Don Dobson | Sports organisations need governance support

Over the past few decades, there has been a groundswell in calls for better governance of sport organisations from governments, media, athletes, fans, sponsors, and other stakeholders.

This has been fuelled by scandals involving corruption and the sexual abuse of athletes and instances of gross mismanagement in international and national governing bodies of sport, among other things. Examples include corruption in FIFA and the International Association of Athletics Federations (now World Athletics), doping in Russian athletics, sexual abuse at USA Gymnastics, and mismanagement and poor governance practices at the Trinidad and Tobago Football Association.

WHAT IS GOVERNANCE?

The conceptualisation of governance and its application to sport varies significantly. However, at its core, governance is about the policies, structures, and processes an organisation uses to develop its strategic goals and direction, monitor its performance against these goals, carry out its statutory and fiduciary responsibilities, and ensure that its board acts in the best interest of the shareholders or members.

SITUATION IN JAMAICA

The findings of a 2021 study, Good Governance in National Governing Bodies of Sport in Jamaica: An Analysis of the Jamaica Olympic Association’s Member Federations – suggest that there is a serious governance deficit in several sports in Jamaica [Unpublished dissertation].

The study measured the level of governance in 12 Jamaica Olympic Association (JOA) member federations using the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) basic universal principles of good governance of the sport and Olympic movement (BUPs): 1. vision, mission and strategy; 2. structures, regulations, and democratic process; 3. highest level of competence, integrity, and ethical standards; 4. accountability, transparency, and control; 5. solidarity and development; 6. athletes’ involvement, participation, and care; 7. harmonious relations with governments while preserving autonomy.

The average score of the 12 JOA member federations across the seven BUPs was 2.57 out of 4, which corresponds to stage two (poor; significant level of improvement is necessary) of a four-stage scale that outlined a pathway to full compliance, inclusive of the conditions that must be met. The highest average score among the 12 members was 3.26, which corresponds to stage three – average to good but some improvement is required – and the lowest 1.79 (stage one – extremely poor; unacceptable). None of the participating organisations achieved a score of four (stage four – fully compliant) with any of the BUPs, suggesting that significant improvement is required across the board, and some organisations require more support than others.

The organisations performed best on BUP1 – vision, mission and strategy – with an average score of 3.04 (average to good but some improvement is required). Overall, the highest average score recorded for an organisation was 3.78 and the lowest 2.11. At the other end of the scale, the 12 national governing bodies of sport (NGBS) struggled with BUP4 – accountability, transparency and control – with an average score of 2.38 (poor; significant level of improvement is necessary). This is particularly concerning, considering that a lack of accountability could foster an environment that facilitates corruption, the concentration of power, and a lack of democracy.

Despite the importance of these findings, it is worth noting that the modest administrative/management structure and size of these organisations might have limited the relevance and applicability of the BUPs. Nonetheless, compliance with the BUPs should remain a priority for these organisations as they grow and become more professional.

GOVERNANCE SUPPORT

On a positive note, the participants appear to be interested in receiving assistance to improve their governance performance. Nine of the NGBS agreed or strongly agreed that the JOA should set up a specific committee to help member federations with governance-related projects. This could mirror the approach taken by the US Olympic Committee, which has a special division that focuses on assisting its national governing bodies with a range of governance issues including compliance-related issues and major scale reforms. The division also provides capacity building support through education programmes.

IS THERE A ROLE FOR GOVERNMENT?

What role does the Government envision for itself in the arena of sports governance considering the importance of sports to Jamaica? Would the Government be willing to develop comprehensive, fit-for-purpose guidelines and resources to assist local sport organisations with governance as governments in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand have done? Such an undertaking could be carried out with the support of stakeholders such as the JOA and the Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica. Would the Government consider making the implementation of good governance practices a mandatory requirement for sports organisations to receive funding from its ministries, departments, and agencies?

A lack of good governance practices can have catastrophic results for sports organisations, including loss of or difficulty attracting sponsorship, decline in membership numbers and participation, missed opportunities, wastage of human and financial resources, and ‘unwelcome’ intervention from external parties. Perhaps one of the reasons why so many local sports organisations struggle to attract financing and often find themselves having to ‘call on or appeal to corporate Jamaica’ for financial support, is the perception or indications of poor governance. It is imperative that sports organisations and relevant stakeholders start to take governance seriously and give it the strategic attention it deserves.

- Don Dobson is a Chevening Scholar and a member of the Board of the Sports Council for Glasgow, Scotland. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.