Strategic Management in Fiji:- the Case of Fiji Rugby

Moving towards a Culture of Strategic Management in Fiji:- the case of Fiji Rugby

Faculté des sciences de la motricité, Université catholique de Louvain, Belgique MASTER EXECUTIF EN MANAGEMENT DES ORGANISATIONS SPORTIVES EXECUTIVE MASTERS IN SPORTS ORGANISATION MANAGEMENT

MEMOS XVII 2013-2014

“Moving towards a Culture of Strategic Management in Fiji: the case of Fiji Rugby”

“Vers une culture de Strategie d’Entreprise à Fidji: Étude de cas sur Fiji Rugby”

Tutored by Professor Leigh Robinson Affiliation of Tutor

ABSTRACT

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to set out research that aimed to understand how Fiji’s Olympic Sport Organisations (“OSOs”) could move towards a culture of strategic management.

Methodology – Quantitative research was carried out on Fiji’s OSOs using the readiness assessment tool developed by Minikin (2009) and qualitative research into the Fiji Rugby Union (“FRU or Fiji Rugby”) that included semi- structured interviews, the review of several documents and participant observations.

Findings – The quantitative research on Fiji’s OSOs found that: (1) there is a need for strategic management to improve accountability, transparency and competitiveness; and, (2) governance is of a basic to moderate level of development, however, organisational performance is not being adequately evaluated or monitored, if at all, and that generally the practice of strategic leadership and strategic planning is below the Sport Industry Benchmark. The case study of the FRU found that the FRU Strategic Plan was not fit for its purpose; discussed the vision, values and strategic objectives of the FRU; and, proposed a methodology for revising the FRU Strategic Plan. The development of human capacity is the key for Fiji’s OSOs to move towards a culture of strategic management and financial independence from funding agencies. The training and development of those responsible for governance and management at village, school, club, provincial and national levels in the practice, theory and applicable tools of governance and strategic management is at the heart of improving the accountability, transparency and competitiveness of Fiji’s OSOs, reinforcing the public’s trust and confidence in these sport organisations, and sustainably lifting the standard and performance of Fiji’s athletes and national sporting teams.

Research Implications – The research identified suitable frameworks of governance, strategic management and performance management for use by Fiji’s OSOs. The research also developed and proposed a methodology for the revision of the FRU Strategic Plan.

Practical Implications – The development and implementation of a long- term, sport industry-wide training and education program on the governance and strategic management of sport organisations in Fiji, aimed at those responsible for the governance and management of Fiji’s OSOs from village to national levels. The update, revision and validation of the FRU Strategic Plan.

Originality – The paper presents an analysis of the practice of governance and strategic management by Fiji’s OSOs, including a unique case study and insight into the FRU’s practice of strategic management, strategic planning and performance management.

Key words - Strategic Management, Fijian Culture, Vaka i Taukei, Solesolevake, Ke davo donu na vauna, ena qai muri main a Sauta, Talanoa Na Yagona, Fijian way of Life, Fiji Rugby Union or FRU or Fiji Rugby, International Rugby Board (“IRB”), Strategic Planning, Performance Management, Oceania National Olympic Committees (“ONOC”), Fiji Association of Sports and National Olympic Committee (“FASANOC”), Fiji National Sports Commission Decree 2013, Olympic Sport Organisations in Fiji or OSOs.

Paper Type: Research paper.

SOMMAIRE

Objet – L’objet de cette dissertation est d’engager une recherche dont le but est de comprendre comment les comités d’organisation des sports Olympiques (OSO) peuvent évoluer vers une culture de stratégie d’entreprise.

Méthodologie – Nous avons entrepris une recherche quantitative sur les organisations de Sports Olympiques en nous servant de l’outil d’évaluation de disponibilité opérationnelle élaboré par Minikin (2009) et une recherche qualitative sur la Fiji Rugby Union (“FRU ou Fiji Rugby”) qui a comporté des entretiens à moitié structurés, l’analyse de plusieurs documents et les observations de participants.

Conclusions – La recherche quantitative sur les “OSO” Fidjiens a conclu que: (1) il y a un besoin réel de stratégie d’entreprise pour améliorer la responsabilité, la transparence et la compétitivité; et, (2) la gouvernance en général est à un niveau de développement basique ou modéré, cependant, la performance organisationnelle est peu évaluée et pilotée, voire pas du tout, et en général l’usage de leadership stratégique ou de planification stratégique est en dessous de l’étalonnage (standards) de l ‘industrie du sport. L’étude de cas de la FRU a révélé que la planification stratégique n’était pas adaptée à son objectif ; a débattu de la vision, des valeurs et des objectifs stratégiques de la Fidji Rugby Union, et propose une méthodologie pour revoir la planification stratégique de FRU. Le développement du potentiel humain est capital pour les OSO’s Fidjiens afin d’évoluer vers une culture de stratégie d’entreprise et une indépendance financière par rapport aux bailleurs de fonds. La formation et le développement des responsables de la gouvernance et de la gestion au ntniveau du village, de l’école, du club, de la province et au niveau national ; avec la mise en pratique, la théorie, les outils appropriés et la gestion sont au cœur de l’effort pour améliorer la gouvernance, la transparence et la compétitivité des OSOS Fidjiennes. Ceci pour rétablir la confiance et la foi du public envers ces organisations sportives, et en élevant durablement le niveau et les performances des athlètes de Fidji et des équipes sportives nationales.

Les Implications de cette recherche.– Ce travail a identifié des canevas appropriés de gouvernance, de stratégie d’entreprise et de pilotage de la performance pour les OSOs Fidjiennes. Ce travail a aussi développé et proposé une méthodologie pour la révision de la planification stratégique de FRU.

Implications Pratiques—Le développement et la mise en place à long terme d’un programme de formation et d’éducation sur la gouvernance et la stratégie d’entreprise des organisations sportives à Fidji, qui visent les responsables de la gouvernance et de la gestion d’entreprise des OSO’s Fidjiennes; depuis ceux du niveau des villages à ceux du niveau des équipes nationales. La mise à jour, la révision et la validation de la planification stratégique de FRU.

Originalité – La dissertation présente une analyse de la pratique de la gouvernance et de la stratégie d’entreprise des OSO’s Fidjiennes, qui inclut une étude de cas unique et un aperçu de la mise en œuvre de stratégie d’entreprise et pilotage de la performance par FRU.

Mots clé - Stratégie d’entreprise, Culture Fidjienne, Vaka i Taukei, Solesolevake, Ke davo donu na vauna, ena qai muri main a Sauta, Talanoa Na Yagona, le style de vie Fidjien, Fidji Rugby Union or FRU or Fidji Rugby, International Rugby Board (“IRB”), Planification Stratégique, Pilotage de la Performance, Oceania National Olympic Committees (“ONOC”), Fiji Association of Sports and National Olympic Committee (“FASANOC”), Fiji National Sports Commission Decree 2013, Olympic Sport Organisations in Fiji or OSOs.

Type de dissertation: Recherche.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to all of the people and sport organisations that made possible this unique experience and amazing journey towards an Executive Masters in Sports Organisation Management (“MEMOS”) from the Université catholique de Louvain, Belgique, particularly Olympic Solidarity and FASANOC for the financial assistance they provided me.

I especially wish to acknowledge the FASANOC executive board members, particularly Dr Robin Mitchell (President ONOC & IOC member in Fiji) and Reginald Sanday (President FASANOC) for accepting my application to attend the MEMOS program on scholarship. Also, the board members and office bearers of the Fiji Rugby Union, Cycling Fiji and Fiji Triathlon Association for supporting my MEMOS application to FASANOC, particularly Filimone Waqabaca, Chairman Fiji Rugby Union, Dom Sansom, President Cycling Fiji and Andrew Pene, President Fiji Triathlon Association.

Participation in the MEMOS XVII program required the necessary logistical coordination and administrative support of principally the following organisations and individuals who were always kind, considerate and courteous towards me: Professor Thierry Zintz (MEMOS Director), Professor Ian Henry (MEMOS Project Coordinator), Joana Zipser-Graves (Section Manager, NOC Management Programs, Olympic Solidarity), Lorraine Mar (Secretary General & Chief Executive Officer, FASANOC), Lyndall Fisher (Sport Administration Officer & Sport Development Manager, FASANOC), Marta Avila (Chaperone, Guatemalan Olympic Committee) and Peter Brull (Chaperone, Finish Olympic Committee).

