Independent Directors

[Oldman]

If Sport England withdraws funding from us because the membership voted against a policy they wanted to force on us, what does it say about democracy, equity and fairness.

As funders, Sport England are entitled to place whatever requirements they wish on giving funds, so there's no question of "withdrawing funding" surely?

And as for democracy, the members have the option to adopt or reject this change (which as it's proposed by the Board and there are other reasons for adopting it, I support).

[SJC]

As funders, Sport England are entitled to place whatever requirements they wish on giving funds,

Whilst I am quite happy with the funders dictating what their money should be spent on, I am far less happy that they should also place restrictions on the way that we govern our sport.

However, if we accept that the primary reason for agreeing to these changes is to obtain funding from Sport England then it is something we will just have to live with.

[Spookster]

There isn't any guarantee that someone with those skills will come forward though.

No, but nor is there a guarantee that people will come forward with such skills to fill elected director roles. There are, however, far more people who are non-orienteers/members than orienteers/members, so we have a much larger pool of people from within which to recruit someone suitable.

In fact it's possible that an orienteer with those skills could be blocked from being on the board if we already have the full quota of elected directors.

Except that an orienteer with those skills could be appointed as an independent director. Plus each year 2 elected director posts are available, albeit perhaps contested by existing directors wishing to stand again. If the membership decides that the candidate with the required skill is preferred over the re-appointment of an existing director, then so be it.

We could then be forced to have an independent director who doesn't have the skills we want and is only there to look good on their CV.

If an independent director candidate doesn't have the skills, and is apparently only standing to improve their CV, then I'm sure the Appointment Panel would not appoint them! (And there is no mandate to have to have 3 independents - we are not "forced" to have them.)

[Paul Frost]

There has been nothing to stop the board recruiting someone with specialist skills to advise them from outside orienteering up to now. They could even have made them a director as there was an empty spot, but they haven't.

If they have to be a director to get them to volunteer help then I'd question if they are only doing it for their CV.

What is the plan/method to recruit from the larger pool of non-orienteers?
How/where do you find people with no interest in orienteering?
Who will spend the time (and money?) looking for them?
Do you already have a number of people in mind to take up the new posts?

If we'd had experience of one independent director and what improvements they had made to our sport it would have helped the case for increasing the number to three.

As I keep saying, I don't object to independent directors or having more women on the board, but I don't think the numbers of either should be set in stone. It removes flexibility and could result in not the best candidate getting the job. Setting a quota doesn't make it easier to find volunteers it makes it harder, so why do it? And the answer shouldn't be because Sport England say so.

[Clive Coles]

I'm still with you Paul ~ the introduction of quotas for both Directors (and Genders) and making these quotas part of the articles just confirms to me the style of Governance we don't need. I am not averse to utilising experts to supply expertise from outside orienteering if a need exists, but making them a Director is surely unnecessary.
All it does is encourage the trend of "you sit on my board and i will sit on yours"

There is a need for more orienteers to step forward and offer to serve on both the Board and various committees. This AGM agenda however provides little encouragement for any potential volunteer to get involved.

[Oldman]

What is the plan/method to recruit from the larger pool of non-orienteers?
How/where do you find people with no interest in orienteering?
Who will spend the time (and money?) looking for them?
Do you already have a number of people in mind to take up the new posts?

The Board proposes an appointments process where a Board-appointed Panel make the appointments using, amongst other things, input from the Board on particular skills the Board lacks. The Panel would comprise a Director, a Constituent Association Chair and a non-member of British Orienteering who has relevant experience. The Directorships will be advertised publicly, and the composition of the Panel will be published on the British Orienteering web site. Recruitment
would involve selection of applicants followed by interviews

[Paul Frost]

The Directorships will be advertised publicly...

Is the only part of that statement that vaguely touches on my questions.

Advertised publicly where?
Cards in local newsagent windows or adverts in The Guardian?
What is the advertising budget for this?
I've never seen an advert looking for volunteer board members for any other sport, so where do you find them?

Who is the "non-member of British Orienteering who has relevant experience" and are they a volunteer?

