Governance is the Real Integrity Play
PwC’s latest Global Sports Survey signals a shift: integrity is no longer just the right thing to do — it’s a commercial and reputational imperative. Sheena Horgan explores what that means for sporting bodies.
Tag Archive for: board effectiveness
Shifting From Operational Focus to Strategic Leadership
Read about how the nonprofit sector can build strategic capacity when it’s structurally designed to operate transactionally.
What Crises Teaches Us About Governance
Effective governance is not just a box-ticking exercise. It is the foundation for trust and, critically, for funding, which ultimately supports long-term success.
The Board’s Role in Strategy Development
Developing a strategy isn’t just about setting ambitious goals; it’s about how Boards and Executives work together to shape, resource, and oversee them.
Making the most out of your Annual Report
The Annual Report is the perfect medium to showcase your strategy & operations. When done right can be a crucial & high-impact communication tool.
Key Implications: The Charity Regulator’s Strategy 2025–2027
The Charity Regulator’s new Strategy 2025–2027 sets out a vision for a “thriving, trusted charity sector in Ireland”. Shaped by the Charities (Amendment) Act and sector-wide consultation the Strategy signals significant changes in governance, reporting, and stakeholder engagement.
Is Governance Ever ‘Good Enough’?
Written by Sheena Horgan, Director of Advisory Services, 2into3.
There is a certain pragmatic logic in the phrase, don’t let the perfect bully the good, but can this be applied to governance? Especially when the organisation in question is non-profit.
However, socially good the credentials of a charity or organisation, they are no excuse for poor governance. That said, the nature of the sector does require it to balance best practice deliverables, with what is feasible given an organisation’s capacity and resources. Focusing on achieving functional and effective governance, as opposed to striving for perfection, can ensure accountability, transparency, and inclusivity while being adaptable to contextual challenges.
Scoping your Governance Pathway
Good governance in the sector, is less about idealistic behaviour, and more about best practice. It should be realistic, first off recognising resource and capacity constraints, and then planning to address these in a coherent and incremental way that prioritises the most detrimental deficits.
Whilst it’s fair to say that not all governance gaps need to be tackled immediately, it is beholden on Boards to scope, articulate and navigate their organisation’s governance pathway. This likely means breaking down the complex governance agenda into manageable and context-sensitive steps. There will inevitably be trade-offs on what can be achieved now and what might be deferred. Asking the key question, ‘what will this governance task achieve?’, in relation to the organisation’s vision and mission and values, can be a helpful lens when considering which aspects are tackled first.
What is ‘Good Governance’?
A cautionary warning though, agreeing what good or good enough governance entails, may be influenced by the Board’s entrenched views, group think and biases, and even ‘founder syndrome’. There is a reason why independent external Board Reviews are recommended on a regular basis within the Governance Code. Charities that rely only on internally conducted reviews, run the danger of reenforcing and perpetuating poor governance practices. Over the years, I’ve witnessed light-touch evaluations with little depth or robustness to be a genuine assessment. And I’ve seen how “governance” vocally weaponised in the Boardroom to sustain certain positions and viewpoints.
There is an abundance of case studies on poor governance and therefore no excuse for it to be brushed over. But to offer some guidance that might lessen the fear or enormity of “Good Governance” for charities and non-profits, here’s some simple principles of Good Enough Governance:
Pragmatism over perfection
Governance structures should enable good decision making, so they need to be effective in practice rather than in theory. Consider policies and processes in this light, asking are they readable, accessible and implementable
Improvement by increments
Clarify the scope of what’s needed and design a time-line and pathway that allows for continuous progress and iterative governance capacity-building
Form follows function
Governance procedures should reflect, state and deliver their desired outcome e.g., integrity, accountability, etc.
Allow for agility
New and revised governance practices are emerging all the time – take hybrid meetings, DEI and AI as cases in point. Taking an agile approach and adapting where required means having governance on Boards’ radar as well as agenda.
Get in Touch
If you’re seeking governance support, visit our webpage for more information, or contact Sheena Horgan, Director of Advisory Services at sheena.horgan@2into3.com.
4 key words to help you navigate a crisis in your nonprofit
Anyone involved in leading or managing a charity or nonprofit dreads having to deal with a crisis under their watch. Despite adequate planning, we understand that even the best-prepared organisations can face unexpected crises. Whatever the focus of the crisis – funding, financial mismanagement, governance, safeguarding or reputational – here are 4 key words to help you keep a cool head at a stressful time.
1. Anticipation
The best way to manage a crisis is to prevent one occurring in the first place. This is what your organisation’s risk management and oversight practices are in place for: to identify potential risks at all levels of your organisation and putting in place effective mitigation or management structures, policies and practices.