I am grateful to my tutor, Professor Leigh Robinson, for her positive attitude and guidance that led to my research topic, title and this paper; Brian Minikin, for his initial support and encouragement; the participants in my research who made this research possible but due to confidentiality restraints I am unable to acknowledge individually; and for the memorable moments, diversity,

i friendship, respect and inspiration of my fellow MEMOS XVII students who work daily and passionately to achieve the Olympic Vision of building a better world through sport.

I must thank Frank Boivert for his expert skill and assistance translating the abstract in this paper from English into French, although Kamil Khoury was generous enough to assist with a basic translation of the abstract.

In conclusion, I must end where it all began. This journey would not have been likely if I did not have a passion for sport, especially rugby union, and had not been coaxed in 2004 by the then President of the Rewa Rugby Union, Ro Vilitati Mataitini, to coach the provincial men’s senior team for two seasons; nominated in 2011 by the Prime Minister of the Republic of Fiji, Rear Admiral Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama, and supported in this nomination by the President of the Republic of Fiji, Brigadier-General Ratu Epeli Nailatikau, to be the independent community director on the board of the Fiji Rugby Union for two years to April 2013; the leadership and guidance of the then FRU Chairman and current Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, Brigadier Mosese Tikotonga from 2011 to 2013; and re-nominated in 2013 by the then Chairman and current President of the Suva Rugby Union, Commander Francis Kean, to be the legal director on the board of the Fiji Rugby Union to April 2015.

ii CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1

1. The Research Problem 1

2. The Research Aims and Question 1

3. Summary of Chapters 2 to 4 2

CHAPTER 2 – LITERARY REVIEW 3

1. Introduction 3

2. Strategic Management 5

3. Performance Management System 6

CHAPTER 2.1 – STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 7

1. Governance reflective of an OSOs culture 7

2. What is strategic management and the planning process? 8 Figure 1 – Strategic Management Process

3. What is the board’s role in strategic management? 9

4. How to prepare for the strategic process? 10

5. Why is strategic management needed? 13

6. What are the benefits of strategic planning? 16

7. Common barriers to strategic planning 21

CHAPTER 2.2 – PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 23

1. The Performance Management Cycle 23 Figure 2: The Performance Management Cycle

2. The Balanced Scorecard 25

3. Strategic Objectives Model 27 Table 1 – Model of Organisational Performance

4. Readiness Assessment Tool 28

CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS 30

1. Introduction 30 iii 2. OSO Assessment 31

3. Case Study: - Fiji Rugby 33

CHAPTER 3.1 – OSO ASSESSMENT 36

1. Quantitative Research Methodology 36

2. Results of RAT Assessment 38 Table 2 – OSOs below Governance Sport Industry Benchmark Graph 1 – FRU, FTA & CF RAT Results compared to Sport Industry Benchmark Graph 2 – OSO Governance Results compared to Sport Industry Benchmark

3. Discussion of RAT Assessment Results 40

CHAPTER 3.2 – CASE STUDY 42

1. Qualitative Research Methodology 42

2. Results of Documentary Review 44 2.1 FRU Strategic Planning Working Document Table 3 – July 2012, Workshop Schedule The Vision Exercise The Mission Exercise Table 4 – July 2012, top five SWOTs Strategic Planning / GAP Exercise Balanced Scorecard Exercise Table 5 – July 2012, Balanced Scorecard Graph 3 – July 2012, Balanced Scorecard Formulation of Strategic Plan and other initiatives 2.2 FRU Strategic Plan, 2012 - 2022 – ‘Leaving a Legacy’ Table 6 – FRU Strategic Plan Vision, Mission and Values Table 7 – FRU’s Strategic Goals 2.3 FRU Development Plan 2014-2015 2.4 Fiji National Sports Commission Decree 2013 2.5 2013 IRB Report 2.6 2012 PWC Report

3. Results of Interviews 58 3.1 Part A – Preparing to Revise (A) Who are the key stakeholders for the FRU, which key stakeholders should be involved in the planning process, and how would you involve the Vanua? (B) How would you go about revising and developing the FRU Strategic Plan? Strategic Planning Committee iv Consultant and Balanced Scorecard Workshops in 4 Divisions (C) How much time is required to revise the FRU Strategic Plan, how long should the plan be for, and when should the plan be reviewed? 3.2 Part B – Revision of the FRU’s Vision, Values and Objects (A) What are the core values for Fiji Rugby? Table 8 – Core values for FRU (B) What should be the vision for Fiji Rugby overall, and for 7s and 15s? (C) How would you achieve this vision or what are the strategic objects of Fiji Rugby? Table 9 – Mission Research Results

4. Discussion of Case Study Results 76 4.1 A diagnosis of strategic planning by the FRU Introduction The FRU strategic documents are not fit for purpose 4.2 Revision of FRU Strategic Plan Table 10 – Proposed Methodology for the Revision of FRU Strategic Plan 4.3 Governance, Constitutional Review, Incorporation, Performance Management

CHAPTER 4 – CONCLUSIONS 93

1. The Fiji Rugby Union 93 Picture 1 - The first committee of the Fiji Rugby Union - 1913

2. Rationale for Strategic Management 94

3. Strategic Management of Fiji’s OSOs 94

LIST OF REFERENCES 98

APPENDICES 101

Appendix 1 - Chronology of Events of Governance and Management 101 Fiji Rugby Union 15s, Governance and Management Fiji Rugby Union 7s Athletics Fiji Netball Fiji National Golf Association of Fiji Boxing Fiji Association

Appendix 2 - FRU Structure, Background and Pictures 104

Appendix 3 - RAT Governance Pillar 1 – Strategic Management Elements 107

v Appendix 4 - Colonial Cup 2004 - 2008 108

Appendix 5 - OSOs RAT Data and Column Graph – 2014 110

Appendix 6 - Stakeholder Interview Questionnaire 112

Appendix 7 - Combined Stakeholder Interview Answers 114

Appendix 8 - The FRU’s 10 Strategic Goals 128

- The FRU’s Balanced Scorecard Quadrants and Strategic Goals 129

vi Chapter 1 - Introduction

1. The Research Problem

1.1 Generally, the public’s trust and confidence in the governance and operation of Fiji’s OSOs is low and expectations of performance pessimistic. There is a degree of justification for the public’s negative attitude towards Fiji’s OSOs, as so many internal governance and management issues have been highly politicized and publicized (see Chronology of Events of Governance and Management Appendix 1).

1.2 For example, the governance and management of Fiji’s largest national federation, the Fiji Rugby Union, over the last decade has been unstable, its operational performance unremarkable, and its financial position precarious or uncertain (see Appendix 1 and the FRU Structure and Background in Appendix 2).

1.3 However, despite these challenges for the FRU, to the credit of the players and those people involved in their development and participation (including families, coaches, villages, schools, clubs, provincial unions and the IRB), the FRU’s national athletes and teams continue to punch well above their weight on the international scene.

2. The Research Aims and Question

2.1 The purpose of this paper is to set out research that aimed to understand how Fiji’s OSOs could move towards a culture of strategic management.

2.2 The research focused on how to move Fiji’s OSOs towards a culture of strategic management, by quantitatively investigating the governance capacity of Fiji’s OSOs, as context for further qualitative research into the Fiji Rugby Union as an exemplar of how to move Fiji’s OSOs towards a culture of strategic management.

1 3. Summary of Chapters 2 to 4

3.1 Chapter 2 – Literary Review: contained a review of literature relevant for research purposes. Chapter 2.1 – Strategic Management: began with a brief discussion of governance, outlines the concept of strategic management and a five-step process developed by Camy & Robinson (2007, p.62, Figure 1). Chapter 2.2 – Performance Management System (“PMS”): outlined the concept of performance management and a four-step process by Robinson & Palmer (2010, p. 127, Figure 2).