I would expect applicants attending interviews to have their expenses paid, what is the budget for this?

There should be answers to all these questions, because if all goes well for the board they will be implementing their plan very soon.

[Spookster]

Advertised publicly where?
Cards in local newsagent windows or adverts in The Guardian?
What is the advertising budget for this?
I've never seen an advert looking for volunteer board members for any other sport, so where do you find them?

Here is an advert for a volunteer independent director of English Rounders. They were after a person with experience of marketing/HR/sport development. Knowing the rules of rounders was not a requirement.
http://www.roundersengland.co.uk/rounde ... orvacancy/

These places could all place advertisements, if we wanted them to do so, and as far as I can tell they would not charge to do so.

http://www.sportscotland.org.uk/jobs/Ot ... cies/index
http://www.sportengland.org/careers/oth ... sport.aspx
http://www.irishsportscouncil.ie/About_ ... _in_Sport/
http://www.sportni.net/about/Currentvacancies
http://www.sportwales.org.uk/about-us/j ... ncies.aspx
http://www.uksport.gov.uk/jobs/

There are all sorts of sports jobs in there, and they are the sorts of places people would look. Some of them are voluntary, and some of them are board director posts.

Another angle is "volunteer opportunity" websites. There are also several of those, here is one: http://www.do-it.org.uk. There are volunteer director roles in sport in there.

Why do people volunteer? Lots of reasons in here, many of which would be applicable to volunteer directors:
http://www.sportwales.org.uk/media/2968 ... nteers.pdf

Expenses associated with the committees and board come under the budget heading of "governance". Board costs (including reasonable potential recruitment expenses) will be budgetted for. The amount we spent on governance last year is in the annual report.

[Paul Frost]

I'm not sure that the advert for an independent director for rounders on the rounders website is a good example of how to find directors from outside the sport.

As I keep saying, I don't object to independent directors or having more women on the board, but I don't think the numbers of either should be set in stone. It removes flexibility and could result in not the best candidate getting the job. Setting a quota doesn't make it easier to find volunteers it makes it harder, so why do it? And the answer shouldn't be because Sport England say so.

That's why I'm against the 2 proposals.

[Glucosamine]

Expenses associated with the committees and board come under the budget heading of "governance". Board costs (including reasonable potential recruitment expenses) will be budgetted for. The amount we spent on governance last year is in the annual report.

So even before paying for imposed independent director recruitment and expenses, governance costs as much as 'members and communication' and seems to be running 25% over budget - apparently due to servicing the funding body. Naively, is it any wonder that some members may feel that priorities may be turning topsy turvey?

[Oldman]

I can't believe someone's arguing about the recruiting expense of an independent director (the ongoing cost being likely to be the same as an elected director). Surely the debate should be focusing on a more important aspect of the proposal than that!

[Glucosamine]

Suitably chided, humble pie eaten and in the corner with the D-cap on my head.

But while absolute costs to recruit / support independent directors may be small, this does seem symptomatic of a situation where to get larger amounts of money to spend in specific ways which everybody may not agree altogether benefit the sport, more and more effort and money has to be spent. It may well be that we are now trapped on the roundabout, and that the majority do support the approach, but I cannot help feeling we are being railroaded.

I'm told that our club membership decline has reversed since clubnights were supported, so perhaps I'm just a dinosaur in thinking that people enjoying competitive courses in the forest on a sunday are what the sport is about.

[Spookster]

The advertisement for two Independent Directors has been published, on the BO website and several others.

[ER]

Interestingly the person spec does not seek people with legal experience which might have been useful considering the liability shadows that surround sprint/urban orienteering.

[Scott]

This is a good point, and the Board did discuss whether we should seek someone with legal knowledge, as it is an area we're currently weak in. Eventually we decided that, for now, we can meet British Orienteering's need for legal advice by consulting with (external) solicitors when we need to, but it is certainly something we will look at again when the next ID recruitment cycle comes around.

Apparently recruiting lawyers to unpaid non-executive roles can be tricky - practising lawyers generally aren't very willing to offer legal advice outside their professional capacity because of concerns over their own professional liability...