Oh no - things aren't so bad after all

[SeanC]

From the annual report on the BOF website.

Membership up.

Participation up (even compared to the last Scottish 6 Day year).

(perhaps we should all cheer up )

[aiming off]

So lets see whether I've understood this.

We've had a successful year because we have taken £578,000 in Grant Income to pursue Development Activity in line with Government Sporting Policy, and increased Membership by 244 as a consequence. Thats £2368.85 per new member.

Whilst letting Lagganlia/Vasteras/Lakeside/Regional Junior Squads go to the wall. And severely reducing the international programme

[SeanC]

I don't think you've understood this at all. That increase in participation and membership might be mainly down to the numerous non-BOF initiated development initiatives that different clubs do, or it could be that the development program has made much more difference than just the net increase. It's not our money anyway. Some might argue that the money could be put to better use in hospitals or schools, or then again it could have ended up as a bankers bonus or an MP's duck house. And it's keeping Richard Barratt and Ed Nicholas off the streets

As far as I can tell, this is the first time since about 1990 that there has been an increase in BOF membership*. Perhaps orienteering has turned a corner? No reason to be complacent as orienteering could easily be several times as popular, but a good reason to cheer up. ... and it's going to be a lovely spring weekend for Orienteering.

*ignoring the years where BOF membership was increased by the abolition of club only membership.

[aiming off]

Within the 2009-13 Orienteering Whole Sport Plan, Briritish Orienteering contracted with Sport England to seek to achieve the following Orienteering Schedule of Outcomes.

1) In the "Growth" Area to increase the number of people participating at least once a month from a Baseline of 12000 to 18000 by 2013. Within the plan period the outcome to date is a drop of membership from 12000 to 11000. Given orienteering "could easily be several times more popular", I beg to question the effectiveness of the delivery and progress to date. The gains from Development Activity have been balanced by losses in key areas which have been neglected by British Orienteering. The fault here, IMO, lies to a great extent with the constraint on the type of development activity which can be funded.

2) In the "Excel" Area a key outcome was to grow the Regional Talent Squad to 9 squads involving 250 Athletes. So far I would say the amount of support that Regional Talent Squads have received from British Orienteering in the plan period has gone down, not up. Again, I beg to question the delivery.

The Whole Sport Plan for 2013-17 could play much, much, better to the strengths of Orienteering, with 60% of funding directed to 14-25 year olds, with the objective of achieving retention in sport, and lifelong participation.

Despite the priority for Sport England being sports with >75,000 participants. NGBs who received funding in 2009-13 are also eligible, but the track record of delivering contracted outcomes in 2009-13 will be a key to securing future funding. So I'm concerned at the level of complacency in the Annual Report.

But what do others think??

[SeanC]

When I said "could easily be several times more popular" I should have clarified that, IMHO, there is easily sufficient demand amoungst the 60 million people in the UK to increase membership and participation many times over. Delivering and marketing an appropriate product for these people whilst retaining the things many of us like about the sport such as it's democratic(ish), low cost, volunteer based ethos is, also IMHO, the difficult bit.

Interesting questions aiming off. What do others think?

[70plus]

I can't comment on the statistics which claim to show a reversal of the long-term downward trend. I would only say that there have been many years of looking for ways to overcome it, without (so far, perhaps) any noticeable result. I don't believe that the great majority of the population don't know what O is, so equally I don't believe participation will greatly increase - except perhaps 'short-stay'.

The popularity graph of O since the 1960s suggests that it appealed to those born (say) 1930-1970. For whatever reason, a diminishing proportion of younger people are less interested. By all means let's try, but don't imagine that we are failing because we haven't yet found some magic formula.

[graeme]

it appealed to those born (say) 1930-1970. For whatever reason,

Figuring out that reason should be top priority.
To emphasize your point : I just finalised course combinations for the JK sprint. Obviously because Urban-style racing is so fantastic and popular, we need twice as many courses as a few years ago to fit the start block. M18-34 is full But, balancing numbers gives a MOpen+M35+M40 course with fewer people than M45.
I've heard a lot down the years that the sport appeals to 35+ (ten years ago), to 40+ (five years ago), and now 45+. That's rubbish - as you say it's dominated by a particular generation and their kids.

[mharky]

So lets see whether I've understood this.

We've had a successful year because we have taken £578,000 in Grant Income to pursue Development Activity in line with Government Sporting Policy, and increased Membership by 244 as a consequence. Thats £2368.85 per new member.

Whilst letting Lagganlia/Vasteras/Lakeside/Regional Junior Squads go to the wall. And severely reducing the international programme

But what percentage of those members were brought to the sport due to the efforts of BOF? I'd dread to think how many tens of thousands of pounds have been spent on people who orienteer a handful of times, kind of enjoy it, but for whatever reasons never take up the sport.

[AndyC]

I don't believe that the great majority of the population don't know what O is, so equally I don't believe participation will greatly increase - except perhaps 'short-stay'.