3.2 Chapter 3 – Methodology and Results: outlined the theoretical and methodological procedures used for research purposes, the readiness assessment tool developed by Minikin (2009), documentary review and semi-structured interviews. Chapter 3.1 – OSO Assessment: outlined the quantitative research methodology used on OSOs, the results of the RAT assessment, and presents and discusses the RAT assessment results. Chapter 3.2 – Case Study: outlined the quantitative research methodology used on the FRU, the results of a documentary review and semi-structured interviews, and presented and discussed the case study results.

3.3 Chapter 4 – Conclusions: outlined the conclusions reached from the research and suggested how Fiji’s OSOs can move towards a culture of strategic management.

2 Chapter 2 – Literary Review

1. Introduction

1.1 A review of literature on governance, strategic management, and performance management was undertaken and informed quantitative research into Fiji’s OSOs and qualitative research into the Fiji Rugby Union.

1.2 The literary review identified the following governance and management tools for research purposes and for the use of management in Fiji:

(a) The readiness assessment tool (Minikin, 2009) was useful for research into the strategic management capacity and development of Fiji’s OSOs;

(b) The five-step strategic management process (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 62, Figure 1) was useful for research into the strategic management activities of the FRU;

(c) The four-step performance management process (Robinson & Palmer, 2010, p. 127) was useful for research into the performance management activities of the FRU.

(d) The Contingent and Standards governance framework (Mowbray 2011) (“CaS”) is useful for Fiji’s OSOs because the framework addresses poor governance in sport, is non prescriptive, adaptive to the changing needs of sport organisations as they move around the governance lifecycle, applies to large and small OSOs, reflects the culture of a sport and those involved in it, and is multi-dimensional.

1.3 The literature is crowded with different models for both strategic management and performance management, like for example: the four-phase strategic planning processes defined by Sport and Recreation New Zealand (2004, p.8) and the Australian Institute of Company Directors (“AICD”) (2014, p.14), which were considered conceptually inaccurate for the purposes of the research;

3 and the holistic performance management methods, the balanced scorecard framework, which was considered far to complicated in general and not suitable for use in Fiji, the strategic objectives model (Winand, Zintz, Bayle and Robinson, 2010), which may be suitable for use in the Fiji context, and the readiness assessment tool (Minikin, 2009), used for research into the strategic management capacity and development of Fiji’s OSOs.

1.4 The accountable, transparent and competitive governance and management of a sports organisation is totally dependent on the quality of the people that participate an OSO, combined with synergy, trust and communication that exists between the board and executive teams of the organisation or the office bearers and volunteers of the organisation.

1.5 Strategic management by a sport organisation involves high-level strategic planning, aimed at achieving a strategic advantage, and the formulation of a strategic plan for achieving long-term strategic goals and objectives, as well as, the implementation of a strategic plan and allocating resources necessary for the carrying out of these strategic goals or objectives.

1.6 At an operational level of a sport organisation, the goals and objectives established in a strategic plan are each further refined into separate operational strategic objectives and plans that are implemented and individually evaluated on a regular periodical basis for performance. This performance management process, system or cycle is critical to achieving the vision of a sports organisation.

1.7 There two factors for any sport organisation that are integral to the success of any performance management system, as follows:

(a) The staff must have an attitude or culture that is supportive and accepting of performance management, making sure that procedures and operations actually meet targets; and,

4 (b) The effective setting of performance measurements and targets that are measureable, achievable, specific, time-specific, ends not means, and ranked.

2. Strategic Management

2.1 Chapter 2.1 - Strategic Management, is divided into 7 Sections, and for the purposes of the research into the FRU this Chapter is focused on how to prepare for the strategic process (Section 4), why strategic management is needed (Section 5), and the benefits of strategic planning (Section 6).

2.2 These 7 Sections can be summarized, as follows:

(a) Section 1 - Governance reflective of an OSOs culture, briefly discusses governance and the CaS governance framework;

(b) Section 2 – What is strategic management and the planning process, defines strategic management and presents the Camy and Robinson (2007) five-step model of strategic management;

(c) Section 3 – What is the board’s role in strategic management, discusses the board role in formulating a strategic plan, managing strategy and the performance of an OSO.

(d) Section 4 – How to prepare for the strategic process, discusses how an OSO can formulate a detailed political and administrative plan for the revision or development of a strategic plan by simply answering the following four questions (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 62):

1. Why do you need a strategic plan?

2. How will you go about developing this plan?

3. How much time do you have to carry out the strategic planning

5 process?

4. What budget do you have for the strategic planning process?

(e) Section 5 – Why is strategic management needed, discusses the role, rationale and reasons for developing a culture of strategic management for Fiji’s OSOs.

(f) Section 6 – What are the benefits of strategic planning, discusses the benefits of developing a culture of strategic management.

(g) Section 7 – Common barriers to strategic planning, puts the problems faced by Fiji’s OSOs into context, by presenting research into the state of strategic planning by Sport and Recreation New Zealand (2004, p. 7), which characterized strategic planning in the sport and recreation sector in New Zealand.

3. Performance Management System

3.1 Chapter 2.2 - Performance Management System, is divided into 4 Sections, each section outlining one of four selected models relevant for the purposes of research into Fiji’s OSOs and the FRU, particularly the readiness assessment tool (Minikin, 2009) used to evaluate the governance capacity of Fiji’s OSOs (Section 4), the balanced scorecard framework used by the FRU to develop its current strategic plan (Section 2), and the four-step strategic performance process (Camy & Palmer, 2010, p. 127) recommended for use by Fiji’s OSOs (Section 1).

6 Chapter 2.1 – Strategic Management

1. Governance reflective of an OSOs culture

1.1 Whether or not the standards, policies or rules of an OSO are implemented or developed; good governance in Fiji is totally dependent on the quality of the people that participate and are involved in it, combined with the synergy, trust and communication that exists between the board and executive teams of the organisation (Mowbray, 2011, p. 39).

1.2 According to Mowbray (2011, p. 26), there is no model of governance that will transform a poor-performing organisation into a pillar of high performance. The performance of the board is almost entirely dependent on the people involved; models or frameworks can only help them by providing tools to work with.

1.3 The CaS governance framework provides an alternative for OSOs dissatisfied with their current structure and who do not want to adopt models that are not reflective of the culture of the sport or its constituents or the volunteers that govern it. Boards can attain a level of excellence through the application of the CaS framework that will reflect the success of the organisation.

1.4 The development of the CaS framework was reinforced by the need to develop a governance framework that adapted to the changing needs of sport organisations as they move around their governance lifecycle and was built upon an extensive and thorough review of governance literature, highlighting the general dissatisfaction of the existing Carver (1997) model of governance in sport, the incidents of poor governance in sport and significant country-specific research into the governance of sport organisations.

1.5 The CaS framework allows OSOs to adapt their governance style and practices dependent on their position within their governance lifecycle. The CaS framework recognizes that organizational effectiveness is multidimensional and is not reducible to a single factor. The CaS framework’s

7 flexibility allows the development of best practice governance standards in smaller OSOs where by necessity the interaction between the CEO, stakeholders and staff may need to be more interactive due to factors of size and resources.

1.6 The non-prescriptive nature of the CaS framework allows organisations to develop governance standards that account for the different governance requirements associated with the recreational and elite or competitive elements of a sport. For example, the research highlighted the conflicts that occur between these sectors in a number of sports but specifically in cycling where the reality is that, for the great majority of participants, their participation does not require the help or services of their NF.

1.7 More information on the CaS governance framework is freely available online at www.spportgovernance.org. For the reasons outlined above, the CaS governance framework is suitable for use by Fiji’s OSOs.

2. What is strategic management and the planning process?

2.1 Strategic management can be defined as the implementation of a strategy, which is a plan for achieving long-term goals and objectives and allocating resources necessary for carrying out these goals (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 62).

Figure 1 – Strategic Management Process

8 2.2 Strategic management for an OSO can be represented as a simple five-step process, as outlined in Figure 1 above, which needs to focus on the vision and mission of an OSO (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 62).

3. What is the board’s role in strategic management?

3.1 In summary, although not all directors are responsible for formulating the plan, the board of an OSO is responsible for the following (AICDs, 2014, p. 51, V1):

(a) Deciding its strategy, mission and values.

(b) Ensuring there is a strategic plan and approving it.