2. Leadership
Crisis management involves quick decision-making and action. Consider establishing a small team of leaders to develop and implement a crisis management plan. Make sure that their remit, responsibilities and reporting relationship to your Board is clear from the outset.
3. Communication
Key to your management of any crisis – and maintaining or re-building trust – will be how you communicate and engage your stakeholders. Develop a stakeholder map and communications plan that covers all your key relationships, particularly employees, volunteers, supporters and funders.
4. Accountability
The best way to resolve any crisis is to ensure that there is appropriate action. It’s not advisable to shy away from acknowledging and investigating the incident, how and why it happened and its impact – and demonstrate accountability by identifying the clear steps that will be taken to redress its impact and prevent it from occurring again.
By prioritising anticipation, leadership, communication, and accountability, you will be in a better position to navigate any crisis that may arise. Remember, a well-prepared organisation is less likely to be caught off guard.
Get in touch
If you require additional support with your crisis management, 2into3 is experienced at supporting organisations to prevent anticipated crises and manage actual crises. Our governance and strategy services can help you to identify and mitigate organisational risks. Or, if the worst should happen, we can support you to effectively navigate through a crisis. In the last year, we have worked with six charities of different sizes to handle a range of funding, financial mismanagement, governance and reputational crises.
For more information, visit our webpage or contact our Director of Advisory Services, Sheena Horgan at sheena.horgan@2into3.com.
5 Reasons to Conduct a Board Effectiveness Review
What comes to mind when you hear the word “review”? If you think of criticism, judgement, or inspection, you might be approaching it the wrong way. A well-conducted Board effectiveness review provides numerous benefits for both your Board and your organisation, and should be seen as a constructive process instead of a fault-finding one.
Let’s look at five reasons your Board should consider conducting a Board effectiveness review.
1. Leveraging the strengths on your Board
Boards are composed of experts in their respective fields. However, in some cases, the skillsets and experience of individual Board members may not be fully recognised and utilised. A strengths-based Board effectiveness review allows you to map the skills and expertise on your Board and ensure they’re being maximised. When Board members engage in tasks that match their experience, it adds to the Board’s overall effectiveness and contributes to broader organisational success.
2. Aspiring towards best practice in governance
Regular Board reviews are a core requirement in the Charity Governance Code, and as a Board effectiveness review is an indication to your stakeholders – including funders, staff, volunteers and beneficiaries, as well as the public – that your Board is dedicated to best practice, transparency and accountability.
3. Adapting to a period of change
Nonprofits are operating in an evolving political and social landscape. This context demands Boards to be proactive and adaptable; capable of addressing challenges as they arise and identifying potential opportunities.
A Board effectiveness review helps to strengthen Board engagement and collaboration, to ensure that its committees have the appropriate composition and established duties, and that processes and structures are consolidated. This facilitates effective decision-making, leadership, and communication when faced with change.
4. Identifying and addressing gaps
So maybe it isn’t all good, and we’d be lying if we said a Board effectiveness review doesn’t consider areas for improvement. By taking stock of your Board’s its structure, dynamics, processes, people, and performance, you have an opportunity to reflect on what perhaps may not be working as well as it could.
What is important here is to focus on what happens next. After hearing constructive feedback from all your Board members, you can create an actionable roadmap to address any gaps and overcome challenges.
5. Returning to your purpose
Let’s return to the core purpose of serving on a Board and take a moment to reflect on the reasons and motivation behind this commitment. We are reminded of the passion, interest, skills, and desire to give back. A Board effectiveness review serves to remind all Board members of these fundamentals, generating a renewed sense of purpose, clarity, and confidence moving into the future.
Interested in learning more?
Engaging an independent and external third-party perspective in a Board review can offer a valuable objective insight, removing any bias and allowing Board members to be honest and transparent with their feedback. We can work with you to tailor a Board evaluation that reflects the nuances and complexities of your organisation, out of which will emerge constructive recommendations that resonate with your Board members’ experiences.
If you are interested in learning more about what a Board review would look like for your Board, please contact our Director of Advisory Services, Sheena Horgan at sheena.horgan@2into3.com.
“We’ve tried – women just don’t want to be on our board” Governance insights for your sports organisation from an international perspective
Authored by Matt McKerrow, Associate Consultant
As a father of toddler boy/girl twins, I am ever vigilant (and regularly reminded by my constituents) to ensure I am equitable in all dealings, particularly those that pertain to distribution of important resources – like strawberries, or marshmallows.
