is changing at a breakneck rate, with regular technical updates. It is critical to stay current with changes, failing which the Mayor company may gain market share (Harvey et al., 2018). The current leaders are in charge of directing their staff to change in the most effective way possible. The researcher name (Khan et al., 2018) highlighted the importance of leadership effectiveness in intellectual capital for the firm (Nauman et al., 2021). Transformational leaders were far more effective in handling the execution and completion of innovation inside the dynamic environment of workspaces and its responsibilities, according to leadership style (Stremersch et al., 2021). The transition from the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure to the knowledge era has forced leaders to adjust their leadership methods, because modern inventions are unstable, global leaders must be flexible, adaptable, and interactive. Succession planning requires a high level of dependability of Mayor of London's EV (Nauman et al., 2021).

Transformational leadership theory

The Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure demonstrated no improvement in leadership practices for over fifty years, with centralized control being the favored strategy (Kwan, 2020). Unfortunately, contemporary changes in the global economy have significantly altered the criteria for leaders and influenced the companies like Mayor of London's EV to adopt stylistics way of leaderships (Fernández and Angel, 2020).

The earlier researcher (Clancy et al., 2018), explain the novel concepts in the context of benefits and shortcomings of the transformational leadership theory as extended to the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure, the researcher (Clancy et al., 2018), also proposes a number of changes designed to reduce negative consequences. To begin, executives must pay more attention to engagement with the technological team to make sure that critical elements from unknown industries are included (e.g., the integration of IT, hybrid technologies, and autonomous technologies) are more important to deliver computational plan for Mayor of London's. Furthermore, they must assure the establishment of both azimuth and elevation messaging services, as well as shared ideals, in order to strengthen trust, accomplish consistent progression, and reduce unequal competency allocation (Kwan, 2020). Finally, inspiring potential must be used to convey the need for transformation throughout the firm in order to maintain the industry's speed and agility while also overcoming newly developing obstacles. The transformational theory is predicted to optimize the functionality of the Mayor of London's Objectives Of sustainable design if these guidelines are followed correctly (Clancy et al., 2018).

Authentic leadership theory

Authentic leadership theory (Luthans and Avolio, 2003), which provides strong interaction, motivation, & intercultural flexibility, seems to be another reasonable suggestion in the context of the Mayor of London's Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan (Luthans and Avolio, 2003). Furthermore, it fulfills the industry's contemporary requirement for a plausible entrepreneurial planning. Finally, Authentic leadership motivate the style of transactional leadership theory, which is based on sound economic concepts, has practical potential (Ofori, 2008). Furthermore, according to (Wang et al., 2014), it is linked to outcome focus, which is one of the company's overall aims. It does, however, bring unpredictability, since the London's Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan declining stability may erode contingent compensation opportunities.

Historical prospective

In the study of the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure, (Muralidharan and Pathak, 2019) suggested the Sophistication Conceptual Framework. Traditional leadership styles can help motivate personnel and increase productivity, or they can also discourage investment among the Mayor of London's EV workers (Wen et al., 2019). The emergent Properties Leadership Theory concept elevates leadership above and beyond management duties (Schock et al., 2019). The modern era's leadership requirements are completely opposite, and this may be handled by adapting leadership behaviors to the demands of the company (Schock et al., 2019).

Recommended leadership style

In the context of the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure, according to (Bass and Stogdill, 1990), transformational leaders excite and cognitively invigorate their staff more than traditional leaders whose focus on standard methods (Pralat, 2021). From the beginning, Mayor of London's embodied the culture of invention. The earlier researcher (Bateman and Snell, 2019), creates significant challenge for his staff and encourages them to question the status of companies which create more efficient advertisement to adopt newly develop strategies and plan. Leaders that bring through transformation and skillfully administer it always have an influence on the community (Myricks, 2021).

The Mayor of London's EV is part of a rapidly shifting technology landscape that is adaptable across all battlefields. Professionals having understood the impacts of disturbance and the necessity of working with agility in the contexts of transformational style. There have been cases wherein companies like Mayor of London's worked diligently on a technique, only for new adopted individuals  to dismiss the idea due to his strategic considerations (Schwarz, 2019). Employees are capable of accepting continuous transformational styles of leadership and are equipped for this sort of action (Khan, 2021). Musk's transformative leadership style was ideal for ushering in a change in the sector of organization (Anastasiadis et al., 2019).