(d) Reviewing and agreeing the business, action or operational plan and annual budget.

(e) Monitoring the achievement of the strategic plan, the business, action or operational plan and the budget outcomes.

(f) Monitoring risks faced by the organisation.

3.2 Thus, the board’s responsibility is to understand, test and endorse an organisation’s strategy, not necessarily to propose strategy (Owen, 2003).

3.3 Generally speaking, it is for management, rather than the board, to propose strategy. This is not an impediment to the board taking the initiative in an appropriate case. But management is best able to dedicate time to strategic thinking and is likely to have greater industry knowledge and experience. The final decision on approval of a strategic plan rests with the board, as the board is ultimately responsible for the organisation’s performance (AICDs, 2014, p. 15).

3.4 In monitoring performance, the board needs to measure management proposals by reference to the endorsed strategy, with any deviation in practice being challenged and explained (Owen, 2003). A good board will intervene if the strategy starts to fail. Whilst senior members and the CEO of an OSO play critical roles in setting strategy the success of the process and planning is dependent on the initial and continued political support of key stakeholders, including an OSO’s constituent members.

4. How to prepare for the strategic process?

4.1 The quality of preparations for strategic planning and the quality of planning throughout the strategic process to a large extent determines whether or not conditions are favourable for implementing the strategy developed and the success of that strategy.

4.2 Engaging in strategic management requires formulating a detailed political and administrative plan that addresses, at a minimum, the following four questions (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 62):

(a) Why do you need a strategic plan?

(b) How will you go about developing this plan?

(d) What budget do you have for the strategic planning process?

4.3 To develop a plan, first, a decision has to be made as to what steps and methods are going to be employed to gather information and who will be involved in the planning effort, including whether or not to engage a consultant to guide and facilitate the process. Establishing a method is important so as to know who will be involved and at what stage they will be involved.

10 4.4 Second, a decision as to the time frame for the process so that you know when stakeholders have to be available. Performing a strategic diagnosis of an OSO and defining a strategic plan are usually long processes. Thus, it is helpful to define how much time is available to develop or revise the strategy, which may include:

(a) A quick exercise, such as a week, in which case it will only be possible to make revisions to an existing strategy;

(b) A relatively short process, such as 1 month, in which case diagnosis and strategy development will be compressed; or

4.5 As a general rule of thumb, one should plan for 3 to 6 months to analyse and develop a new strategy because most OSO strategies require a collaborative approach.

4.6 Where a long planning process is required or an OSO has been through a serious crisis or series of crises the support of the senior members of the OSO and its constituent Council or General Assembly is essential.

4.7 Where the time available for strategy development is short, such as 3 months, the committee responsible for its development may approve the procedure and then communicate the information and explanation to the management team and member organisations.

4.8 According to Chappelet (2010, pp. 58-59) drawing up the first strategic plan should not take less than three months or more than twelve. The idea is that the preparation of this first plan should not be endless, and nor should it be a rapidly completed superficial exercise. Time should be taken for the plan to be widely discussed within the organisation and approved by its governing body. Then the plan must be implemented and its effects evaluated.

4.9 Finally, it is useful to establish a budget for developing the strategic plan. This budget should include financial and administrative costs, such as the costs of data collection and human resources, including time dedicated by Board members and managers. If feasible, the budget may also include the cost of an outside consultant.

4.10 Chappelet (2010, pp. 58-59) says that in addition to budgeting for the time and human resource required, it is also essential to draw up a financial budget for developing the first plan in order to finance the cost of necessary studies, to collect information, and to possibly bring in consultants. Some funding could be set aside for brainstorming sessions or in order to cover meals or other incentives for those contributing to the process, whether volunteers or employees. If no such budget is possible, the strategy development process runs the risk of being seen as unimportant. Once launched, strategic management falls within the organisation's normal administrative costs.

4.11 By the end of this planning stage, an OSO is ready to begin the process of developing its strategic plan and should have political support, with the approval of senior members of the Organisation or the Board and its constituent Council or General Assembly, for the following:

(a) Rationale for the strategic planning process;

(b) Methodology for achieving the plan;

4.12 The strategic plan of an OSO may be formulated by answering the following four questions, as follows (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 62; AICDs, 2014):

(a) What is our situation or where are we now – current performance?

(b) What are our objectives or where do we want to be – vision, mission and values?

(d) Have we achieved our objectives or how do we know we are going or getting there - monitoring?

5. Why is strategic management needed?

5.1 Clarifying the role of strategic management in an OSO is an essential and important first step to ensure that all stakeholders are aware of the importance and need for the development and implementation of a strategic plan and are committed to helping with its development, if required (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 63).

5.2 The IOC considers the development of strategy at the highest level of an organisation aligned to its vision as the first basic universal principle of good governance and requires Olympic International Federations to have a four-year strategic planning process.

5.3 In the Fiji context, the following internal and external reasons for developing a strategic plan are relevant for both small and large OSOs:

Internal to OSO

(a) Vague objectives, poorly defined roles and responsibilities of participants, a lack of clear cohesion amongst activities and a need to clearly define priorities.

(b) To use as a unifying tool for management and internal communication.

13 (c) To encourage staff and volunteer involvement and a more effective collaboration between the two types of workers.

External to OSO

(a) The need to demonstrate good governance and to communicate goals, values and key objectives to partners.

(b) To show any sponsors and funding agencies how the OSO will use its resources in general and particularly the resources provided by these organisations.

(c) Such plans are a useful tool for dealing with the increasing cost of high- performance sport. A strategic plan will allow an OSO to plan the efficient and effective use of its resources, which is particularly important where an OSO operates in an environment of dwindling public funding for sport.

(d) The plan is a communication tool that can be used to reinforce an OSOs image and the legitimacy of its activities to its public and private partners.

5.4 The development of a strategic plan by an OSO is often driven by external reasons. The literature review sourced the following summary of reasons for an OSO to strategically plan:

(a) In response to the diversification of sport practice and the commercialisation of sport and greater competition between the traditional and new sports in terms of gaining or retaining athletes, fans, television viewers and/or sponsors (Chappelet, 2010, p. 56).

(b) To survive in a constantly changing environment and meet the particular challenges it is facing (Minikin, 2011, p. 44-56).

(d) To achieve competitive advantage and strategic success (Robinson, 2013 L2, p. 3).

(e) To improve its ability to perform a coordinated set of tasks and skillfully utilize its resources to achieve its goals (Robinson, 2013 L2, p. 3).

(f) To produce a strategic plan that will guide its development and provide a framework for the day-to-day operations of the organization (Minikin, 2011, p. 47).

(g) To address internal factors such as vague objectives, poorly defined roles and responsibilities of participants, a lack of clear cohesion amongst activities and a need to clearly define priorities. The strategic plan should be a unifying tool for management and internal communication. It should encourage paid staff and volunteer involvement and a more effective collaboration between the two types of workers (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 63-64; Chappelet, 2010, p. 58- 59).

(h) Often to address external factors, such as the need to demonstrate good governance and to communicate goals, values and key objectives to partners. A plan will also show partners that you are doing everything you can to fulfill these goals, values and objectives. In many cases, a strategic plan is required by funding agencies to show how you will use the resources they give you. Such plans are also a useful tool for dealing with the increasing cost of high-performance sport; a strategic plan will allow you to plan the efficient and effective use of your resources. This is particularly important if you operate in an environment of dwindling public funding for sport. Externally, the strategic plan is a communication tool that you can use to reinforce the

15 organisation’s image and the legitimacy of its activities to your public and private partners (Camy & Robinson, 2007, p. 63-64).

(i) Also to address external factors where a sport organisation is losing members, its services are not attractive, loss of interest on the part of fans, financial difficulties, or even increased competition from similar organisations or new entrants to its market (Chappelet, 2010, p. 58-59).

6. What are the benefits of strategic planning?

6.1 An OSO will benefit from strategic planning by identifying and building a broad framework that allows it to achieve its mission and vision, matching its strengths to available opportunities that arise within its internal and external environment, providing a set of guidelines that guide it in the pursuit of its mission and objectives (Boyd, 2005; Minikin, 2011, p. 46).

