Description
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer
View attached explanation and answer. Let me know if you have any questions.Here is the assessment, corrected as you asked. I did the best I could, although some corrections of the professors remain since they are related to citations and references for statements you made, and therefore you have the information to make them.Still, even if the time is over I am at the disposal to correct anything you need and for any observations.I wish you success in your assessment and more than may come.
The main issue with your paper is that you have not fulfilled the task. The task was to recommend
some governance principles for Sport Larsutland. Instead, you seem to have produced a general
discussion of governance, sometimes relating it to sport. Much of what you say in your assignment is
relevant to the task but you must structure it to show the relevance, which you have not done. You
have large sections with headings but these have not been explicitly identified as principles and it is
not evident to me that they are; it may also not be evident to your lecturer. Because you have not
substantially addressed the task, your lecturer may not pass your assignment.
What you have been asked to do is to produce the following structure:
1) Executive summary (200 words) – not present in your assignment, but write it last so that it
reflects what you have actually written.
2) Introduction (200-300 words). Here you should firstly provide the rationale for the report,
which should briefly address the need of Sport Larsutland for a code of sports governance,
what governance is, issues faced in the governance of sporting bodies, why governance is
necessary in sport, and that you will be recommending to Sport Larsutland some key
principles on which to base their code of sports governance. Then, still in the 200-300 words
of the introduction, list the principles (I think a numbered list is ok). You can word this like,
“The key principles of sports governance which you should consider are …”
3) Explain each principle. This requires you to explicitly identify some principles, which you
have not done. Most of your assignment reads as a discussion about governance in general
and rationales for why governance is needed in sport. This should have been briefly done in
your introduction. On page 2 of the task sheet, the lecturer has listed some potential
governance principles. You touch on some of them, like board composition and
accountability, but they are obscured by other discussion and by a lack of structure. Identify
the four to six governance principles in your assignment, like you see listed on page 2. You
structure should then look like:
a. Principle 1: “Z”
i. Define the principle and key words.
ii. Why does this principle represent good governance? What issues in sporting
organizations does it address? Draw here on academic literature.
iii. Is there a case study from an actual sporting organization to show this
principle in action (should be a positive example)? Spend no more than two
or three sentences describing this.
b. Principle 2: “Y”
i. Same structure as above.
c. Principles “X”, “W”, “V”, etc. You will determine how many principles you think
important based on your judgement and your word limit, since you will need about
500 words per principle.
4) Conclusion that summarises the report (much like the executive summary – in fact, write the
conclusion and then change a few words to use it as your executive summary). Conclusions
do not moralise or say any more than has already been said. This 200 words will not require
any references since you won’t be saying anything new.
You urgently need to restructure your work to reflect the structure above. The whole point of the
assignment is to recommend some principles upon which to write a code of governance. Be explicit
about the principles: the assignment is all about them.
Make explicit links: your central topic is the need for sports governance and to develop specific
principles. Anything you write in your assignment must be explicitly linked to this. Use linking words
where necessary like “because”, “therefore”, “furthermore”. Everything must be explicitly linked to
your central topics: if you do not make links explicit, your lecturer will assume that you do not really
understand these links. Use headings that create explicit links. For example, your introduction
should be entitled Introduction. Each principle of sports governance should be titled Principle 1,
Principle 2, Principle 3, etc, with the name of the principle following.
Referencing: One of the three assessment criteria is about your use of academic sources. Your
assignment needs far more references. Most of what you write you will have read somewhere else.
You need to reference where you read these. Do this especially for:
1. Facts that are not general knowledge. Any specific numbers or facts that the average person
does not know should be referenced. This also includes the details of any case studies.
2. Opinions and ideas that are not your own. Many of the ideas in your assignment will have
come from other authors. This is quite OK but you need to reference these.
3. When you write about how things work or situations, you need references. If you assert that
something is or is not working, that there are few or many of something, or any such thing,
you need to reference where you got that information. There are very many points in your
assignment where you say something about how sports governance is or should be without
any references. Your lecturer will ask, “How do you know” or “Where did you get this idea?”