Critically review and evaluate 2 managing change models (Kotter or Kübler-Ross or Lewin’s model) covered on the module and recommend one model that could be used or adapted as a suitable framework for implementing the ‘Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan’ to improve consumer awareness and perception of EV’s. Justify your answer supported by the literature and link this to the EV case study (LO3). 4. Whilst the ‘Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan’ will

Critical review & evaluation of models

Industry has gone through several transformations & cultural shifts, and competitiveness has grown genuinely global throughout current history (Shrivastava et al., 2020). Never before has a company had to react as swiftly to market demands and adopt new technology as quickly as it does now without risking becoming irrelevant (Mergel et al., 2019). An comprehensive literature (Vial, 2019) investigation of all the most widely admired and paraphrased Transformation Modeling approaches (Misra et al., 2019) was conducted to establish a comprehensive and integrated understanding of the nature of Implementing Change, especially the different facets applicable to incorporating technological change to Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure manufacturing lines towards the extent that an Increasingly Recognized as a key can indeed be built from that framework (Mergel et al., 2019). The models were evaluated for both straight & non-linear ideas which may be applied to the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure manufacturing companies, and a meta-theoretical architecture was constructed by combining the appropriate aspects of all the models using a snowflake purposeful sampling. Aspects of Scientometric concepts, non-codified theories, and the scientists' direct knowledge achieving technical change were included to this design (Lacerda, 2019).

Kubler-Ross & Kurt Lewin model case study of EVs

According to Kubler-Ross (Corr, 2020), most people's experiences of 'Transformation' through a sequence of processes, similar to the well-known "Five mourning process (Suomela, 2019, Corr, 2020)." It is critical for a Project Manager to recognize that emotions of amazement, willful ignorance, unhappiness, and sometimes even depressed mood are common once attempting to deal with digital transformation, so the individuals, as caretakers of the Change Initiative, must deal with these negative emotions accordingly to avoid disrupting the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure integration. Most, if not all, people will feel the feelings associated with the Kotter's eight curve, therefore anticipate significant irritation and/or lack of participation from the Steering Committee (Eisenberg and Alahakone). Once the Underperformers are satisfied that the Implementation process was completed correctly and that the technology is safe to use, they will embrace the innovation as well. Some Underperformers will only join once the Optimize stage has been completed or all the kinks have been straightened out (Safe, 2021).

Kurt Lewin devised a three-step change theory (Burnes, 2020): unfreezing, altering, and refreezing. The model is a straightforward and practical approach to comprehending the transformation process. The period of development, according to Lewin, comprises first generating the notion that a change is required, then progressing forward towards the improved, optimum consistency of conduct, and lastly consolidating that new behavior as the norm (Bakari et al., 2017). The model is still extensively utilized and it is the foundation for many current transformation models, such as the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure rollout. Numerous individuals consider Kurt Lewin's 'shifting in 3 parts' (unfreezing>changing>refreezing) to be the standard or essential method to project leadership. Researchers have chastised Lewin for overcomplicating the organizational change, while others have supported him against certain claims (McAleese et al., 2013). The model's basic relevance, on the other hand, has remained uncontested. It can be linked back to early article on the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure ever written in Social Relations (if it can be linked directly whatsoever). Researchers  (Cummings et al., 2016) contend that Kurt Lewin actually designed such a model and that it emerged after his death, comparison about what Lewin stated regarding change in three phases in how it's represented in recent works for EV Infrastructure.

Recommended model for case study: Richard Kotter

Rising temperatures including local pollution are high on the agenda for urban areas, and are mostly now actively looking at methods to cut their energy consumption, as seen by the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure. "Most automobiles sit idle for much of the day, as well as in the late evenings," says Richard Kotter (ElBanhawy et al., 2012), "and are often only utilized for commuting at peak periods throughout the daytime." Overnight & throughout the weekend, the same was said about industrial transportation vehicles. Richard Kotter went on to say" While this technology is still in its infancy, we are conscious that our cities have a rising desire and legal need to address climate change." According to the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure (Shaw and Bunce, 2015), "this strategy demands the joined-up planning of both transportation and infrastructural amenities, including energy consumption and availability for UK & other metropolitan regions & rural surrounds of the future."