6.2 Minikin (2011, p. 45-46) sets out a number of benefits of strategic planning sourced from Chappelet and Bayle (2005) and Gollwitzer (1996), as follows:

(a) Increasing the awareness of the operating environment both within the organization and outside of it. By understanding the forces that are working within and around the organization, volunteers have a better chance of becoming more efficient and more productive with the limited but valuable time that they are contributing.

(b) Coping with change in the environment. As an organization undertakes projects that develop areas of its operating environment, it is likely that these changes will impact other areas of the organization. For example, running a new competition may require the addition of new personnel and access to new facilities. This in turn may impact on the financial procedures and the skills required of volunteers, which will in turn require additional training and preparation and a better communications strategy. Effective planning will assist the organization with these rolling changes.

(c) Exerting more control over the organization’s destiny. This means members can decide where they want the organization to be in the future and how to get there. This will provide members with a clear picture of their own roles and responsibilities and enable more effective contribution to the common goal by the members as a whole.

(d) Improving the financial performance of the organization. This engenders confidence by assuring staff and volunteers that monies are being handled responsibly and spent effectively. An organization in a healthy financial position is more likely to provide for the needs of its members.

(e) Improving organizational control and coordination of activities. This will reduce duplication of effort and create an environment that members are happy to operate in. A sign that governance is not achieving this is when a “them and us” mentality develops within the organization, resulting in a lack of respect for decision-makers and the administrative processes that exist within the organization.

(f) Providing a sound platform for decision-making and forming other plans. This should be based on an effective monitoring and evaluation process that provides information accurately and in a timely fashion to the decision-makers.

6.3 The SPARC Guide to Strategic and Business Planning (2004, p. 6) states that a good planning approach will benefit an OSO, as follows:

(a) By enabling an organisation to better understand the dynamic environment and many pressing challenges it must face, and to make strategic choices, establish a clear direction and gain stakeholder support.

(b) By being a mechanism by which an organisation ensures alignment

17 between its desired direction and the resources and activity necessary to achieve the desired strategic outcomes.

(c) To avoid poor planning, which puts an organisation at risk of making poor decisions and operating in a reactive rather than proactive manner.

6.4 The process of strategic planning should ensure an OSO focuses on activities that meet its objectives and which it has the capacity to deliver (Robinson & Minikin, 2011, p. 223).

6.5 The benefits of strategic management to Fiji’s OSOs, include being able to address the following challenges:

(a) Poor infrastructure - NFs in Oceania, including Fiji, lack key infrastructure for sports development from the grassroots to elite level (Rapilla, 2008, p. 10).

(b) Avoid funders overlooking grass roots development and sustainable activities - The influence of funders is a key issue for NFs in Fiji and other developing countries in Oceania and parts of Asia, where they are heavily, if not totally reliant on external funding (Robinson & Minikin, 2011, p. 220) from organisations like Olympic Solidarity, FASANOC, the IRB, the Fiji National Sports Commission or corporate sponsors.

The expectations of these external organisations may unreasonably or detrimentally influence the formation of an OSOs structure and organisational priorities, and lead these sport organisations to adopt objectives, strategies or programs that meet the criteria set by these external agencies rather than what is more appropriately required by the organisation itself. This in turn may have an adverse impact on the establishment of sustainable activities by the organization, including investing heavily in elite sport at the expense of grass roots development and participation for all. In other words, by offering funds for a specific

18 area of development only, funding agencies may be encouraging, or even force NFs to undertake projects that they are not ready for, simply because they require funds (Kikulis, 1992), or to adopt programs that are not so relevant to them (Skinner, 1999, p. 175).

(c) Encourage the allocation of adequate resources to the development of an OSOs capacity, sporting systems, strong competitive structures and infrastructure as opposed to being drawn away to support elite programs - The literature emphasizes the need for OSOs to direct their resources toward the development of organizational capacity, sport systems, strong competitive structures and developed infrastructure, for example Rapilla (2008, p. 9) in her assessment of NFs in Papua New Guinea said that it “would appear that successful performance in Olympic sport is an outcome of a development system. Therefore the challenge for all Olympic sport organisations is to get their infrastructure right to ensure an outcome of successful performance”.

This statement is supported by an earlier and comprehensive study of New Zealand sport organisations from which it was concluded that “sports with a strong competitive structure at all levels are likely to be internationally successful at the elite level. Strength in domestic structure due to the number and enthusiasm of participants creates athletes who are mature and competition hardened as they move to international competition (NZOCGA, 1994, pp. 7-13).”

In addition, a recent study examining sport policy factors leading to international sporting success (SPLISS, 2006) supported the view that success in sport on the international stage requires a complex integration of support programs and infrastructures. This may be in conflict with the pressure of managing sport development priorities as vital resources are drawn away from development to support elite programs. The pursuit of both goals is very difficult, as each one demands different delivery systems and technology (Papadimitriou, 2007, p. 572).

The external pressure to take part in competitions at various levels or to make use of offered programs of support are often in conflict with the internal needs of OSOs, such as organisational structure, human and physical resource requirements and communications. Adding to this conflict can be personal influences and priorities set by personal agendas.

For example, choosing to build new administrative headquarters (meeting the needs of the administrator), over the establishment of a much needed training facility for the athletes (meeting the needs of the athletes).

Furthermore, if planning is used for the primary purpose of obtaining funding opportunities as opposed to assessing the priorities for development, the result might be a further deterioration in the capacity of the sport organisation to deliver appropriate programs and services to its members.

(d) Avoid a culture of short cuts and consumption, shooting for the stars, but ending in disappointment - According to Minikin (2011, p. 44) the temptation for many sport organizations is to aim straight for the top, to “shoot for the stars” without establishing a proper base. The end result is usually disappointing and it will either have cost a lot of money and left very little to show for it, or achieve success without having the capacity to be able to capitalize on it. Some symptoms of this might include:

(1) Establishing a national squad before establishing a national competition framework in the sport;

(2) Spending vital development funds on sending athletes to where they can access facilities for training and competition because

20 they are not available at home; and,

(3) Employing foreign coaches or human resources at rates well beyond the economic viability of the organization in a bid to gain early success.

Taking short cuts to achieve aspirations that the organization is not ready to take on may retard growth of the organization and ultimately compromise the overall development of the sport itself.

Many sport managers are in favor of gambling on a results-based outcome, in the hope that the outcome will stimulate the development required. The problem with this approach, however, is that if the organization does achieve a successful outcome, it might not be in a position to take advantage of the opportunities for development that arise from it.

Chappelet (2010, p. 69) encouraged a change in culture from simply consumption to results and performance, and said that:

Such a systematic approach offers those in charge of organisations better control. It makes it possible to move from a culture whereby the resources available are simply consumed to one of results and performance. It is not only a case of being efficient by using the means available to the organisation sensibly, but also of being effective in spending or deploying the resources according to deliberately chosen objectives that fully reflect the organisation's vision and mission. In other words, doing the right things, not only doing the things right!

7. Common barriers to strategic planning

7.1 The SPARC Guide to Strategic and Business Planning (2004, p. 7) also charaterised strategic planning in the sport and recreation sector in New Zealand, as follows:

(a) Poor preparation. Limited analysis of the external environment, current capability and stakeholder expectations.

(b) Time pressure. The planning process is often squashed within a busy operational environment. There can be very little time to properly examine strategic possibilities.

(c) Focus on ‘business as usual’. Plans often focus on doing what we’ve always done but perhaps aiming to do them a little better. There can be an unwillingness to think ‘outside of the square’ and respond to the realities of the external environment.

(d) No supporting resource plan. A ‘stretch’ vision may be set but there is often no resource plan for people, finance and infrastructure to support the vision. Thus the feasibility of the plan is called into question.

22 Chapter 2.2 – Performance Management System

1. The Performance Management Cycle

1.1 The performance management process operationalizes the strategic planning process. The strategy and planning activities set the objectives and establish the plans that the performance management process must manage and deliver on (Robinson & Palmer, 2010, p. 127).

1.2 The performance management process set out in Figure 2 aims to answer the following three practical questions and more:

(a) How do you know how your organization is doing if you don’t have accurate performance evidence?

(b) How do you know what to aim for if you don’t know what your current position is? or

1.3 A basic (unrefined to an applied level) representation of the performance management process is set out in Figure 2 (Robinson & Palmer, 2010, p. 127).

