British Orienteering Governance Review

[Paul Frost]

I can't see a problem with paying a non-orienteer for giving up many evenings a year. We pay non-orienteers all the time for all kinds of things.

Again I ask, why are we keen to pay non-orienteers to do stuff for us but never consider paying an orienteer?

There are many coaches qualified to teach orienteering that may be prepared to do these jobs but feel that they already "give" a lot of time to orienteering. So whilst they may not be prepared to volunteer to run weekly club activity sessions they may be prepared to if they were rewarded. Why not ask them first, before going outside the sport?

[SeanC]

I think in some circumstances coaches from within the orienteering community are being paid and there are adverts out there. We've paid for coaching before and I suspect other clubs have. I agree there is not consistency about who we pay and who we don't for all kinds of things in orienteering, and the area is difficult. But consistency means paying everybody, which means adventure racing style fees, or paying nobody which is going to be a massive break on the sport's development.

Maybe people looking for a small part time income, keen on coaching and willing to give up an evening most weeks, especially those willing to travel to support clubs without many qualified coaches, should be pro-active and contact Ed Nicholas?

[Sunlit Forres]

The Moray Active Schools Team, most of whom are Moravian members through a partnership we've set up, are delivering orienteering sessions in schools right across Moray. They're doing it as part of their paid job. For viewers outside Scotland, this is a programme funded by the Scottish Executive aimed at introducing school kids to new sports that they might then wish to take up outside school time, and to help forge school-club links.

Apart from one team member, none of the Moray team had any experience in orienteering, but they've done their UKCC Level 1 as part of their CPD after gaining some basic skills with our club. What they're now delivering in schools (and in after-school clubs) at a very basic level is excellent, and this is reaping benefits for our club. This is a genuine example of non-orienteers who have become extremely effective in promoting our sport.

Although one of the Active Schools remits is to forge school-club links, the team have come to accept that there just isn't the volunteer manpower across many sports to deliver the goods in school time. Increasingly, therefore, the co-ordinators are delivering the sessions themselves instead of just organising clubs to deliver them. Its different with bigger sports who have paid development officers (eg cricket which is booming in the north in schools thanks to a new cricket development officer).

Feedback from the team shows that orientering is one of their favourite activities, and this has got to be encouraging.

[Sunlit Forres]

Having had a private exchange e-mails with another Nope correspondent, I ought to add the Moray Active Schools Team are delivering orienteering at the most basic level, mostly using school maps with the occasional foray into mapped local parks or Roseisle. The best course for this type of Activity is without doubt the Teaching Orienteering Pars 1 & 2, not the UKCC Level 1.

The more competent orienteers amngst them are starting to develop secondary schools orienteering using school maps (funded by school themselves) with adjacent extensions to nearby woodlands, funded by the club, and used for Sat league events.

[Taybank]

Coming in a bit late here so I apologise if I repeat anything already said.
The BOF move is based on criticism from UK Sport? of the current structure of administering the sport. I read that somewhere.
Of course all this comes down to the way BOF is saddled with running English orienteering. It really is time the English were given their independence.
Then BOF could act as a federation with occasional meetings of reps from the four countries meeting to decide the way forward in areas where their interests overlap - British Champs, JK, British teams and of course the money needed to fund its operation.
Each association could decide its own vision - if necessary.
By the way, Scotland does not need to be independent to operate on its own. That only applies at Olympic level.
Many sports do operate at international level with the four home countries sending teams. If it is applicable, they put in a joint team at the olympics.
I understand that the IOF would look favourably on an application for recognition from Scotland. It would give them another member country.
By the way - I would welcome weekly club meetings I enjoy running, talking, having a beer or coffee with other people, but Frog is right - there are so many hoops you have to jump through if you want to it - just so BOF can show an "on paper" increase in events (rather than competitions) and participation.
Lastly, has anyone else noticed that according to the AGM based discussion on BOF accounts, the professionals now provide the "leadership" in the sport. I always thought that was our job as orienteers.

[NeilC]

By the way - I would welcome weekly club meetings I enjoy running, talking, having a beer or coffee with other people, but Frog is right - there are so many hoops you have to jump through if you want to.

Exactly what hoops are those? Perhaps I dodged round them or simply ignored them. Spend 5 minutes a week entering the details of the activity on the BOF website and then 75 minutes every Tuesday evening running, chatting, orienteering and generally bemusing the local residents.

[SeanC]

I thought it might be interesting to post what Neil and Rob are up to in Brighton for discussion.

uly 5th Burgess Hill away day
Jun 28th TBC
Wed June 22nd Devils Dyke Trail Challenge
June 14th TBC
June 7th Street navigation run Pen/pencil
May 31st Circuits and campus score
May 24th Campus races SI Card, pen/pencil
May 17th Brighton score event SI Card, pen/pencil
May 10th Circuits and nav run
May 3rd Lancing away day
Apr 19th/26th Easter break
Apr 12th Street run
Mar 29th Circuits and indoor hockey
Mar 22nd Coaching or street Race Torch, SI Card
Mar 15th Circuits and street race Torch
Mar 8th Pancake races frying pan (if you have one), small torch
Mar 1st Circuits and campus sprints torch, SI Card
Feb 22nd Devil's Dyke away day
Feb 15th Short race and course planning
Feb 8th Circuits and course planning
Feb 1st Horsham SONIC race torch, pen, SI Card
Jan 25th Manor Field Races torch, SI Card
Jan 18th Circuits and indoor hockey
Jan 11th Campus activities
Jan 4th Circuits and short street race torch, SI Card

[Paul Frost]

Contrary to popular belief I wouldn't object to clubs having weekly meetings if it suited their members.