Delivery Plan’ to improve consumer awareness and perception of EV’s

Many researches (Adnan et al., 2017, Jin and Slowik, 2017, Carmichael et al., 2021) affected the mechanisms of delivery plan and proposed evaluations for outstanding worldwide practices on electric motor awareness among consumers & community engagement in order to improve public attitudes and understanding of EVs. The previous study (Jin and Slowik, 2017, Hodson and Marvin, 2013) contains related literature and studies on the relevance of customer perception, as well as exemplary measures in promoting Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure in marketplaces. Based on an extensive review, the authors decided 5 research studies (Moser, 2010, Ager and Strang, 2008, Rowe et al., 2013) for further debate in attempt to understand the essential components of effective comprehensive public service announcements, such as the implementation of action huge impact perception is a key part of helping the early Mayor of London's electric vehicle market. Long-term initiatives that employ a variety of marketing & awareness offenders are more likely to reach a larger number of potential Mayor of London electric car buyers (Lee and Kotler, 2011, Manning, 2001). Interested parties might presumably cooperate to utilize abilities as well as successfully use available resources on Mayor of London's electric vehicle awareness programs, & local context as well as funds can be critical in assessing the practicability of a Mayor of London's electric vehicle consumer awareness (Hall et al., 2017, Skok and Baker, 2018). Whereas the objective of this project is on how behavior to enhance understanding and awareness could perhaps influence electric vehicle uptake, Mayor of London's Delivery Plan should note that a wide range of promotion actions (e.g., financial (Kley et al., 2012), and non-financial incentives (Zhongming et al., 2017), charging infrastructure deployment, high model availability, efforts to increase awareness and understanding, and others) are critical to growing the market Mayor of London's to improve consumer awareness and perception.

 

Whilst the ‘Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan’ will encounter many well documented barriers and issues you are asked as a consultant to critically analyses the risks associated with the EV delivery plan from Concept to Implementation for a client who intends to deliver Electric Vehicle’s in another leading European City that currently has no such EV Infrastructure plan.

Although advancements to gasoline engines will continuing to lower atmospheric co2 and other harmful emissions in vehicles during the next few millennia, it is widely acknowledged that automotive innovations will indeed be necessary to meet objectives. There seems to be a widespread belief among potential choices that the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure is the finest near-market low-emission vehicular technology. The Mayor of London's EV plan emphasizes the need for extensive charging infrastructure to accommodate the accumulation or use of electronically controlled automobiles besides People in London as well as enterprises. The Mayor of London's EV plan highlights the requirement for extensive charging infrastructure to facilitate the uptake and usage of electric automobiles by Londoners and businesses. This draught plan lays out a potential risk analysis technique for the implementation of charging infrastructure for privately owned EVs up to 2025, which faces several challenges and concerns. Choosing to focus on the Mayor of London's EV Infrastructure deployment plan within leading regions, such as European cities that currently lack an EV Stimulus plan and destinations dominated by people living in this area, will not only provide the greatest environmental benefit in the short term, but will also increase sales, lower mileage reimbursement, & help in making EVs more accessible to a larger number of people, which will also be crucial for M2M adoption and implementation.

 

a) Review all the possible sources of risks related to the development and implementation of the ‘Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan’, learning from the UK’s lessons learned. Identify the project’s aim and from these identify 10 possible risks, construct a risk register (in a table) making use of the risk meta language to describe the risk fully and qualitatively analyse the risks and summarise your findings. (LO4)

The mayor of London EVs infrastructure has been effectively utilized in infrastructure investment like an innovative funding mechanism, as well as researchers have accomplished various research outcomes. The authors of (Leurent and Windisch, 2011, Zheng et al., 2012), highlighted the mayor of London's electric infrastructure plan can help the country to save money while also encouraging business strategy for charging infrastructure. The authors of (Wirges et al., 2012, Andersen et al., 2009), thought that incorporating the mayor of London's electric infrastructure into filling stations may allow individual entrepreneurs to help with project profitability. The authors of (Zheng et al., 2012), showed that the mayor of London's electric infrastructure plan is a good strategy to improve recharging operational effectiveness.

Risk management is a major issue in the mayor of London's EV infrastructure projects, and feature analysis is a vital aspect in the risk management process. The authors of (Rozenes et al., 2006, Suresh et al., 2020) created a methodology to identify the most critical risk variables impacting the mayor of London's EV infrastructure projects in UK, as well as to assess the overall threat level of such projects. It is still at the risk evaluation phase, with no complete risk control in place. The authors presented a three-dimensional approach to regulate risks in the mayor of London's EV infrastructure projects in (Voronkova et al., 2020) to cover this gap.  These findings equip choice with a comprehensive risk strategy. However, while defining and assessing risk variables, present research ignores the interconnections across specified standards, it has a substantial impact on risk mitigation.

