Generic models of sports governance and their potential for sustainability

This chapter discusses how generic governance models may influence sporting organisations in Australia to improve their prospects for utility and sustainability. It draws on a research study that focused on the sports of bowls, hockey and swimming which examined how governance, and management structures and practices affected a sport’s capacities in revenue generation and sustainability. (The Project Team comprised the authors and Dr. Robert Kidston (Senior Consultant, Governance and Management Improvement, Innovation and Best Practice Program, Australian Sports Commission), Mr. Rob Clement (General Manager, Innovation and Best Practice, Australian Sports Commission), Mr. Stephen Fox (Senior Consultant, Australian Sports Commission). The Project Team acknowledges with gratitude research assistance, literature review, interviews with participants and a report entitled, The Influence of Governance and Management on the Capacity for Revenue Raising by Sporting Organisations, Preliminary Report, unpublished (copy on file with authors), conducted and/or provided by Mr. J A (Jim) Ferguson (Consultant, former Executive Director of the Australian Sports Commission)). The results of the study are considered within the context of two broad questions on sport governance:

1.
Is sport a ‘special case’ in terms of governance in comparison to the broader business sector (including not-for-profit)?

2.
Are there specific models of governance that seem to have more influence in Australian non-profit sports organisations?

The conclusion is that the answer is no to question 1, although sport does have particular special characteristics (some of which may apply to other sectors), and a qualified yes to question 2. This chapter considers the extent to which three generic governance models: traditional model (TM), policy governance model (PGM) and executive led model (ELM) apply to each of the three sports.