How should we finance orienteering

[SeanC]

? Do you mean me Eddie?

[EddieH]

Aye I did, but actually going back I see it should have been Seabird, not you

[DeerTick]

Having been ticked off for my lack of (unfunny) humorous contributions, I thought it's time to respond to Paul's original post.

I am a returnee to orienteering after a hiatus of more than twenty years and have been quite amazed at, for instance, electronic punching, results online before I get home, premarked waterproof maps for even club events, BOF rankings (yes) and planning and mapping software. What value for money.

Even as a retired person, the cost of entering events is not therefore the biggest issue for me. Having been made aware of the costs of putting on an event and the volunteer time, I'd be prepared to to pay a bit more. Compare with, for example, an evening with a faded rock star, apart from, of course, Dylan (who's not faded, of course) or an afternoon at a Scottish Premier League football match. And I have no problem with a proportion of the entry fee going to SOA and/or BOF; nor with subsidising potential recruits to orienteering by means of lower entry fees.

As the most northerly member of EckO (I think), the travel and accommodation costs are far more of an issue for me. The JK last year and this year have been a problem. At least I will be able to walk or cycle to this year's 6-Days .

AP

[SJC]

Proposal for the AGM :

MF took Board members through a paper outlining the planned modest increase in overall membership and event levy fees of approx 2%. NC questioned why the planned increase was less than current levels of inflation.

Shouldn't the question be why should it increase at all ?

British Orienteering has externally funded development and participation managers who should be bringing more people into the sport and with them more membership fees and more levies. If they are doing a good job then income from these will increase by more than enough to cover any additional costs in the next year.

It would also be nice to see a comprehensive breakdown of how all the membership fees and levies are spent. This was around £250,000 in 2009 and before I vote to increase it I would like to know what it is being spent on.

[14stoneflyer]

Hi

I am a newcomer to the board here who may be able to give a bit of an external perspective.

My family started orienteering a little over a year ago now.

We started by going to some local events - very well organised, very friendly and not difficult to get to. The days consisted of turning up, running, downloading, having an orange squash and a chat and then going home. All before lunch. We found these good value for money, especially for the kids.

After a while we progressed on to bigger things. We found the regional events (I guess "Level B"?) more interesting areas to run on, but this came at a price. A queue on the motorway (especially on the way back), a 1/2 hour walk to the start (sometimes even a coach trip from the car park!), and up to £12 for the run. Even the kids are £4 or £5 for a 2km course. So, both pretty expensive, and time consuming. But then, by now we were hooked so this was OK for us (ish).

Now we are starting to help out at events ourselves and are realising how much work keeping this event structure in place takes from volunteer club members. It seems to us that it is only through the hard work of the average club member that the sport continues to function.

My understanding is that our club has a surplus. Reading this thread I understand that this is commonly the case. So is the current financing system not working?

Key points:
Local events well priced and attractive
Regional events a bit pricey - current costs may be OK, but increases may lead to newcomers not progressing from the local level
Club structure is essential to keep the system working - keeping active club membership up is key to the future, especially the volunteering type.

The Flyer

[Paul Frost]

My understanding is that our club has a surplus. Reading this thread I understand that this is commonly the case. So is the current financing system not working?

My conclusions from this thread (that I started):

That generally the larger clubs have a good cashflow, put on a lot of events, have a lot of members and so don't need much/any support from outside funding.

That the smaller clubs (which are in the majority of in Scotland*) don't have the number of members, so can't put on weekly events and need the support of lottery grants etc. to survive.
They may have a surplus, but the size of it might be small. It's also likely that with a small membership the chances of having a competent voluntary mapper are low, so new maps will often require paying a professional, which can easily be £1500.

*11 out of the 19 Scottish clubs have an average of 50 or less members.
There are only about 2000 Scottish members in total.

[Clive Coles]

Largely agree with that conclusion Paul

We are a small English club which covers one of the larger rural English Counties. Very few of our members venture outside East Anglia ( JK and British Champs attract a handful more). Conversely very few non -EAOA members ever travel into the County to run at one of our events.

We haven't in fact made full use of lottery funding opportunities ~ we probably should do more.

We are however very fortunate to have an active club member who is a cartographer and surveyor ~ all our maps in recent years are home grown.

We survive financially on membership subscription income and the small margins we make on our event fees. We concentrate our efforts on Level C and level D events.

We are beginning to grow our numbers ~ nothing dramatic. Our Level D Summer series has been the catalyst. We probably orienteer for fun rather than glory.

[graeme]

One could conclude that there are too many Scottish clubs. ECKO makes sense, covering a huge, sparsely poopulated region. But quite why there are four open clubs based within 20 miles of my house (INT, ESOC, LINOC, ELO) and another seven within 50 (STAG, CLYDE, FVO, RR, TINTO, TAY, KFO) has always been a mystery. When the sport was booming, clubs came and went as required, but now we have a structure which has been fossilised for 20+ years without even considering whether its the right structure..
As for the club-based model, I commend again this perceptive article from attackpoint about how it works only for only a certain type of person (like most of us).
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11186&p=125152&hilit=Gusiatnikov#p125152

[SeanC]

I can think of a few reasons why clubs might not want to merge.

Assume most people know that both Club A and Club B would be better off merging and that prospects for one or both of the clubs growing their way to a sustainable size look unrealistic.

Some members in Club B and Club A are emotionally attached to their clubs and don't want to see it ended, having spent thousands of hours volunteering for that club over the past 20-40 years.

Members in Club B and Club A don't know each other that well, and fear that there may be members in the other club who might be difficult to work with.