Table 1: Risk in the context of project

Serial #	Risk
1	In the short term, incumbent lead-acid battery producers will influence policy makers to against new-technology batteries, which has to be imported.
2	Massive rises in energy cost as well as certain locations with power failures
3	Domestic firm's capabilities to expand production is insufficient.
4	Endorsement of an accommodation system for Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle by participants, as well as inability to pay by EV drivers
5	Accidents and unforeseeable circumstances are putting Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle technology at UK.
6	Engineered of inferior quality The Mayor of London's Electric Vehicle is eroding the credibility of the technology and the project's feasibility.
7	Use of Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle to influence the 2020 local survey.
8	Under the proposal, substandard Li-ion batteries will be chosen through international bidding.
9	Multiple middlemen result in higher borrowing costs.
10	The private sector is being squeezed out.
11	The Mayor of London's Electric Vehicle has a low demand, which is deterring fresh investment.

 

b) For the 10 risks identified from (4a) develop mitigating strategies (threats and opportunities) for each of the 10 risks and include the mitigation strategy alongside the risk register shown in part (a). (L06).

Table 2: Develop mitigating strategies in the context of project

Risk Serial #	mitigating strategies (threats and opportunities)
1	Electric motors, according to the Mayor of London, are a new business that has flourished significantly as batteries technology has progressed. The initiative will assist lithium-ion battery vendors (including incumbents) that want to set up battery assembly or manufacturing facilities. The 1 million Electric Vehicles will revolutionize the market. The management team canvassed key stakeholder thoroughly on the advantages of the rechargeable batteries’ technology.
2	Only those places with enough power to fulfil demands will be covered by the initiative. Several of the charges will take place during off-peak hours as well.
3	The project manager has always been in frequent contact with potential new industry entrants, facilitating collaboration & intelligence gathering. The initiative has sparked tremendous investment curiosity in the sector. The procurement process will be staged to allow for rapid acceptance, investment opportunities, and innovation.
4	The advantages of the rent-to-own alternatives have been extensively addressed with the drivers, and it will continue throughout the system implementation. The desire to save money and earn more money are the primary motivators.
5	At all stages, technological specialists were consulted to ensure that the correct technical decisions and precautions are made to avoid mishaps. The e-trike for the project was created by an unaffiliated automotive manufacturer. Furthermore, customers and motorists will indeed be educated about batteries and associated technology to guarantee that no unrelated1 fires or other risks are blamed on EVs.
6	Through multinational competition, conditionally approved bidders will offer Electrified Vehicles designed to a creating design based on international safety requirements. The units will most likely be built locally, and the vendors will give after-sales assistance as well as a 3-year warranty across all parts. At all stages, strict quality-control & achievement methods will be implemented.
7	Municipality elections are conducted every three years in the United Kingdom. The projects span the election cycle and must incorporate methods to reduce the risks that may arise. The Mayor of London will be developed as a part of a key attribute for the receivers of Electric Vehicles. Given the time it took to get funding, it's doubtful that Electric Vehicle would obtain any Mayor of London funding under the planned initiative before the May 2021 surveys.
8	Only items from respected worldwide manufactures will be included into the cars, thanks to bare minimum technical aspects and commercial qualifying criteria. The Mayor of London's Electric Vehicle transfer of money, which is phased over 36 months, would guarantee that manufacturers have the necessary financial motivation to produce high-quality batteries and fulfil guarantees.
9	The Mayor of London will work closely with the government to guarantee that the rent-to-own agreement's operators or proprietors pay solitary financing costs.
10	Because the planning process is restricted to 1 million EV out of the 370 million mobility scooters now in use in the UK, the phrase "filling out" does not entirely appropriate. There are presently no active banks supplying EV specific financial solutions. The project might very well create a market for just a particular model by removing technological risk and establishing empowering national services trying to charge, lots of high batteries, warranty, wide ranging technological capability, and a creative commons professional EV design (drawings and formally known) that anyone can build. In most situations, the project would only encompass a portion of the EV demographic in order to encourage capital enterprise and develop interest.
11	The Mayor of London's Electric Vehicle will be covered by the business testing stages, which will cover 20,000 vehicles. A full product and process assessment of the industrial development cycle will be conducted while commencing on the distribution of the 1 million Mayor of London's Electric Vehicles under the "Scale Up" phase.

