Independent Directors

[Clive Coles]

I slept on my decision as to how I should cast my proxy vote. i was challenged by Paul who made the following comment

If the proposal is rejected and we loose all the Sport England money it might be the wake up call the sport needs.

We are being asked to accept quotas of both Independent and gender defined directors in the belief that this constitutes "Good Governance". In exchange for being compliant we secure Sports England funding. We are however building constraints into our articles which restrict flexibility over how our governing board is constituted.

To my mind "Good Governance" is assessed not by the way we define our articles but by how we actually run and administer our sport. And when I look back over the last few years I think we have regressed from representative to "we know best" governance. This is not the sport I recognise as the one that I joined all those years ago.

We have made ill thought out decisions over event structures which lead to a subsequent defeat of the board following an AGM vote. That resulted in nasty accusations of betrayal, an attempt to impose collective cabinet style responsibity, and the disbandment of hard working groups and sub-committees by edict rather than natural evolution. Was that "Good Governance" ? Is it really surprising that there are few volunteers coming forward to become directors ?

Alongside that, to my mind, the best developments that have occurred have arisen from the grass roots. For example:- Urban orienteering has really developed since the institution of the Nopesport Urban League.

So reluctantly i have decided to cast my proxy in favour of change. If the vote again goes against another board recommendation it may lead to a loss of Sport England funding. There will have to be changes in the way we operate. I think though the time has come for that wake up call.

I understand Australian Orienteering faced the same pressures of funding partners trying to dictate governance style. In true OZ style they told them what they could do ! They survived ~ Orienteers continue to run their sport

[Paul Frost]

Clive
I'm confused by your last post.
Are you saying you will vote against the proposal?
You say you are going to vote in favour of change, which I read as yes to the proposal, as voting against would stop the changes.
Most of your post sounds against the change and at the end you say it's time for the wake up call and quote the Australian decision to stop being dictated to by funding partners.

[blairtrewin]

I understand Australian Orienteering faced the same pressures of funding partners trying to dictate governance style. In true OZ style they told them what they could do ! They survived ~ Orienteers continue to run their sport

That's not quite the case - the Australian Sports Commission put out various recommendations on governance (which seem to bear a fairly close resemblance to what is being talked about here) but recognise that some of them may not be appropriate to a small organisation. In particular, the corporate governance model where the Board is a strategic and oversight body, and the people who actually do things on the ground report to the CEO (or equivalent) rather than a Board member, isn't really appropriate for an organisation which has only a bit over 1 full-time-equivalent employees.

There's a new round of governance guidelines which has just come out in the last couple of days (some of you might have seen something about this in the news), but so far they're only going to be mandatory for the seven largest sports which receive A$5 million or more in funding. As we get $4.82 million less than that the implications for us are probably modest in the short term.

(And I can definitely relate to Graeme's earlier comments about the contrast between the outsiders' view of finding Board members and the reality of doing so).

[eddie]

http://m.theage.com.au/sport/gender-imb ... 2gfz7.html

[Mrs H]

'That's a load of baloney','' Wylie said. ''If people look hard enough there are just an enormous number of capable and talented women in the Australian corporate and sporting communities.''

I'm sure this is true but it doesn't mean that they want to spend their free time sitting on some crusty board and not getting paid when they could be spending their free time with their families or gardening (or even having to catch up with the chores)

Is it surprising that the governance tends to fall to retired men - Do women with careers, young children/elderly parents/households to run and a bit of time to do some sport really have time for this?

[graeme]

One often hears that we need "the best man for the job" *
Nothing could be further from the truth when it comes to volunteers, since the best person for one job is invariably the best person for other, more useful jobs.

and vice versa: I think we deploy our people rather well and the gender balance on the board may reflect this You can decide which category to put me in, by balancing the merits of ranting on nopesport against sitting on the BOF committees. remembering that BOF now recommend we all make more use of social media

* A staccato canard that works only in monosyllables.

[Muddy Boots]

I have just got back from a well planned, organised local level C NOR event at Lynford in East Anglia. Deep snow on the roads and in the woods, club volunteers around to make sure the experienced and newcomers all had an enjoyable run, get back safely and return home happy. But at top BOF level outside the regions clubs we now seem to be swamped by a committee management system that very few at grassroot level can understand and now we have an AGM vote to introduce independent directors who will have no orienteering experience. No wonder as Clive Coles states many now feel detached from the sport we love. So hopefully long may the volunteering spirit as I experienced today continue and thrive at club level.

[DavidJ]

So hopefully long may the volunteering spirit as I experienced today continue and thrive at club level.

Been reading Mrs H in CompassSport?

[Muddy Boots]

Sorry I do not understand what you mean as I do not take Compassport. I just read NORNEWS at club level and Nopesport on line.

[Philip134]

If you follow up the CVs of those listed as Independent Directors for other sports you will discover that most are sports professionals of some sort - that's how they make their living.

So as with all consultants, you put yourself about a bit to network and get contracts. It is a way to market your services!!

Despite this, will we get value for (no) money, who knows?

[DavidJ]

Sorry I do not understand what you mean as I do not take Compassport. I just read NORNEWS at club level and Nopesport on line.

My turn to apologise. Mrs H's article in the latest issue of CompassSport was about supporting volunteers - hence the possible connection. It is a good magazine to subscribe to if you want to really get a feel for what is happening in the sport.

[Muddy Boots]

David - not necessary to apologise. I just felt after what I experienced today at the NOR event in East Anglia I had to express a view that I suspect is felt by many of us at grassroots level.

[Mrs H]

My copy hasn't arrived yet due to us being snowed in (again) so I had to look up what I wrote as it's so long ago I'd forgotten - it's really good isn't it?

[awk]

Is it surprising that the governance tends to fall to retired men - Do women with careers, young children/elderly parents/households to run and a bit of time to do some sport really have time for this?

Do most men with similar other commitments? I don't (and whilst I respect many of those who have taken on directorships, personally I feel that the national governance of the sport has become hopelessly remote and have no desire or interest in going there).

[King Penguin]

Catch 22 - because the governance is perceived as remote most with real interest in the sport do not want to go there (I can think of a few exceptions)....
....so the governance becomes remote !