And OK, whilst two for the price of two does require significant extra resources (time, energy, and effort) – one of the great benefits of parenting dual small humans, beyond the constant gender equity check, is the diversity of experiences, learning, and as a result extra knowledge, that comes and will continue to come from raising a girl and boy the same age at the same time. That’s without considering what they’ll learn and gain from each other in the process. Summary: More work, tricky to balance, but increased knowledge, richer experiences, better and fairer outcomes for all, right? That’s my theory anyway.
Therefore, I can’t help but notice some parallels as the Irish sport governing body sector prepares for the pending 40% board gender balance deadline at year end. Recent media reports indicate the Football Association of Ireland (FAI) [1] [2] and the GAA [3] are among the organisations working earnestly towards change facing into the challenge of meeting the deadline – and I am sure there are others.
Here are some key points to consider for making progress towards balancing your board:
S/he got more than me
Whilst those electing sports boards may not prioritise or appreciate the benefit of the additional experience, knowledge and perspective that having a diverse board brings, it does seem implausible they could rationalise leaving 50% of the funding available to their sport on the table. Especially when this would then potentially be available to be re-distributed to other NGBs, their fellow ‘sport system siblings’. Neither of my 3-year-olds would stand for that.
International perspective
Having spent near equal amounts of time during my 20+ year career working in sports governance in Ireland, as in New Zealand & Australia, I am well placed to compare and contrast the Irish context with others I’ve worked in. I’ve also seen/heard some absolute clangers (refer to this article’s title quote, uttered much more recently than you’d imagine) and gathered some fascinating insights from both hemispheres as national sports systems have evolved to tackle the challenges of board gender balance and board independence.
Governance Principles over time
In a federated country, Australian NGBs (National Sporting Organisations or NSOs as they’re known down under) have long grappled with multiple layers of governance existing together – especially when it comes to the issue of independence.
A first version of the Australian Sports Commission (ASC) Governance Principles were published in 2002 and they have undergone several iterations since, most recently in 2023 [4]. The most recent version is explicit regarding board gender balance at 4.3: “The board (…) should be composed in a manner such that no one sex accounts for more than 60% of the total number of Directors”; and regarding independence at 4.4: “The organisation’s directors should be independent, regardless of whether elected or appointed”.
It is of note that whilst the ASC “Governance Code” has existed for decades, with prescription regarding board composition, a Women on Boards report [5] published in 2020 indicated that up to approximately 30% of funded Australian NSOs did not meet the 40% target that is currently prescribed in the ASC principles at that time. The more recently published ASC Governance Standards Benchmarking Report 2023 [6] depicts a decrease in the gender balance standard (4.4) since 2021, and highlights Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (4.2) as one of the “bottom 5” poorer performing standards where Board Independence (4.4) is among the Top 5.
Which country has it right?
By contrast, New Zealand, which is often compared to Ireland, in land and population size, sadly in terms of 2023 RWC performance, and notably examined in sporting system context detail at the 2018 Federation of Irish Sport Annual Conference – could be said to lead the way in board gender diversity. Sport New Zealand reported near 100% compliance (65 out of 66 funded organisations) with its 40% gender target in 2021, three years after publication of its 2018 Women & Girls Strategy and accompanying policy to impose significant penalties for those organisations not in compliance. Sport NZ report an overall improvement in governance and board dynamics as a result. [7]
Fiercely independent?
Speaking of New Zealand, and at the risk of again mentioning rugby, it is relevant to reference the recently published NZ Rugby (NZRU) Governance Review [8]. A highlighted summary contended the governance of the NZRU, the organisation behind the All Blacks and Black Ferns, is not currently fit for purpose, and offered some strong recommendations.
In contrast to the current issues reported in Ireland within the FAI – as they attempt to re-structure their board to meet their MOU obligations to government to have a 50/50 split of “football” and “non-football” directors [9] – the recommendation of the NZRU review is that the NZRU board be completely independent of constituent directors, instead proposing the inception of a Council structure where representatives of rugby’s stakeholder groups would feed into the governance of the organisation on select and specific terms. In that review, an independent director is defined to be one who is “four years (out of the game or) out of positions of influence within the game”. This may be viewed by some as heavy handed.
Rising through the ranks
For sports organisations with federal structures of governance – eg club> county>province>national, as in Ireland, there is an established practice of Presidents/Chairs/board members progressing “up the ranks”. This is often lauded as an achievement and viewed as an acknowledgement or even an entitlement based on time served within the sport. It would be common that upon election to a higher tier the director would resign from their lower tier appointment, but often one occurs directly following the other, with minimal, if any, time away from influential roles in the sport – and certainly not a four-year stand-down.