 

c) Furthermore, identify the risk management team structure and roles (with a supporting diagrammatic structure that would link with the risks shown in part (a)) that would be required when undertaking a risk management exercise for the ‘Mayor of London’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Delivery Plan’ (LO5).

Successfully investigated in diverse sectors based on reviews and literature have recognized important risk linked with resulting in significant at this time. In another article (Rozenes et al., 2006), the top three risk in waste-to-energy incinerator mayor of London’s EV infrastructure projects were identified as community resistance and encouragement, inadequate risk associated with new adopted batteries and electric filling stations developments, & incorrect operations. Risk allocation was done out in the mayor of London's EV Infrastructural development in UK by the authors of (Grenier and Page, 2012). Limited availability, dealings with non-licensed commodities, threats to the environment, financial risk, as well as a lack of supporting facilities are indeed the five main risk concerns, according to the authors (Metzner et al., 2018).

Figure 1: Risk management team structure and roles

In figure 1 the Table 1 presents several essential risks in the mayor of London's EV infrastructure spending based on illustrative research, providing empirical direction as well as an indication benchmark and Table 2 provide the mitigating strategies (threats and opportunities) for company. From the perspective of the system, this research attempts to investigate the influence relationships among risk variables of the mayor of London's major infrastructure projects. Risk aspects linked with the mayor of London's EV infrastructural development are recognized and identified based on a literature survey, expert consensus, and industry leaders' viewpoints. In the first phase, a vulnerability analysis indexing system is introduced, which includes six dimensions considerable risk, economic exposure, psychological influence, design risk, & risk management.

References (Harvard Style)

ADNAN, N., NORDIN, S. M. & RAHMAN, I. 2017. Adoption of PHEV/EV in Malaysia: A critical review on predicting consumer behaviour. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 849-862.

AGER, A. & STRANG, A. 2008. Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of refugee studies, 21, 166-191.

ANASTASIADIS, E., ANGELOUDIS, P., AINALIS, D., YE, Q. & HSU, P.-Y. 2019. A bilevel optimisation model for the selection of parking and charging facilities for EV-based ride-hailing services.

ANDERSEN, P. H., MATHEWS, J. A. & RASK, M. 2009. Integrating private transport into renewable energy policy: The strategy of creating intelligent recharging grids for electric vehicles. Energy policy, 37, 2481-2486.

BAKARI, H., HUNJRA, A. I. & NIAZI, G. S. K. 2017. How does authentic leadership influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions: Integration of theory of planned behavior and Lewin's three step model. Journal of Change Management, 17, 155-187.

BASS, B. M. & STOGDILL, R. M. 1990. Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications, Simon and Schuster.

BATEMAN, T. & SNELL, S. 2019. Management: Leading & Collaborating in Competitive World, 13e.

BELANCHE, D., CASALÓ, L. V., FLAVIÁN, C. & SCHEPERS, J. 2020. Service robot implementation: a theoretical framework and research agenda. The Service Industries Journal, 40, 203-225.

BIRESSELIOGLU, M. E., KAPLAN, M. D. & YILMAZ, B. K. 2018. Electric mobility in Europe: A comprehensive review of motivators and barriers in decision making processes. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 109, 1-13.

BISSESSAR, C. 2018. An application of Hofstede’s cultural dimension among female educational leaders. Education sciences, 8, 77.

BRAMBILLA, M., SACCHI, S., RUSCONI, P. & GOODWIN, G. P. 2021. The primacy of morality in impression development: Theory, research, and future directions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Elsevier.

BREZINA, I., BAŠNÁKOVÁ, J. & SOLLÁR, T. 2019. Beyond Czech and Slovak differences in Hofstede's Masculinity index: An investigation of cross-cultural differences using Hofstede's and Schwartz's framework. Individual & Society/Clovek a Spolocnost, 22.

BURNES, B. 2020. The origins of Lewin’s three-step model of change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56, 32-59.

CARMICHAEL, R., GROSS, R., HANNA, R., RHODES, A. & GREEN, T. 2021. The Demand Response Technology Cluster: Accelerating UK residential consumer engagement with time-of-use tariffs, electric vehicles and smart meters via digital comparison tools. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 139, 110701.

CHITCHYAN, R. & BIRD, C. 2021. Bristol as a Smart Local Energy System of Systems: Skills Case Study. Available at SSRN 3966236.