I disagree. I'm of the impression (from doing informal marketing research recently while distributing posters) that many people have either no real understanding of the sport or have the impression that it is bearded men slowly walking round with a compass. The speed of the sport is completely lost.
I've also come across a number of middle aged people who were sent out on a far too difficult course in their early teens and inevitably got lost. The advent of LG & SG courses will hopefully deal with the phenomena of "this is too easy but the next step is too hard" which I know I faced soon after I started.
It may be that things are different in other regions (in which I include the countries of Scotland, Wales and Ireland for the avoidance of doubt)

[70plus]

I'm of the impression that many people ... have the impression that it is bearded men slowly walking round with a compass.

That describes me fairly well ...

The advent of LG & SG courses will hopefully deal with the phenomenon of "this is too easy but the next step is too hard" which I know I faced soon after I started.
It may be that things are different in other regions (in which I include the countries of Scotland, Wales and Ireland for the avoidance of doubt)

It sounds defeatist, but my realism (pessimism if you prefer) is based on the efforts made so far with Red, Purple or M21V courses to attract runners and novices. Very often they get no takers at all. LG and SG courses are aimed more at those wanting less physical challenge, but they may work.

Our club has staged the Sandstone Trail race for about 30 years - every autumn around 300, mostly from running clubs, finish in Delamere forest and are invited to take up O. Sometimes one does, and very rarely we gain a convert. (perhaps interestingly, although runners enjoy entering the race, they don't want to take over the organisation )

Many years ago we put a lot of effort into organising a Corporate Challenge, where local businesses were invited to enter teams in an entry-level O competition. The number of entries was very close to zero. Maybe we missed something somewhere.

So while I wish all clubs every success in their recruitment drives, I am sceptical about the results. Maybe urban O, potentially much more of a spectator sport, is the answer. Just not for me, I'm afraid.

[SeanC]

We've been getting slow growth for the last couple of years. Quite a lot of turnover and the ones who've become regulars have generally been from a running background.

I think the hardcore runners are less likely to become regular orienteers as they are too busy training and racing, but orienteering can be a secondary activity for many runners say 5 events a year. We see a demand for that - same as orienteers often do 5 or 10 running races a year.

The less hardcore /fun runners ... I suspect orienteering may appeal more to many of these as there will be those who find running boring. These are a more difficult group to reach as they may not be regulars at running clubs, but you can reach them through posting on runners world, fliers at running shops, or maybe by a better online presence (facebook, twitter etc). Park Run's are full of these sorts of runner and our local park runs are very happy to put details of local O on their website.

Trail Challenges are great promotion, but maybe the bridge between that and classic O needs to be examined. Runners courses at classic o events - M21V, red etc.. it's all about marketing that as something other than O and making them a product that appeals to runners (eg making them mass start and giving them a different brand name). Difficult to do with all the other stuff we have to do I know.

What size is the market? A pessimistic guess is 1 in 1000 people for traditional O. My maths says that's 6 times the current number of orienteers (60,000 people). If we can produce something more marketable (something more sociable, fashionable and local) to others then I think 1 in 100 (1%, 600,000 people) is possible.

[70plus]

What size is the market? A pessimistic guess is 1 in 1000 people for traditional O. My maths says that's 6 times the current number of orienteers (60,000 people). If we can produce something more marketable (something more sociable, fashionable and local) to others then I think 1 in 100 (1%, 600,000 people) is possible.

I can't fault your maths, SeanC. My difficulty is that if we do produce something more marketable (etc.) it will be quite different from what we have had for 40+ years. Things move on, but where to?

[awk]

I can't fault your maths, SeanC. My difficulty is that if we do produce something more marketable (etc.) it will be quite different from what we have had for 40+ years. Things move on, but where to?

I think we've already seen some indication where . Once upon a time there was pretty much just one type (classic distance cross-country), with some occasional variants (eg score). Today we have two strands - urban and terrain - and four main disciplines: sprint, middle, long, relays, again with some occasional variants. All together we now have a much richer more interesting sport, with the potential to achieve much stronger exposure to the general public, and an ability to appeal to a broader market if we promote it properly (and that does NOT mean saying that "you can walk"!). Personally, I think things that aren't part of that core product, e.g. trail challenges, corporate challenges etc., are of limited value (but then that might have been said of urban racing a few years ago).

[70plus]

All together we now have a much richer more interesting sport, with the potential to achieve much stronger exposure to the general public, and an ability to appeal to a broader market if we promote it properly.

'Events' show that you are right, awk. But it seems to me that one way that things have 'moved on' is that I didn't join O because it was promoted to me at the time (1970) and I suspect most of my contemporaries didn't either. I found myself sharing an office with an orienteer and got interested. Does this happen any more (or similar ways of course) ? And if not, why not?

[awk]

I agree 70-plus, word of mouth is very important, and can be very effective! However, we are competing against a lot more activities nowadays, many of which are very professional in their own promotion (either that, or lucky!). The sorts of things that might have attracted people back in the 70s and 80s are somewhat different to those today.