Nearly there
In late 2022, Sport Ireland indicated that if the current trajectory to that time were to continue, the target of 40% gender balance on NGB boards would be achieved in 2023 [10]. This can only be viewed as a positive development for Irish sport in terms of the greater knowledge, insight and diversity in board decision making, and overall improvement in governance of the sector.
More to come?
One wonders – if Irish sport is emulating, and close behind, our NZ counterparts in achieving board gender balance targets; our government, via their MOU with the FAI, are already seeking to ensure greater independence on sports boards; and the organisation behind arguably one of the world’s greatest sports teams appears set to be governed by a rigorously independent board – could we, and should we, expect to see the Sports Minister and Sport Ireland setting quotas and targets for board independence similar to those for gender balance in the not too distant future?
Insights
Insight 1
Like ‘em or loathe ‘em – quotas are here to stay
- Target quotas are a mechanism that serve the purpose of rallying a sector and allow measurement of progress towards a broader societal aim. Their detractors might say they are crude and tokenistic or may use phrases such as “box-ticking” and “window dressing”. Based on my experience of sports governance across international contexts, they are, and continue to be a necessary tactic to ensure the advantages of board diversity and independence are promoted and achieved for the wider benefit of an organisation’s stakeholders and society at large. With a continuing societal movement towards ESG targets in Ireland and abroad, we are likely to see that measures and quotas will continue across all walks of life, not just sport. Moreover, perhaps board independence is next?
Insight 2
Targeted strategy, investment and quotas are supercharged when leveraged with penalties
- With New Zealand as case in point, sports systems that have moved to significantly penalise non-compliance have experienced greater success than those where principles exist without meaningful consequence. It is encouraging to see the firm line taken by the Sports Minister and Sport Ireland threatening a 50% reduction in the allocation from 2024 for all non-compliant organisations, especially in relation to capital grants as well as program funding. The sports sector will wait with interest to see the ramifications for any organisations not achieving the target in the New Year.
Insight 3
S/he who pays the piper…
- Many sporting organisations have bemoaned the loss of sovereignty that comes from a government funder dictating terms and imposing what might be seen to be heavy handed conditions upon them. “Who are they to tell us how to run our sport?” Whilst you’d expect a sport’s community are best placed to deliver that sport – it is however worth remembering that if s/he who pays the piper calls the tune, a sport seeking investment from government, sponsors, philanthropists and even from their own members and clubs – must take heed of their wishes in putting together their playlist. Furthermore, it’s not unreasonable to expect that diversity, independence and other ESG factors will feature in their requests.
Insight 4
It’s no walk in the park, but the effort is worth it.
- A Richie McCaw quote highlighted in the NZRU Governance Review says: “If you want to be the best in the world, it is going to be hard. If you are not prepared to do that, you are in the wrong room”. Progressing the governance of your organisation so your sport can attract heightened funding and achieve great things in terms of increasing participation, connecting communities, raising profile, and delivering awe inspiring winning performances isn’t easy. But it’s a choice. The process is not glamorous, it takes time, significant effort, considerable energy and you can certainly expect detractors, hurdles, miss-steps, learning experiences, unpopularity, argument, compromise and debate along the way. But that pales in comparison with the benefits as greater knowledge, richer experiences and ultimately the achievement of inspirational outcomes are realised. The final destination is worth enduring the tantrums – just like twin parenting.
Get in Touch
This article is authored by: Matt McKerrow, Associate Consultant, specialising in governance and strategy assignments for NGBs, clubs and other sports organisations within 2into3’s sports sector.
If your sports organisation is interested in gaining support in governance or strategy, contact our Associate Consultant, Matt McKerrow or our Director of Advisory Services, Sheena Horgan at sheena.horgan@2into3.com. For more on our work with sports organisations, visit our page here.
References
[1] Headache for FAI as crucial motion fails to pass
[2] Funding to FAI from Sport Ireland delayed (rte.ie)
[3] Relief as GAA votes for better gender balance on management committee
[4] Australian Sports Commission Governance Standards SGS-final.pdf (sportaus.gov.au)
[5] Women on Boards NSO Board Gender Report (womenonboards.net)
[6] Sport Governance Standards Benchmarking Report (sportaus.gov.au)
[7] Gender-equity-in-governance-sport-nz-3-11-22.pdf (sportnz.org.nz)
[8] NZRGovernance-Review-31-August-2023_web.pdf (nzrugby.co.nz)
[9] Sports minister warns FAI of ‘serious consequences’ if they fail to meet gender balance requirement (msn.com)