CHRISTIDIS, P. & FOCAS, C. 2019. Factors affecting the uptake of hybrid and electric vehicles in the European Union. Energies, 12, 3414.

CLANCY, L., PALMER, S. & BLAKE, J. Developing and procuring London’s highway infrastructure to enable an electric future.  Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Civil Engineering, 2018. Thomas Telford Ltd, 45-50.

CORR, C. A. 2020. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross and the “five stages” model in a sampling of recent American textbooks. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 82, 294-322.

CUMMINGS, S., BRIDGMAN, T. & BROWN, K. G. 2016. Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management. Human relations, 69, 33-60.

DYATLOV, S., DIDENKO, N., IVANOVA, E., SOSHNEVA, E. & KULIK, S. Prospects for alternative energy sources in global energy sector.  IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2020. IOP Publishing, 012014.

EISENBERG, J. & ALAHAKONE, M. P. This purpose of this paper is to explain Organisational Culture, analyze the culture of Singapore Refining Company as well as to give recommendations on Organisational Culture Change and ending off with the Kübler-Ross Change Curve Model on the possible behaviours displayed by employees during change.

ELBANHAWY, E. Y., DALTON, R., THOMPSON, E. M. & KOTTER, R. A heuristic approach for investigating the integration of electric mobility charging infrastructure in metropolitan areas: An agent-based modeling simulation.  2012 2nd International Symposium On Environment Friendly Energies And Applications, 2012. IEEE, 74-86.

FERNÁNDEZ, J. E. & ANGEL, M. 2020. Ecological city-states in an era of environmental disaster: Security, climate change and biodiversity. Sustainability, 12, 5532.

FOSSEN, B. L., MALLAPRAGADA, G. & DE, A. 2021. Impact of political television advertisements on viewers’ response to subsequent advertisements. Marketing Science, 40, 305-324.

GIELEN, D., GORINI, R., WAGNER, N., LEME, R., GUTIERREZ, L., PRAKASH, G., ASMELASH, E., JANEIRO, L., GALLINA, G. & VALE, G. 2019. Global energy transformation: a roadmap to 2050.

GRENIER, A. & PAGE, S. 2012. The impact of electrified transport on local grid infrastructure: A comparison between electric cars and light rail. Energy policy, 49, 355-364.

HALL, D., MOULTAK, M. & LUTSEY, N. 2017. Electric Vehicle Capitals of the World. ICCT White Paper.

HARVEY, H., ORVIS, R. & RISSMAN, J. 2018. Designing climate solutions: a policy guide for low-carbon energy, Island Press.

HODSON, M. & MARVIN, S. 2013. Low carbon nation?, Routledge.

HUFFINGTON, C., JAMES, K. & ARMSTRONG, D. 2018. What is the emotional cost of distributed leadership? Working below the surface. Routledge.

JIN, L. & SLOWIK, P. 2017. Literature review of electric vehicle consumer awareness and outreach activities. International Council on Clean Transportation. Available frominternet: https://www. theicct. org/sites/default/files/publications/Consumer-EV-Awareness_ICCT_Working-Paper_23032017_vF. pdf.

KHAN, M. 2021. A critical analysis of Elon Musk’s leadership in Tesla motors. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 1-10.

KHAN, M. S., SENTOSA, I. & SALMAN, F. 2018. Exploring the role of transformational leadership in human capital effectiveness: Empirical evidence from the Malaysian healthcare sector. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development.

KLEY, F., WIETSCHEL, M. & DALLINGER, D. 2012. Evaluation of European electric vehicle support schemes. Paving the Road to Sustainable Transport. New York: Routledge, 75-95.

KWAN, P. 2020. Is transformational leadership theory passé? Revisiting the integrative effect of instructional leadership and transformational leadership on student outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56, 321-349.

LACERDA, J. S. 2019. Linking scientific knowledge and technological change: Lessons from wind turbine evolution and innovation. Energy Research & Social Science, 50, 92-105.

LEE, N. R. & KOTLER, P. 2011. Social marketing: Influencing behaviors for good, Sage Publications.

LEGERE, A. & KANG, J. 2020. The role of self-concept in shaping sustainable consumption: A model of slow fashion. Journal of Cleaner Production, 258, 120699.

LEURENT, F. & WINDISCH, E. 2011. Triggering the development of electric mobility: a review of public policies. European Transport Research Review, 3, 221-235.

LUTHANS, F. & AVOLIO, B. J. 2003. Authentic leadership development. Positive organizational scholarship, 241, 258.