Figure 2: The Performance Management Cycle

Set objectives

Evaluate the operations Develop plans

Put plans in to operation

1.4 The performance management process begins with the objectives established during the strategic management and planning process represented in Figure 1 by the setting of specific strategies and objectives to achieve the overall master objective.

1.5 The objectives need to be measurable, achievable, specific, time-specific, ends not means, and ranked (MASTER). Performance for sport organisations can mean different things depending on what objectives are specified. Robinson and Palmer (2010, pp. 71-72) list 11 non-mutually exclusive aspects of performance, including economy, effectiveness and efficiency.

1.6 Performance indicators should be constructed from empirical data and repeated at time intervals or compared with different organisations. Targets are typically quantitative and give objectives specificity, because they are precise statements of what is to be achieved, and by when. They support the process of performance management because they are the key reference points against which improvement can be monitored. Benchmarking helps to compare similar organisations and to put an organisations performance into perspective.

1.7 Whatever performance management framework is utilized by an OSO Robinson and Palmer (2010, p. 134) highlighted two factors that are integral to successful performance management, as follows:

(a) Culture of Performance - First, it is important for the organisation to have a culture that supports performance management. An effective performance management framework is more than just a system of controlling the operations of an organisation; it must also encourage staff to consider performance management as a fundamental way of doing things. Staff is the key to making sure that procedures and operations actually meet targets and thus, the organisation’s culture has to support this process.

24 (b) Effective Measurement - Second, in order to be effective, performance management systems must involve effective performance measurement and target setting. This is perhaps the key to making performance management effective, because if measures of performance are not established, then managers are not in a position to assess how they are doing, or to be able to take corrective action if required. In addition, it is important to set levels of performance, or targets that are to be achieved, as this aids comparison with other organisations and with previous performance.

2. The Balanced Scorecard

2.1 Underpinning the Balanced Scorecard method is the establishment of a number of performance measures associated with targets in order to assess whether performance meets expectations. The original scorecard has been through many revisions and now has four main components, as follows:

(a) Destination Statement - A destination statement which sets out what the organisation will look like at a defined point in the future assuming that the current strategy has been successful;

(b) Activities and Outcomes - The strategic plan segmented into activities and outcomes;

(d) Measures and Targets – A set of definitions for each of the measures selected to monitor each of the strategic objectives, including targets. (Targets can be thought of as a standard or level associated with the performance indicator. For example, performance in a league is the performance indicator and second position is the target to be achieved).

2.2 The Balanced Scorecard encourages managers to focus on four areas of their organisation’s operations, as follows:

(a) The Customer - managers need to ask what existing and new members value from the service. In addition, they need to identify potential members and find out why they are not using the service. This area encourages the identification of measures that answer the question "How do customers see us?" For example, an assessment of member satisfaction would allow a club to answer this question. This allows targets that matter to stakeholders to be developed and incorporated into the performance management system;

(b) Internal - this considers the operations of the organisation in order to identify what has to be achieved to meet objectives. The purpose of this is to improve internal processes and decision-making and encourages the identification of measures that answer the question "What must we excel at?"

(c) Innovation and Learning - this requires managers to identify areas of improvement and to learn from past performance and encourages the identification of measures that answer the question "Can we continue to improve and create value?" This enables the organisation to identify its competitive position and to identify strengths and weaknesses that need incorporating into the planning process;

(d) Financial - managers are required to consider the financing of the organisation in the context of creating value for stakeholders. Although finance has traditionally had a set of well established performance measures and targets, the choice of which to use needs to be determined in consultation with key stakeholders.

2.3 The scorecard is balanced as managers are required to think in terms of all four areas of performance and to measure their performance in these areas. A key feature of this approach is that it considers both the internal and external aspects of the organisation, in particular customers. In addition, it should be

26 related to the organisation’s strategy as it considers operations in the light of organisational objectives. Finally, it focuses on both operational and social objectives of the organisation, which is important to stakeholders of sport organisations.

2.4 This approach to performance management is flexible in that the process of deciding what should be the focus of the scorecard should allow managers to clarify the strategy of the service.

2.5 However, like all management techniques, problems can arise in the implementation of the Balanced Scorecard, as follows:

(a) First, there may be a problem with conflicting measures. Some measures such as increases in gold medals and cost reduction naturally conflict. The balance that will achieve the best results must be determined after consideration of the service’s objectives.

(b) Second, performance measurement is only useful if it initiates appropriate management action. There is little point in developing a set of measures for the four aspects of the scorecard, if managers are not going to react to the information that these generate or cannot control the outcome.

(c) Finally, managers need to have the skills to be able to interpret the information that the Balanced Scorecard generates.

3. Strategic Objectives Model

3.1 Winand, Zintz, Bayle and Robinson (2010) developed a model for measuring the organisational performance of NFs from the French speaking community of Belgium.

3.2 The model considered objectives distributed among five main dimensions: sport, customer, communication and image, finance and organization, which

27 were measured by quantitative performance indicators.

3.3 The model measures the strategic objectives and operational goals of an organisation. In addition, the priority that each chair of each NF attributed to each dimension and each objective was assessed. A comprehensive and thorough review of literature on organisational performance was presented in the research and underpinned the development of the model illustrated in Table 1 (Winand et at, 2010, Table 3, p. 286) below.

Table 1 – Model of Organisational Performance

4. Readiness Assessment Tool

4.1 Rapilla (2008) developed a simple and practical self-assessment tool for NFs in Papua New Guinea to identify their state of development and immediate priorities for focusing the allocation of scarce resources.

4.2 Minikin (2009) developed the readiness assessment tool from Rapilla’s initial work and undertook research using a multidisciplinary and inductive approach to determine key pillars of organisational development and the elements of these pillars across a continuum from basic to elite organisational development.

4.3 The research centered on “senior sports administrators” from across the Pacific

28 Region, including the secretaries general, chief executive officers, and representatives of several National Olympic Committees and Regional Federations (Minikin, 2009, pp. 39-43).

29 Chapter 3 – Methodology and Results

1. Introduction

1.1 Research into Olympic Sport Organisations in Fiji and the Fiji Rugby Union involved two different approaches:

(a) Quantitative research into OSOs through direct observations or experiences and reported information of those responsible for managing Fiji’s OSOs. The information or data for this research was collected using an online based research tool where participants from OSOs rated the development of their OSO and certain elements that make up the governance and strategic management pillar of the tool on a scale of 0 to 5 or from having nothing in place to being at a specialized and professional level of development. The results of each OSO’s governance or strategic management rating can be compared with other OSOs or against the median rating or an industry benchmark.

(b) Qualitative research into the FRU aimed at gathering an in-depth understanding of human behaviour and the reasons that govern such behaviour or how and why the FRU developed its strategic plan, as well as, what, where and when the plan was developed. The information, knowledge and insights into Fiji Rugby or research data was collected using a range of methods, including reviewing certain documents, undertaking semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, and participant observations.

1.2 By understanding the general level of governance and strategic management development of Fiji’s OSOs and the FRU’s strategic management experience Fiji’s OSOs may move towards a culture of strategic management, particularly Cycling Fiji (“CF”) and Fiji Triathlon Association (“FTA”).

1.3 This Chapter is divided into two parts: Chapter 3.1 – OSO Assessment; and, Chapter 3.2 – Case Study of Fiji Rugby Union.

30 2. OSO Assessment

2.1 Chapter 3.1 - OSO Assessment, is divided into 3 Sections: Section 1 – RAT Assessment, the methodology adopted for the research into Fiji’s OSOs is presented; Section 2 – RAT Results, outlines the results of the RAT research; and, Section 3 – Discussion of Results, the results of the RAT research are summarized and discussed.

2.2 The RAT assessment was used to determine what stage of strategic management development Fiji’s OSOs rated, as against the ‘Sports Industry Benchmark’ (“benchmark”). Specifically, the strategic elements of governance pillar 1: strategic leadership; strategic planning; and, the monitoring and evaluation of any strategic plan (see Appendix 3). Fiji’s OSOs were assessed as a whole, and the FRU, CF and FTA were analysed as a separate group as well.