The problem lies with making it the only way forward for the whole of the UK.
Many clubs have too dispersed a membership over a large area for it to be practical. If all the marketing done by British Orienteering says that this is what you should expect from orienteering clubs potential new members will be disappointed.

Plus there is anecdotal evidence that funding is coming with strings, dependant on the club having weekly club nights.

One size doesn't fit all!

[awk]

The BOF move is based on criticism from UK Sport? of the current structure of administering the sport. I read that somewhere.

Possibly/probably If true, another consequence of a long-term failure to work towards being self-sufficient.

[distracted]

Paul - some interesting "views" there without any detail backing them up - I'm interested to hear more. I didn't know Sport England funding can now be used across the entire UK? What is this marketing you talk of? What is this "funding" that now comes with strings? And how do you know what all new members want from the sport? - if we knew this we'd be overrun with newcomers pretty quickly!

Just because this isn't orienteering as you know it doesn't mean that the approach will not work. If the current product is so good, why are there so few of us?

Yes a one size fits all approach isn't best. It would be great to try a range of ideas at different places in the country and see what works best under certain circumstances. But think of it from the Development Team's point of view. You have 2 years to deliver increased participation numbers in orienteering before the current funding cycle ends. Your jobs are potentially dependent on achieving this. How long does it take to evaluate the effectiveness or otherwise of a sports development intervention? Do you then have the time to do this and then successfully roll out a customised-by-area programme and achieve the increases in participation numbers set by the funding body?

As I've said before, if you can offer a credible alternative that could work in the timescales available then I'm sure there are people who'd be most interested to hear your ideas. Including those involved with development up in Scotland. I understand that Sport Scotland are demanding fairly hefty increases in membership in return for the funding they have provided. Or is this not as great a worry to you as what is done with Sport England money?

[awk]

Just because this isn't orienteering as you know it doesn't mean that the approach will not work. If the current product is so good, why are there so few of us?

The current product (at least at national level) has been driven by Sport England/UK Sport requirements, not by an uninfluenced assessment as to what is best for British orienteering. Whether that uninfluenced assessment would have achieved anything better is, of course, open to question, but don't for one second think that the current product is anything other than dependent on sports council priorities.

I'd agree with you about the challenges of finding credible alternatives - not least because of the ongoing short termism of government funding. What my experience suggested was that sports council project rarely achieved much beyond the length of their funding. Their priorities were always with groups and in areas where, once supporting money was withdrawn, the whole project folded. That includes projects outside orienteering too. Given the nature of the funding cycle you outlined, i don't think anything much has changed. So the question has to be, is it worth it in the long term? Has the government driven development work in BOF delivered sufficient longer term benefits, including sustaining or increasing membership? And where has development (orienteering or otherwise) been secured that is independent of ongoing underwriting, and how has it been achieved?

[SeanC]

I think that's the idea - that these club nights need to be sustainable without financial support from the Sport England money. I would imagine once a club night is getting regular attendancies of about 20 or so it becomes sustainable. Either because the newcomers start to volunteer to organise the club nights (it would be interesting to hear if this has already happened) or because there are enough to pay for a coach without subsidy (presumably using a high cost model - charging say £5+ per night). The first one or two years needs the support from the scheme for initial publicity, advice, motivation, getting venues, land permissions, paying coaches whilst the numbers grow etc.

Is this the best or only way for every club to develop? Probably not. But we don't seem willing to fund our own development schemes except on a very small scale? Or am I wrong?

[distracted]

Awk - yes the bigger question is what is best long term for the sport. That's got to be difficult to answer, and everyone will have a different view as to where they'd like to see things in 10, 20, 30 years time. Whether the whole sport plan has this in mind, or just the 4 year funding cycle for which it is being prepared, I don't know - I haven't fully read the document.

But - going full circle - this is perhaps where the Board should have a role, asking the membership for their thoughts up front and then putting out ideas and true long term plans for feedback. The Whole Sport Plan is a document put forward by British Orienteering as to where the previous consultation said we would like the sport to move, as this could be adapted accordingly. Perhaps the Community-O project does have long term applicability, as it could be said to move the UK orienteering setup more towards the Scandinavian model with their club huts. It may be that other countries that are doing things differently, e.g. the growing scene Portugal, and this model would better work in the UK. We can probably learn from other countries' successes and adapt to fit our country - but this needs someone to do the research in the first place.

[SeanC]

There's also examples of expanding clubs within this country and membership/participation statistics that could be analysed for club variations but aren't, I understand because the paid staff at BOF don't have the time.

I'm sure if there's someone reading this who wanted to volunteer to analyse statistics and do a study I'm sure this would be well received.

Incidentally, on the matter of BOF promoting club nights as the sole development model, development committee reps are asked for "good news stories" before each meeting. With SLOW's help I wrote a short piece on what SLOW are up to and I'm told this may appear in Focus. They don't do club nights but it's an interesting story.

[Sunlit Forres]

Maybe a straightforward analysis of BOF membership by postcode could reveal useful data. If a particular postcode (eg AB1) showed a disproportionately high number of members, BOF could investigate what it is in that particular area that is attracting members.

If this analysis could be extended to members joining within the last (say) 2 years it could be tied in to any development activity in those postcode areas.