MAGHIRANG, R. G. 2019. Urban Air Quality. Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Improving Air Quality. CRC Press.

MANNING, P. K. 2001. Technology's ways: Information technology, crime analysis and the rationalizing of policing. Criminal Justice, 1, 83-103.

MATZ, S. C., APPEL, R. E. & KOSINSKI, M. 2020. Privacy in the age of psychological targeting. Current opinion in psychology, 31, 116-121.

MCALEESE, I., CREED, A. & ZUTSHI, A. 2013. A response to critique of the refreeze step in Lewin’s model of organizational change from the viewpoint of organizational behavior. International Journal of the Academy of Organizational Behavior Management, 104-124.

MERGEL, I., EDELMANN, N. & HAUG, N. 2019. Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government information quarterly, 36, 101385.

METZNER, M., BICKEL, B., MAYR, A. & FRANKE, J. Simulation-Assisted Method for Evaluating Innovative Production Technologies for Electric Traction Motors.  2018 8th International Electric Drives Production Conference (EDPC), 2018. IEEE, 1-5.

MILOVANOFF, A., POSEN, I. D. & MACLEAN, H. L. 2020. Electrification of light-duty vehicle fleet alone will not meet mitigation targets. Nature Climate Change, 10, 1102-1107.

MISRA, B. B., LANGEFELD, C., OLIVIER, M. & COX, L. A. 2019. Integrated omics: tools, advances and future approaches. Journal of molecular endocrinology, 62, R21-R45.

MOON, S.-J. 2021. Effect of consumer environmental propensity and innovative propensity on intention to purchase electric vehicles: applying an extended theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 1-15.

MORTON, C., ANABLE, J., YEBOAH, G. & COTTRILL, C. 2018. The spatial pattern of demand in the early market for electric vehicles: Evidence from the United Kingdom. Journal of Transport Geography, 72, 119-130.

MOSER, S. C. 2010. Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 31-53.

MURALIDHARAN, E. & PATHAK, S. 2019. Consequences of cultural leadership styles for social entrepreneurship: a theoretical framework. Sustainability, 11, 965.

MYRICKS, S. P. 2021. Relationships Between Perceived Leaders' Transformational Leadership, Employees' Core Self-Evaluations, and Employee Outcomes. Grand Canyon University.

NAUMAN, S., MUSAWIR, A. U., MUNIR, H. & RASHEED, I. 2021. Enhancing the impact of transformational leadership and team-building on project success: the moderating role of empowerment climate. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business.

OFORI, G. 2008. Leadership for future construction industry: Agenda for authentic leadership. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 620-630.

PANCHAL, C., STEGEN, S. & LU, J. 2018. Review of static and dynamic wireless electric vehicle charging system. Engineering science and technology, an international journal, 21, 922-937.

PRALAT, D. 2021. Organizational Leaders' Perceptions of Multigenerational Learning: A Phenomenological Study. University of Phoenix.

RAHMAN, S. U. & LUOMALA, H. 2021. Demystifying horizontal/vertical cultural difference in green consumption: A cross-cultural comparative study. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 33, 543-558.

REQUARDT, J.-G. 2020. Importance of culture, personality and environmental awareness in automotive purchasing behavior. Hannover: Institutionelles Repositorium der Leibniz Universität Hannover.

ROJO, J., EVERETT, B., RAMJAN, L. M., HUNT, L. & SALAMONSON, Y. 2020. Hofstede's cultural dimensions as the explanatory framework for performance issues during clinical placement: A mixed methods study. Nurse education today, 94, 104581.

ROWE, K., SHILBURY, D., FERKINS, L. & HINCKSON, E. 2013. Sport development and physical activity promotion: An integrated model to enhance collaboration and understanding. Sport management review, 16, 364-377.

ROZENES, S., VITNER, G. & SPRAGGETT, S. 2006. Project control: literature review. Project management journal, 37, 5-14.

SAFE, A. D. B. 2021. AI Case Studies: Potential for Human Health, Space Exploration and Colonisation and a Proposed Superimposition of the Kubler-Ross Change Curve on the Hype Cycle.

SCHOCK, A.-K., GRUBER, F. M., SCHERNDL, T. & ORTNER, T. M. 2019. Tempering agency with communion increases women's leadership emergence in all-women groups: Evidence for role congruity theory in a field setting. The Leadership Quarterly, 30, 189-198.

