The original idea was hatched in the late 1970s, and was a massive challenge for the fledgling, under funded, International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF).

It was an enormous undertaking especially as up to this point the global athletics pinnacle had always been the Olympics, and the modest IAAF organisation of that period had no experience in creating and hosting such a global event.

A driving factor was that in the 1970s the Olympics were facing major issues with problems both in Munich 1972 and Montreal 1976, plus athletics was under pressure to be more open, more commercial, as other sports like tennis were opening up for "professional" recognition.

In 1976 the Dutch World War Two freedom fighter Adriaan Paulen became the President of the IAAF and started to work closely with us at the marketing firm I ran, West Nally.

This involved collaborating on the first Nations Cup in Düsseldorf in 1977, and the creation of an IAAF development programme supported by the "Golden Series" to bring attention, and sponsorship, to individual athletic disciplines.

An early aspect of our discussions with Paulen was his belief that athletics needed to develop and organise its own World Championship event. His concerns however were how such an event could be both funded and hosted. 

Paulen also knew the importance of athletics creating its own global shop window, as it adapted to the inevitable changes being advocated regarding amateur status and the need for athletes to be openly paid.

It was while Paulen and I travelled to Tokyo in 1978, to witness Steve Ovett winning a "Golden Mile" event that we started, while on the floor of a jumbo jet, to write a detailed plan, including a commercial approach to give comfort to how we could mitigate the impending financial risk, a risk that the Finns were also prepared to share. 

From the very outset the Finnish team were fully committed in their desire to host the inaugural event and we quickly opened a dedicated office in Helsinki.

West Nally was already deeply entrenched with the sport, and responded to the specific challenge of how to ensure the funding needs could be met. 

We had already developed our "exclusive" sponsor package approach with FIFA, with the first totally managed approach at their 1978 World Cup in Argentina. 

We were also well advanced in developing a similar package approach for the forthcoming 1980 Olympics in Moscow.

Our sponsor lineup for the first event was impressive - it included TDK and Seiko, both of whom are still key sponsors today. Others included Canon, Coca-Cola, Budweiser, FIAT IVECO and Nokia.

The success of an event is as much about the company you keep. This week we see the key players are NCN, a Japanese bearings company, TDK and Seiko, our old and immensely loyal friends also from Japan. 

We see Tokyo Broadcasting Services, Talk Tokyo and ASICS all from guess where? Other than a number of others in supporting roles, the global brands that FIFA and the International Olympic Committee can attract are clearly missing.

This week's event shows the incredible improvements on television coverage, use of data, impressive graphic presentation adding to the brilliance from the athletes themselves. 

But does it show 40 years of creative development by the sport itself maintaining its position as one of the global event superstars?

The global profile and impact that we created with that first event is, I think, lacking. I still feel that the decision to make the event every two years reduced its impact and decreased its value. 

The fact that all its principal sponsors are from the same country shows the limitation of World Athletics' long term decision in selling off their marketing rights to Dentsu, the Japanese agency. 

That decision has limited the ability to secure other world brands and has stifled creative thinking. The lack of global brands means less global promotion and without the brands challenging the creative approach, has the event truly evolved to its full potential over the past 40 years?