2.3 The RAT assessment was selected for the following reasons:

(a) It was specifically developed for sport organisations in the Oceania region;

(b) It is useful in assessing the structure and development of OSOs across eight pillars identified as typical of sport organisations in Oceania, particularly governance and strategic management.

(c) Provides an objective assessment that leads to recommendations for use in developing strategic plans for OSOs while prioritising the application of resources.

(d) The information provided by undertaking a regular RAT assessment would help guide boards and management of OSOs to make informed choices and decisions about the development of the organisation for which they are responsible. This should enable decisions made to be based on the ‘state of readiness’ of the organisation and reduce

31 decision-making based on perceived immediate needs.

(e) If conducted on a regular basis, a RAT assessment will, over time, demonstrate the overall progress that the organisation is making as it strives to achieve its mission and strategic objectives. This adds value to the evaluation process, providing the necessary information to members when decisions are to be ratified at an OSOs’ annual general meeting.

2.4 The strengths and weaknesses of the ONOC’s online RAT assessment, included the following:

(a) It is an inexpensive, speedy and easy way of acquiring information from OSOs in a non-threatening manner.

(b) The self-assessment tool is easy to use and once familiar to users, can be completed from home or work.

(d) The strengths of the RAT tool may also be detrimental to the integrity of the information or data collected.

(e) The ease of completion may mean that the responses are not considered in adequate detail.

(f) The wording of each element may lead participants towards a particular response. Where the elements are not fully understood or explained participants may become confused and select the wrong option or select a more flattering option than is actually the case.

(g) Whilst the tool is convenient in obtaining lots of data from multiple

32 participants the results may not reflect the full and accurate scenario as to the structure and development of an OSO.

3. Case Study: - Fiji Rugby

3.1 Chapter 3.2 – Case Study of the Fiji Rugby Union, is divided into 4 Sections: Section 1 – Qualitative Research Methodology, the qualitative methods of research into the FRU are discussed.

3.2 Section 2 – Results of Documentary Review, was divided into 6 separate subsections, each one reviewing and analysing the following 6 documents: the FRU Working Document; FRU Strategic Plan; FRU Development Plan; Fiji National Sports Commission Decree 2013; and two reports from the IRB in July 2013 and PWC in 2012.

3.3 Section 3 – Results of Interviews, divided into Part A – Preparing to Revise and Part B – Revision of the FRU’s Vision, Values and Objects presented and discussed the results of semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders.

3.4 Section 4 – FRU Discussion, the results of the research in general are discussed and a methodology for revising the FRU Strategic Plan is proposed. This section is divided into 3 subsections. Subsection 4.1 – A diagnosis of strategic planning by the FRU, examines whether the FRU Strategic Plan is fit for purpose; Subsection 4.2 – Methodology for Revising the FRU Strategic Plan, discusses how the FRU may go about revising the FRU Strategic Plan and proposes a framework of responsibilities in Table 10; and, subsection 4.3 – Governance, Constitutional Review, Incorporation, Performance Management, discusses certain relevant aspects of these matters.

3.5 The FRU is being used as an exemplar of how to move Fiji’s OSOs towards a culture of strategic management for several reasons, including the following (see Appendix 1): (a) The FRU is Fiji’s largest OSO and sport organisation; (b) Rugby is Fiji’s largest and most popular sport; (c) the FRU has strategic management experience; (d) Rugby is an integral part of the ‘vaka i taukei’ or

33 indigenous Fijian way of life; (e) Rugby is a part of Fiji’s national identity and culture supported by the nation as a whole, made up of a multi-cultural, multi- racial and multi-religious community; and (f), the FRU is the middle of reforms to improve its governance, administration and financial affairs.

3.6 The strengths and weaknesses of the documentary review and interviews, included the following:

(a) The interviews and documentary review procured insights and in-depth information on how the FRU has strategically planned in the past and whether the FRU Strategic Plan is fit for purpose.

(b) The interviews permitted the development of rapport and an open and candid discussion about the vision, values, mission, challenges, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats facing Fiji Rugby, and how to address these issues.

(c) Interviewing participants is time consuming and it can be difficult to find mutually suitable times to conduct interviews.

(d) The information generated from interviews was difficult to analyse, compare and categorise.

(e) The interviewer’s bias may have influenced the responses of each participant, however, efforts were made by the interviewer to be objective with each participant and the development of semi-structured questions from the FRU Working Document and literature helped keep the process as objective as possible.

(f) The discussion on a new vision for FRU had to be influenced to open up discussion and solicit responses as to a vision for both 7s and 15s Rugby.

34 (g) The participants bias, as a coach, provincial union representative, FRU manager, director, did colour the content of their responses to questions, particularly how to achieve any vision for Fiji Rugby.

(h) The documentary review and analysis was useful in obtaining objective and internal information on the FRU; was not disruptive to the FRU’s general activities; and, was drawn from existing information.

(i) Not all documentary information was freely available or was confidential in nature. The FRU Strategic Plan and FRU Development Plan was only discovered and shared during interviews. Ancillary documents to these plans, such as budgetary documentation or the development of values stated in the FRU Strategic Plan was not available.

(j) The time required to read, review and analyse these documents was significant and required suitable skills to do so.

3.7 The use of group workshops for this research in place of individual interviews was not possible or practical because of poor relations between the FRU and provincial unions, also because of the logistical difficulty and costs involved organizing these workshops throughout Fiji for this purpose. However, for the purposes of revising the FRU Strategic Plan, using workshops to include a majority of stakeholders seems like the most sensible and practical option available.

35 Chapter 3.1 – OSO Assessment

1. Quantitative Research Methodology

1.1 In February and March 2014 workshops were held in Suva, Fiji, over several days. All of Fiji’s approximately 40 NFs, including the 21 OSOs that are part of Fiji’s ‘Olympic Team’ were invited to voluntarily attend Fiji’s ‘Olympic House’ on scheduled days to complete ONOCs’ online RAT assessment. The participants were encouraged to send a group of 3 to 5 administrators from their NF to conduct the assessment as a team, preferably including a member from their regional sport federation and/or FASANOC. The team members were asked to deliberate and agree on the responses given for each element under each of the eight pillars. Participants were asked to bring their own computers, however, additional computers and internet access was available for accessing ONOCs’ online RAT assessment program.

1.2 This research focused on the aforementioned 21 OSOs, which ranged in size and development from small or basic to large and specialised. Of Fiji’s 21 OSOs, only 11 completed the RAT assessment this year. 3 OSOs which did not complete the RAT assessment this year, had previously completed RAT assessments, Fiji Volleyball Federation in 2011, Athletics Fiji in 2012 and Fiji Swimming in 2013. Their previous assessments have been included in this research, despite the possibility of these organisations either developing or regressing along the development stages described below. It is further observed that the data submitted by the Fiji Volleyball Federation may not be accurate. One representative from Athletics Fiji who attended the RAT assessment workshops was not permitted to complete the assessment because there were two sets of officials claiming to be elected to run the organisation. No representative from the FRU was present at the workshops to complete the RAT assessment, but the assessment was completed online after the workshops. Thus, data from 15 of Fiji’s 21 OSOs in total was collected and used for this research.

1.3 The participants were briefed on the background, purpose and benefits of

36 completing the RAT assessment on a regular basis and permission was obtained for the results to be used for the purposes of this project. The participants were then asked to login to the ONOC RAT assessment webpage using their login email and password. Once logged into the RAT assessment program guidance was given to create a new assessment.

1.4 The participants had to complete the assessment for each of the eight pillars of Governance, Management, Sport Activity, Communication, Human Resources, Finance, Physical Resources and Values. There was a glitch with the program and the Management pillar was missing. This omission was of no consequence to the research for this project, as the research was only concerned with Pillar 1 “Governance”. The participants had to rate each element under each pillar in only one of the five development stages, from 0 to 4, as follows:

0 - ‘Nothing in Place’

1 - ‘Basic Level of Development’

2 - ‘Moderate Level of Development in Place’

3 - ‘High Level of Development in Place’

4 - ‘Specialised and Professional Level of Development’

1.5 The participants had to work through each pillar, and the various elements of each pillar, and click on the circle option for each element that best or closely represented the state of development in their OSO. Moving the mouse cursor over the circle option for each element automatically caused an information box to appear with a more detailed description of that stage of development for a particular element. The strategic management elements and descriptions of the Governance Pillar 1 are summarized in Appendix 3.