SCHWARZ, E. C. 2019. Human vs. Machine: A Framework of Responsibilities and Duties of Transnational Corporations for Respecting Human Rights in the Use of Artificial Intelligence. Colum. J. Transnat'l L., 58, 232.

SELEZNYOV, S., GOEI, S. L. & EHREN, M. 2021. International policy borrowing and the case of Japanese Lesson Study: culture and its impact on implementation and adaptation. Professional Development in Education, 1-15.

SHAFIE, S. H. M. & MAHMUD, M. 2020. Urban air pollutant from motor vehicle emissions in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 20.

SHAW, S. & BUNCE, L. 2015. Electrifying London: connecting with mainstream markets. E-Mobility in Europe. Springer.

SHRIVASTAVA, P., SMITH, M. S., O’BRIEN, K. & ZSOLNAI, L. 2020. Transforming sustainability science to generate positive social and environmental change globally. One Earth, 2, 329-340.

SKOK, W. & BAKER, S. 2018. Evaluating the impact of Uber on London's taxi service: A strategic review. Knowledge and Process Management, 25, 232-246.

SOVACOOL, B. K., ABRAHAMSE, W., ZHANG, L. & REN, J. 2019a. Pleasure or profit? Surveying the purchasing intentions of potential electric vehicle adopters in China. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 124, 69-81.

SOVACOOL, B. K., KESTER, J., NOEL, L. & DE RUBENS, G. Z. 2019b. Income, political affiliation, urbanism and geography in stated preferences for electric vehicles (EVs) and vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies in Northern Europe. Journal of Transport Geography, 78, 214-229.

STEWART, G. L., COURTRIGHT, S. H. & MANZ, C. C. 2019. Self-leadership: A paradoxical core of organizational behavior. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6, 47-67.

STREMERSCH, S., CAMACHO, N., KEKO, E. & WUYTS, S. 2021. Grassroots innovation success: The role of self-determination and leadership style. International Journal of Research in Marketing.

SUOMELA, J. 2019. People and Change: Change Management from a People Perspective.

SURESH, S., RENUKAPPA, S., ABDUL-AZIZ, A.-R., PALOO, Y. & JALLOW, H. 2020. Developments in the UK road transport from a smart cities perspective. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management.

VENKATESWARAN, R. T. & OJHA, A. K. 2019. Abandon Hofstede-based research? Not yet! A perspective from the philosophy of the social sciences. Asia Pacific Business Review, 25, 413-434.

VIAL, G. 2019. Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The journal of strategic information systems, 28, 118-144.

VORONKOVA, O. Y., MELNIK, M. V., NIKITOCHKINA, Y. V., TCHUYKOVA, N. M., DAVIDYANTS, A. A. & TITOVA, S. V. 2020. Corporate social responsibility of business as a factor of regional development. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7, 2170.

WANG, D., WALDMAN, D. A. & ZHANG, Z. 2014. A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness. Journal of applied psychology, 99, 181.

WANG, S., WANG, J., LI, J., WANG, J. & LIANG, L. 2018. Policy implications for promoting the adoption of electric vehicles: do consumer’s knowledge, perceived risk and financial incentive policy matter? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 117, 58-69.

WEN, T. B., THERESA, C., KELANA, B. W. Y., OTHMAN, R. & SYED, O. R. 2019. Leadership Styles in Influencing Employees’ Job Performances.„. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 9, 55-65.

WILDAVSKY, A., SWEDLOW, B., COYLE, D., ELLIS, R., KAGAN, R. & RANNEY, A. 2018. A cultural theory of leadership. Cultural Analysis. Routledge.

WIRGES, J., LINDER, S. & KESSLER, A. 2012. Modelling the development of a regional charging infrastructure for electric vehicles in time and space. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 12.

WONG, K. F. E. & CHENG, C. 2020. The turnover intention–behaviour link: a culture‐moderated meta‐analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 57, 1174-1216.

XIA, D., LI, Y., HE, Y., ZHANG, T., WANG, Y. & GU, J. 2019. Exploring the role of cultural individualism and collectivism on public acceptance of nuclear energy. Energy Policy, 132, 208-215.

ZHENG, J., MEHNDIRATTA, S., GUO, J. Y. & LIU, Z. 2012. Strategic policies and demonstration program of electric vehicle in China. Transport Policy, 19, 17-25.

ZHONGMING, Z., LINONG, L., WANGQIANG, Z. & WEI, L. 2017. 2017 Report to Parliament–Summary and recommendations.