Show him/her by referencing.
If you write a paragraph without a reference, you need to go back and see what you missed. No
paragraph should be without references. A paragraph without references says to your lecturer one
of the following:
a) You read it somewhere but didn’t record where.
b) You think this is how things work rather than relying on research.
c) You made this up (you probably didn’t, but how does your lecturer know this?)
None of this is good.
1
Sport Governance Research
2
Index
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Executive Summary
Introduction
Evolution of governance and leadership approaches within the sport industry and their
impact
Governance Principles
o Integrity
o Diversity
o Vision and Mission
o Accountability and Transparency
o Board Dynamics
o Other principles
Critical reflection on the governance practices and models in contemporary sport
organizations and systems
o Local and Global Issues
Conclussion
References
3
Executive Summary
There is a misconception of governance where it is seen as the management of an organization
through the exercise of power; however it is the visible expression of a set of sociopolitical
processes, tensions between different actors that assume the work of governing (in local,
national, regional, and other types of governing) and most importantly is the recognizable
manifestation of ideological structures from which diverse visions of society are built upon. In
later decades as sports grow like important business with strong effects on a nation’s economy,
many scandals have come forward leaving the audience questioning the function of the
governance in sports.
It is then that the construction of principles inside governance gains attention and importance
inside sports, where different principles are proposed with the condition that each one should be
adapted according to the local context. Some principles are integrity, diversity, vision and
mission, accountability and transparency, board dynamics amongst many other; many of them
brought forward by national governments where sports are an important element in their culture
4
Introduction
Many authors define and speak of governance through metaphors. In ancient Greece, Plato asks
Socrates to describe in a detailed manner the metaphor of a ship’s captain, therefore illustrating
for Adeimantus why the philosopher was to be king instead of a subject. It is discussed how
governance would fail if filled with ambition, causing a failure to understand all the signs of
things around it. With the notion of a ship as a container of souls with a common destination,
puts governance in a perspective revolving around effort by or for a collectivity to mark the
direction and steer towards it (Janda, 2020).
Throughout the body of the following work an analysis of the governance and leadership will
take place, to then be able to analyze the application of governance inside sports and its
organization, commissions and many more. After than five principles that Sports Larsutland will
be defined and proposed for the incorporation into their sports’ governance, these being:
integrity, diversity, vision and mission, accountability and transparency, board dynamics and
more.
5
Governance and leadership approaches within the sport industry and their impact
As a topic of discussion in recent years, governance has gained prominence. In his 2016 work,
Beltramin defines governance as the visible expression of a set of sociopolitical processes,
tensions between different actors that assume the work of governing (in local, national, regional,
and other types of governing) and most importantly is the recognizable manifestation of
ideological structures from which diverse visions of society are built upon. A broad definition of
governance, provided by traditional media, is the management of an organization through the
exercise of power. However, the former definition omits the importance of the actors, their roles,
visions, and responsibility.
Responsibility, rules and policies, communication and transparency all play a role in governance;
however, decision-making is the most important aspect of the process. As said by Janda “The
term governance is now often deployed much more with that sense, suggesting that we must
come to acknowledge and in some degree accept the way in which the organized whole, the
system, functions to govern us” (2020). In a nutshell, it is the process by which a group of people
come together and agree on a course of action. Stakeholders in an organization's governance
process articulate their interests, influence the decision-making process, and then finalize the
actions that will be taken. When it comes to making decisions, decision makers need to take
these inputs into account and be held accountable to the same stakeholders for the outcomes and
the process by which they were produced, the way a company's board of directors sets and
monitors its performance in order to make sure that it achieves its strategic goals, and the way in
which the board acts in the members' best interests. In a broad sense, sport governance refers to
organization, direction, control, budgeting, leading, and evaluating a company or department
whose primary product or service is related to sports or physical activity in way or another.
