Ideal size for an orienteering club?

[Mrs H]

There are many good reasons for having a MADO style set up - and the reasons are becoming more compelling as travel costs spiral and the potential to use smaller semi-urban areas increase.

BUT

you still need someone to take charge and in the absence of a committee they need to have a fairly clear idea of what they want to achieve and the ability to both communicate and enthuse others with the idea.

I was evangelical over MADO but the lack of support and recognition from BOF really surprised me. The final straw was the introduction of compulsory BOF membership which decimated my new membership after the first free year. That and failing to win Club of the Year (we'd also staged the JK and SinS) that year just about sums up what BOF thought of the idea.

....and we all know what their own version of 'Community Orienteering" looked like.

The climate has some what changed now (and I can't even remmember what BOF's current development thrust is) so if you can find someone to take it on then go for it - it's great fun

[Red Adder]

I can well understand Mrs H disappointment with the way MADO was greeted by BOF.

I have felt similarly about our Summer League. I actually began it to see if their was demand for out-of-season activities but it was clearly appreciated by BOF as it increased their participation figures . Many other clubs have had similar drives with low-key events. Rather than support them BOF sought to tax them by imposing a levy at the same rate for CAT B & C events Small clubs will have to pass on the levy as we generally don't have the resources to put on large lucrative events to cross subsidise them. It will be interesting to see if this has any effect on numbers - its certainly blunted my enthusiasm.

BOF consistently gives the impression of dabbling with flavour of the month ideas to appease their sponsors rather than looking for and supporting over a longer term initiatives by clubs that have a genuine chance of broadening the appeal and uptake of the support - which surely should be one of their key raison-d'etres.

[graeme]

If the constitution was carefully crafted - yes i am sure MiddxO may help with evidence here as I think they had 1 member at one stage but the club subsequently underwent a 600% expansion!

When I first wrote it, the JOK constitution said, inter alia, "the quorum shall be 75% of the number of members present at the meeting, or 20 members (whichever number is the smaller)" . It was several years before anyone noticed

[madmike]

If the constitution was carefully crafted - yes i am sure MiddxO may help with evidence here as I think they had 1 member at one stage but the club subsequently underwent a 600% expansion!

When I first wrote it, the JOK constitution said, inter alia, "the quorum shall be 75% of the number of members present at the meeting, or 20 members (whichever number is the smaller)" . It was several years before anyone noticed

carefully crafted - QED

[SeanC]

you still need someone to take charge and in the absence of a committee they need to have a fairly clear idea of what they want to achieve and the ability to both communicate and enthuse others with the idea.

Yes, I agree. I wonder whether in some clubs the structure tends to inhibit such local initiatives? Eg the club committees job is to come up with initiatives. Everyone else leaves them to it... "it's not my job", "they are the experts, let them come up with something", but often committee types are the people doing far too much already.

If you have subgroups with free reign to develop locally people might feel free to do things to get O going in their local town. It might not be local events, it might be organising shared transport or mid-week runs/gym trips. But it could be local events, but then again that could be a schools or junior initiative, or simpler score events based on permanent courses. It could be off the wall, new and wacky and not something longstanding committee members or anyone else might think of (but appropriate to their area). It could even be a BOF initiative. The wider club could be there to help out if needed, eg the publicity officer helps with publicity, mapping officer with maps etc.

Sometimes what's holding us back is not BOF but things within clubs (which might not be the intention). A bit of devolution might give those the freedom and enthusiasm needed to make such things a success.

[RJ]

Yes SeanC a very sensible analysis.

What I would suggest is that the committee develops a policy.... such as... we wish to increase our membership by ten new juniors this year, with the parents following, but the emphasis on the juniors to begin with.

Any person/group within the club can suggest how 'they' might like to achieve that and to be given the support whatever it entails. Sometimes an initiative dies on its first outing.... but if we don't try we'll never find a way forward.

[SeanC]

What I would suggest is that the committee develops a policy.... such as... we wish to increase our membership by ten new juniors this year, with the parents following, but the emphasis on the juniors to begin with.

Thanks for the kind words RJ, but unfortunately I think that this approach is exactly the wrong one. To get the best out of a local group, clubs need to give them the freedom to do what they want. By setting a policy it just becomes the central committee telling a local group how and what to do. I suspect this is exactly the fear of small clubs thinking of merging with larger ones. A central committee dominated by the larger club that exercises control over the new bigger club.

You could organise clubs so that central committees worry about club wide things such as club junior squads, regional and district events, websites etc, and devolve complete freedom to the groups for local events, training, socials and shared transport. This may end up with groups doing things that some established club members don't agree with or are uncomfortable with, and a cultural change might be needed to give up control.

[Mrs H]

Yes local "ownership" of the initiative is crucial. Otherwise there is no pride and no passion. (IMHO)

[Glucosamine]

I remember a well-supported county town athletic club I used to be a member of combining with another club in the next town. The objective was apparently to form a more competitive track and field team. The result seemed to be to disillusion the less competitive, road runners and mavericks who mixed track, roads, country, fell and O, swelling the ranks of local second tier clubs. Not sure that the metaphor quite carries over (few second tier O clubs to mop up the frustrated) but perhaps we should beware of unintended consequences ...

[Jon Brooke]

As a member of WSX I think I abstained from the WSX/WIM merger vote, though I might have voted for it on the grounds that most people in the club wanted to do it - can't remember and not really bothered either way.

However, when WIM decided not to merge it did occur to me that if we (WSX) were really bothered that we could all just individually leave WSX and join WIM - job done! (which kind of makes their decision a bit daft - after all, what orienteering club turns away new members?)

[alanbrett]

However, when WIM decided not to merge it did occur to me that if we (WSX) were really bothered that we could all just individually leave WSX and join WIM - job done! (which kind of makes their decision a bit daft - after all, what orienteering club turns away new members?)

Well yes and no.

The club's intellectual property, ie maps, would not transfer with the members, without some formal agreement.

[Red Adder]

I'm aware of a situation where whilst no merger was ever proposed informal discussions did take place and a few (quite possibly unconnected) individual transfers followed. I'd say that this certainly weakened the losing club without any evidence of a positive benefit to the stronger.

Therefore if you take in to account kit and especially areas / maps etc. it would seem that a formal merger has to be better. However there will always be history & "personalities" involved as well which I'm sure would make a successful merger (or a club being split and members allocated to 2 or more clubs) quite difficult to achieve.

[SeanC]

Also even if the majority of members leave a struggling club, this might still leaves a development void where new orienteers aren't being recruited, or if they are they soon quit the sport.

The business of successfully organising a club marriage / separation - I think this is where regional development officers could really earn their wage. Unfortunately most regions don't have one, but I'd hope that BOF staff could support under the guise of "helping volunteers". I'm sure it's worth asking if you're a club in this situation.

No doubt that there will always be a few tantrums / resignations etc, but I'm sure most would agree the long term is what's important, especially given our ageing demographics. For those in small clubs morning the loss of history and identity, groups within clubs could be the way forward - with the big club committees willing to give up some control.