An un­will­ing­ness to mod­ernise the way na­tion­al sport or­gan­i­sa­tions (NSOs) think about lead­er­ship and the evo­lu­tion of their roles and re­spon­si­bil­i­ties is cre­at­ing ob­sta­cles be­tween gov­ern­ment and non-prof­it sports or­gan­i­sa­tions.

Un­less se­ri­ous ef­forts are made to re­move this block­age, ef­fec­tive and ef­fi­cient gov­er­nance and by ex­ten­sion ef­fec­tive and ef­fi­cient re­source man­age­ment, will re­main an il­lu­sion.

In ex­change for gov­ern­ment fund­ing, na­tion­al sport or­gan­i­sa­tions are re­spon­si­ble for high-per­for­mance pro­grammes for elite ath­letes and sport de­vel­op­ment pro­grammes in­tend­ed to in­crease in­volve­ment in or­gan­ised sports.

As such na­tion­al sport or­gan­i­sa­tions are now ex­pect­ed to align with the na­tion­al sports pol­i­cy. The re­la­tion­ship be­tween gov­ern­ment and sports or­gan­i­sa­tions may dif­fer based on the ca­pac­i­ty of sports or­gan­i­sa­tions. The re­la­tion­ship can ei­ther be co­op­er­a­tive, com­ple­men­tary or it could even be con­fronta­tion­al. Goals can be sim­i­lar but the means dis­sim­i­lar.

Many sports or­gan­i­sa­tions in lob­by­ing gov­ern­ment for more fund­ing need to ful­ly ex­plore the im­pli­ca­tions of in­creased gov­ern­ment fund­ing and ac­count­abil­i­ty for the use of pub­lic fund­ing. In­creased gov­ern­ment fund­ing can im­pact the way gov­er­nance is con­duct­ed with­in NSOs.

What are the dom­i­nant ide­olo­gies that shaped the de­vel­op­ment of the na­tion­al sports pol­i­cy?

Sports or­gan­i­sa­tions are op­er­at­ing in an en­vi­ron­ment where tra­di­tion­al val­ues of sports are pro­mot­ed but they are re­quired to be fi­nan­cial­ly self-suf­fi­cient, to re­duce re­liance on gov­ern­ment as­sis­tance.

The ap­pa­ra­tus of the state in most sec­tors - sport is not ex­empt­ed - have fos­tered a re­source de­pen­den­cy re­la­tion­ship that has ham­pered so­cial and eco­nom­ic de­vel­op­ment. In sport, for ex­am­ple, the em­pha­sis on elite sport fund­ing pro­grammes cre­at­ed a sce­nario where oth­er sport pol­i­cy ar­eas and fund­ing sup­port have be­come mar­gin­alised.

The fo­cus on elite sport has forced non-prof­it sports or­gan­i­sa­tions to pri­ori­tise elite sport and high-per­for­mance out­comes at the ex­pense of de­vel­op­ment, in­creas­ing par­tic­i­pa­tion and com­mu­ni­ty sport de­vel­op­ment.

In ad­di­tion, sports or­gan­i­sa­tions have to deal with any num­ber of in­ter­nal is­sues that may im­pact the abil­i­ty of the se­lect­ed sport or­gan­i­sa­tion of­fi­cers to per­form their gov­er­nance func­tion.

Ar­eas such as con­duct­ing meet­ings, the com­po­si­tion of ex­ec­u­tive com­mit­tees and or boards, the process­es that are used. What are the or­gan­i­sa­tion­al val­ues and cul­ture and the re­source ex­change re­la­tion­ships be­tween na­tion­al sport or­gan­i­sa­tions and their stake­hold­ers?

How do ex­ter­nal in­flu­ences im­pact the in­ter­nal work­ings of na­tion­al sport or­gan­i­sa­tions? Is it neg­a­tive and pos­i­tive?

De­ci­sions of great sig­nif­i­cance can­not be left to chance. The thought process must be or­gan­ised and de­tailed. How do na­tion­al sport or­gan­i­sa­tions de­ter­mine which de­ci­sions are rou­tine and which are com­plex and not rou­tine?

Sports gov­er­nance is com­plex and ever-chang­ing, those in charge of the gov­er­nance struc­tures must plan ac­cord­ing­ly.

An NSO with­out an or­gan­ised plan with­out goals, ob­jec­tives, tac­tics, roles and an eval­u­a­tion sys­tem is des­tined to fail.

As an ex­am­ple based on val­ues such as cre­ativ­i­ty, in­no­va­tion, cred­i­bil­i­ty, trans­paren­cy and sus­tain­abil­i­ty. The T&T Olympic Com­mit­tee (TTOC) has made cham­pi­oning gen­der equal­i­ty, en­gag­ing young peo­ple, im­prov­ing lives in T&T through sport and forg­ing a new fu­ture for TTOC and Com­mon­wealth sports crys­tal clear pri­or­i­ties. Suc­cess is not a giv­en but a vi­sion and a roadmap are im­por­tant.

Ed­i­tor's Note

Bri­an Lewis is the Pres­i­dent of the T&T Olympic Com­mit­tee (TTOC) and T&TC­GA and the views ex­pressed are not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of the or­gan­i­sa­tion.