6
Government, business and industry leaders, academics and civil society organizations are all
involved in formulating, legitimizing, and putting into action sports policies and programs aimed
at fostering excellence and progress in the sport. National sports are a source of pride, joy and
honor for the country and its people thanks to sports governance. Preconditions and prerequisites
for global prestige and reputation are essential in sports governance, as sports excellence strongly
equates with socio-economic, political, and cultural growth and development, making countries a
sports haven for tourists. Additional to this, sport governance envisions a world in which sport is
used to promote a sense of national and international unity as well as peace, solidarity and
reconciliation among people of all nationalities. Students, researchers, and sports industry
professionals must all learn about governance and how it can be implemented as sports
organizations are under increasing pressure to uphold higher standards of professionalism and
accountability in all aspects of their operations.
Serious questions about the governance standards of sports have been raised periodically over
the last several decades. Since a rash of scandals have engulfed the sporting world in recent
years, the public's faith in sports as a vehicle for the advancement of positive social and cultural
values has been seriously undermined (McLeod, Shilbury, et al., 2021; Zeimers & Shilbury,
2020). Governance literature has grown significantly over the past two decades. Because of this,
the term "governance" has become a synonym for a variety of different concepts, leading to a lot
of theoretical and conceptual confusion. A vertical chain of command from continental, to
national, to local organizations places International Non-Governmental Sports Organizations
(INGSOs) as sport's supreme governing body. If a governing body takes a particular position, the
decisions made by any organization under its umbrella will be affected. The decision and actions
become undemocratic (does not follow democratic practices or ideals) because clubs and players
7
who want to participate in competitions are bound by governing bodies' rules and regulations,
often without any ability to influence them for their own benefit, under this hierarchic structure
of command.
There is also the fact that INGSOs have traditionally had a great deal of autonomy in terms of
self-governance. As a result, neither national nor international public authorities have had much
of an impact on how they operate. Since the beginning of the 20th century, the sporting network
has been able to exercise its self-governance without significant interference from states or other
actors, and the sports world generally eschews state intervention in its activities (Chappelet,
2016). As if that wasn't enough, INGSOs, like many other global corporations, have the option of
picking the best regulatory environment for their operations, allowing them to base their global
operations in a more favorable environment around the world.
We've also seen a rise in the importance of stakeholder organizations in sports governance over
the last few years. As a result of all of these changes, the traditional hierarchical self-governance
of sports organizations has been replaced by a more networked governance model. Since the
traditional vertical channels of authority have been replaced by new horizontal forms of
networked governance, there has been a shift. While INGSO self-governance is still widely
regarded as superior, the commercialization of sport has exposed governance failures such as
bribery and corruption, as well as subjected sport to the more rapacious and predatory aspects of
global capitalism. Due to the unique characteristics of the sport industry, researchers argue that
strong governance is particularly important in this context (McLeod, Shilbury, et al., 2021;
Zeimers & Shilbury, 2020). NSFs play a critical strategic and regulatory role in the sport ecosystem, and thus, good governance must begin in these organizations.
8
With these matters being exposed during the past decades, different commissions and
organizations have expressed their concern, and have declared three major pillars for governance
in sports according to three majors issues. These issues are: 1) how the organization defines and
creates strategic goals and direction, 2) how the panel of the organization supervises the
development and performance of the organization to assure the achievement of these goals, and
3) safeguarding that the board acts in the best interest of the members. Therefore, to guarantee a
good governance inside sports, the roles and responsibility of each actor have to be defined
clearly, and also depend on the transparency in which they are presented, identified, scrutinized
and enforced by the governing organization (Lam, 2014).