Club A has poorer orienteering areas, club A's members fear that the new combined club would ignore these areas, giving less local Orienteering for Club A's members.

Neither club wants to give up its name, and can't agree on a new one.

Committee members in both clubs know that it will be lots of work reorganising 2 clubs into one. Perhaps there will be time next year, but right now there is too much work to do getting ready for the MacFlossie regional next month.

Possible solution to these problems is outside help, someone from outside the club with experience and good people skills who can help each club get over these fears and manage the process. Another is small clubs working together more and sharing resources, so if a merger happen in the future these problems will be less. Perhaps regional development conferences could help too to talk about these things? Some of this stuff is unlikely to just happen randomly, and therefore needs some money to grease the wheels of club development.

I haven't answered the question about how we finance this though which is the difficult bit.

[binman]

Some really fascinating comments and ideas in this thread.

I'd suggest that the idea of the 'social contract' referred to in the link from Graeme is a real asset to the sport; something that if managed tactfully actually attracts and retains people. By necessity, there is a real 'we're in it together' feeling to orienteering, which encourages a more sociable and supportive club atmoshpere than many other competitive sports.

I don't think we'll ever get to the position of operating on anything like a business model, so it's all the important that any funding we do generate is spent not just on the nuts and bolts of the sport (things like maps and kit) but also on developing the skills and encouraging and supporting the commitment of the people who actually run the sport - the orienteers themselves.

By expanding the capability and extent of volunteers in the sport, the downside of the social contract - being 'obliged' to help is much lessened. If you only have to help out/take a leadership role a few times a year you're much more likely to do so happily than those suffering from the 'burnout' experienced, at least on occasions, by a lot of people accessing this forum.

[Paul Frost]

One could conclude that there are too many Scottish clubs.

If you can stand back and look at it logically, it does look daft to have so many clubs in such a close proximity and many with a small membership.

I am sure there would be rioting in the forests if someone suggested mergers, but it would be interesting to know if it has ever been seriously investigated by some of those clubs.

[Paul Frost]

I think we are at a crossroads in the future development and funding of orienteering, and there is no agreement or even wide ranging debate about the issues.

Trying to make decisions about anything involving a computer for the Scottish 6 Days is really focusing my mind on how complex it is getting and the massive amount of volunteer time required.

I keep asking myself if each new 'thing' needs professional support.
Should we pay for commentary, radio controls, gps tracking, big screen tv's etc.
All these areas only have a few volunteer 'experts', and often require a large amount of time to support, and that makes it hard to get a run in or be in a good state of mind to concentrate on your own race.

I think the article Graeme mentions in his post raises these sorts of question in an excellent manner, more people should read it and really think about the issues raised rather than shrugging their shoulders and leaving it to others.

When and how much do you pay?
But the precedent is then set and that makes it hard to expect people to do it for free next time.

[andypat]

Paul
Interesting stuff.
I think part of the problem is that when you say "we" are at a crossroads, probably most orienteers will wonder what you are talking about. Most of us just bumble along accepting that someone will organise things for us and help out wehen asked, not really appreciating how much work is involved. A few years a ago I found myself in the position where I was spending more time on O admin stuff than I was training or competing (this was when our club was revamping its website for the first time). I had to take a step back and look at whether this was what I wanted (it wasnt).

I'm now back to training a bit more and doing my bit a bit more. But I recall a period of time in my 20's when my sport was road running. I ran around a dozen road races a year, usually with mates, wasnt a member of any athletic club, paid my £2 extra non-affiliated fee quite happily and went home with my T shirt etc. Never helped out at an event and never felt guilty about it. Would I like if orienteering was like this? (possibly it is for some people). Well in one sense I would - I'd have a lot fewer emails to worry about, but in another sense - I dont think I'd have the same level of social contact with other orienteers, which I also value.

I do think we should do more for volunteers (I've never had a free entry for any event I've helped at Graeme!) and I also think there might be scope for some roles being remunerated, in the same way that mapping for example already is. Maybe there is also scope for some events being run to make a profit for individiuals or organisations other than clubs (in the way that presumably Mountain marathons and rat races are - is it possible the Purple Thistle already has this format? No idea just asking)

Are we at a crossroads? I think there are some people who have the time and energy to do what it takes to get things done. These people should be recognised and applauded. Ohters of us have limted resources and help out where we can. Are we running out of the first category of people (or is the work we are expecting them to do becoming unfeasible - as I think you are implying) - then we are at a crossroads.....

[EddieH]

Regarding finding helpers, especially major officials, I am not convinced that it is in reality any differeent now than it ever was. Few clubs have ever had the luxury of numbers of folk lining up to take on jobs. There have always been rule fudges to get by with unqualified controllers, no proper organiser etc..

I am interested that with our growing club the atmosphere created has in turn brought forward many new officials, the problem we have is that so many of them are very inexperienced, and therefore our bigger events are very difficult at them moment but our regular Saturday league seems to attract people to put them on to the extent that most of them happen because people come and say they want to do one rather than wait to be asked.

I was once in one of the UK's big clubs where one man mapped, planned organised and generally factoted. When he left the club felt utterly bereft and doubted its capability of being able to stage many events. In the event new people stepped into the breach and the club became much more balanced as a result.

The more officials we decide to pay the more the cost will be driven up which will drive people away and make people less prepared to volunteer. I have long thought that the Scottish 6-day coordinator should be paid, but that is about where I would stop it.

[SeanC]

I guess if all clubs were growing like yours Eddie then we wouldn't need to have this discussion. How do we get the rest expanding their membership and participation in a culture that relies predominantly on volunteers?