Non-profit foundations or commissions tend to be governed by a board of directors. It is critical
that boards have the right makeup in order to effectively carry out their governance
responsibilities (McLeod, 2020). The extent to which NSFs around the world are adhering to the
standard of diversity and board size remains unclear, despite greater understanding and
awareness. There have been numerous calls for better governance of sports organizations from
both governments and independent agencies due to a lack of adequate checks and balances on
board decisions, director misconduct, outdated or inequitable governance structures, and outright
failure to govern (Chappelet, 2016). There has been an increasing number of suggested
governance principles and guidelines developed by government, sport organizations, and
independent agencies in response to governance failures, such as democratic
structures/democracy, accountability, transparency, and professionalization.
9
Governance Principles
Before beginning to present the proposed principals for the governance, it is important to
understand that the imposition of universal recommendations of sports governance are not
appropriate or efficient since they often forget the expression of organizational, cultural, or
political priorities at a national or even local level. Secondly, many of the principles come from
the corporate sector, advocating the virtues of control mechanisms and regulations, therefore
cannot always be adapted to smaller sports organisations. Lastly, the sport system at an
international level is complex, reflecting many different realities, that the execution of these
approaches will reinforce particularism and diminish the idea of a harmonized and systematic
monitoring and evaluation process from the top or by an independent body (Mrkonjic, 2016).
Principle 1. Integrity
According to Sport Integrity Australia, “sports integrity means the manifestation of the ethics
and values that promote community confidence in sport”. When speaking about the sports’
integrity, there should exist three primary areas of focus, which are: 1) regulation, 2) monitoring,
intelligence, and investigations, 3) policy and program delivery (includes education, outreach,
engagement, and development).
A way to uphold the highest standards of integrity, the board of the organization should protect
and identify these standards all the time, not only when it comes to the responsibilities of the
board but in a wider environment. Integrity is not only key to the protection of human rights, but
from a corporate point of view, it is key to protecting the legitimacy and reputation of the
organization or commission.
10
This principle is mainly carried out by leading by example, setting out and maintaining ethical
values for the organization and welcoming new opportunities for transparency, ensuring a
competition is strong, honest, and accommodating with relevant rules and procedures of the
activity. Integrity not only comes with social aspects, but also with the mental and physical
wellbeing of the participants.
Through the search of this integrity, many new departments of this organizations can appear, like
Australia’s National Anti-Doping Organisation, where not only the physical wellbeing of the
athletes is looked out for, but also the fairness of the game for every participant. This department
looks for the achievement of fair and honest sporting performance, promote a positive conduct
by the athletes and any actor inside sports, achievement of safe, fair and including environments
at all levels, and enhancing the reputation of sports overall.
Principle 2. Diversity
The board of a sport’s organisation should be a diverse group of people who together can bring
forward different perspectives and experiences to make the process of decision-making easier
and more appropriate for every need and situation. To create a diversity inside the board, there
are questions one may ask according to Australia Sport Organisation (2020):
•
Do we have diversity in age, gender, cultural and linguistic background, and geography,
on the board?
•
How do we ensure our board has the skills needed to implement our strategy and provide
effective oversight to achieve our vision?
•
Are all our directors representing the organisation and its interests and not acting in
favour of personal or other interests?
11
•
How do we promote vacancies to actively seek diversity of directors?
•
Does the director nomination, appointment and election process consider diversity?
•
What opportunities exist to bring diversity to the leadership of our sport (e.g.,
committees or workgroups)?
When boards are diverse, better decisions can be made because a more robust debate created by
diverse perspective and because a mix of different appointed or elected directors can balance
institutional knowledge with fresh perspectives, new participants are attracted to the sports when
opportunities are highlighted outside the board, and lastly, boards can create, adapt or draw on
insights from other sports or even industries during what would be the decision-making process.
Principle 3. Vision and Mission
Creating a clear vision and mission is a key principle for an organisation in any area, even sports.
The creation of this vision and mission is a responsibility of the board inside the commission; it
is responsible for recognizing and assessing the values of the organisation and should work to
achieve its mission and vision through the creation of a strategic plan best suited to preserving
the long-term stability of the organisation (Sport and Recreation Alliance).
Some elements of the vision and mission are the objects and purpose, which are found in the
constitution of the organisation, but tend to be quite broa...