1.6 The resultant score for Governance Pillar 1, and the scores for each

37 constituent element were compared against the benchmark.

1.7 The benchmark describes the readiness of a sport organisation to establish itself using the basic principles of business such that it operates as a business with a product or service base specific to sport. It is an ideal assessment to use if an OSO is considering how it might become more financially viable and evolve into an income generating business that draws financial security from its products and services as opposed to its members or from funding agencies.

2. Results of RAT Assessment

2.1 The data results of the RAT assessment are summarized and illustrated in the table and column graph in Appendix 5.

2.2 Overall, only 2 of the 15 OSOs in total scored higher than the benchmark. The FRU scored 2 points in total above the benchmark and the Fiji Football Association was head and shoulders above the field scoring 8 points in total above the benchmark.

2.3 The remaining 12 OSOs scored below the total benchmark and 9 of those well below the benchmark, as set out in the Table 2 below:

Table 2 – OSOs below Governance Sport Industry Benchmark Total RAT score less OSO benchmark

-14 Cycling Fiji

-11 Athletics Fiji

-11 Fiji Yachting Association

-9 Boxing Association of Fiji

-9 Fiji Volleyball Federation

-7 Woman’s Golf Fiji

-6 Fiji Table Tennis Association

38 -6 Fiji Archery Association

-5 Basketball Fiji

2.4 Column Graph 1 below compares the rating for each element of Governance Pillar 1 for the FRU, FTA and CF, against the benchmark.

2.5 The FTA, CF and FRU scored below the benchmark for the strategic management elements of strategic leadership, strategic planning, and monitoring & evaluation.

Graph 1 – FRU, FTA & CF RAT Results compared to Sport Industry Benchmark

2.6 Column Graph 2 below similarly compares the rating for each strategic management element of Governance Pillar 1 for the 15 OSOs that participated in the RAT assessment.

Graph 2 – OSO Governance Results compared to Sport Industry Benchmark

2.7 In general, most OSOs rated below the benchmark for each of the three strategic management elements in Graph 2. The Fiji Football Association being the only exception for strategic leadership and strategic planning.

2.8 However, all OSOs in the research, including the Fiji Football Association scored below the benchmark for monitoring and evaluating the performance of their organisation. 5 OSOs were way below the benchmark, CF, Basketball Fiji, Boxing Fiji Association, Fiji Table Tennis Association and Fiji Yachting Association. 3 of the OSOs, Athletics Fiji, Fiji Judo Association and Woman’s Golf Fiji did not score this element and it is assumed that performance of these organisations is not monitored periodically at all.

3. Discussion of RAT Assessment Results

3.1 The results show that none of Fiji’s OSOs that participated in the research adequately practice performance management (monitoring and evaluation) or strategic planning and generally that strategic management and the governance of Fiji’s OSOs is of a basic to moderate level of development, except for the Fiji Football Association.

40 3.2 The Sport Industry Benchmark was designed to tell whether an OSO is developed enough to be financially independent from funding agencies. Only two OSOs scored a total rating above the benchmark, the FRU and Fiji Football Association, however, the FRU has been technically insolvent for some time and dependent on funding agencies for its continuity.

3.3 The FRU, FTA and CF all scored below the benchmark on all three of the Strategic Management elements and therefore organisational development in these areas is needed.

41 Chapter 3.2 – Case Study

1. Qualitative Research Methodology

1.1 The methods of data research included the review of certain documents, undertaking semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, and participant observations. Whilst the observations of the researcher were not directly analysed they did help procure relevant information, understand the FRU’s context and problems, and help conduct interviews efficiently.

1.2 The first part of this research involved the review of the following documents: the FRU Working Document, the FRU Strategic Plan, the FRU Development Plan; the Fiji National Sports Commission Decree 2013; and two reports from the IRB in July 2013 and PWC in 2012, looking at the structure, governance, administration and finances of the FRU.

1.3 This documentary review outlined the FRU’s strategic management activities since 2012, diagnosed the internal and external environment of the FRU, and informed the revision and review of the FRU’s vision, objectives and development of a suitable semi-structured interview questionnaire for the second part of this research.

1.4 The second part of this research consisted of semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders in Fiji Rugby representing past and present members of the board (including past chairman), management, coaching staff, presidents and secretaries of affiliated unions of the FRU, and a former president of the FRU Council. The participants interviewed did so on the basis that their identity remained anonymous.

1.5 As an ‘ice-breaker’ the participants were asked to provide general background information as to their past and current involvement in Rugby. Generally, participants were eager to share their knowledge, perceptions, opinions and insight into the operations and direction of Fiji Rugby. Usually their enthusiasm meant that a lot of information was provided out of sequence

42 to the semi-structured questions at first, but the questions were revisited later on in the interview in a sequential fashion for completeness and clarification.

1.6 In general, depending on the particular participant and their familiarity with the process of developing a strategic plan and their operational knowledge of Fiji Rugby, the participants were, as follows:

(a) Introduced to the role for strategic management (inclusive of strategic planning and performance management) in sport organisations;

(b) Updated as to the results of the documentary review;

(c) Asked a series of questions divided into two parts. Part A, preparing to revise the FRU Strategic Plan; and Part B, revising the FRU’s vision, values and objectives. The questions asked are listed in Appendix 6 and the participants’ answers summarized in Appendix 7;

(d) In summary, for Part A the participants were asked the following questions:

(1) Who are the key stakeholders for Fiji Rugby, which key stakeholders should be involved in the planning process, and how would you involve the Vanua?

(2) How would you go about revising and developing the FRU Strategic Plan (including committee and consultant)?

(3) How much time is required to revise the FRU Strategic Plan, how long should the plan be for, and when should the plan be reviewed?

(e) In summary, for Part B the participants were asked the following questions:

43 (1) What are the core values for Fiji Rugby?

(2) What should be the vision for Fiji Rugby overall, and for 7s and 15s?

(3) How would you achieve your vision or what are the strategic objectives for Fiji Rugby?

2. Results of Documentary Review

2.1 FRU Strategic Planning Working Document

1. This document outlines the process and results of research planning facilitated by officials from the IRB over a two-day workshop with key stakeholders of the FRU. The document is 42 pages in length. Page 2 of the document was left blank for senior management to fill in the rationale for the FRU.

2. The workshop was conducted in July 2012. The key stakeholders were defined as “all coaches, technical experts, managers, executives and sponsors” who it was claimed “would have a say in the direction in which Fiji Rugby would progress towards” ensuring ownership by all parties. 18 participants in total were involved in this workshop. These participants were divided into three perceived equally represented groups for the duration of the workshop.

3. The workshop had two main objectives, as follows:

(a) First, to develop a working document for management to be able to use for the development of a strategic plan for the period 2012 to 2020 that was “holistic, have a long term effect and focused on long term rugby success for the nation”.

44 (b) Second, to establish the balanced scorecard framework and for management to be able to use the strategic planning templates provided to fill in the gaps such as the objectives for the goals, the key performance indicators, targets and milestones.

4. The workshop was intended to set in motion a platform for other initiatives, such as: A process management system; a balanced scorecard system from the corporate, departmental, and union to club levels; a dashboard system that reports on the Key Result Areas and their Key Performance Indicators as stipulated by the corporate scorecard from club level all the way up to the FRU; and a business excellence system to govern the efficiencies and effectiveness of the FRU’s processes and systems. The FRU was to benchmark itself against the Fiji Business Excellence Awards standards.

5. The workshop was claimed to have been “successful in many ways”, without specifying details, and it was acknowledged that there were so “many things that could be incorporated in the future such as a values exercise or an environment scanning exercise” but this workshop was the beginning and the FRU Working Document should be the basis of future strategic planning exercises.

6. Both days consisted of four formal sessions, summarized in Table 3 below:

45 Table 3 – July 2012, Workshop Schedule

The Vision Exercise

7. The vision exercise was broken into three parts. Part 1, required the participants to brainstorm and write down what success would look like for the FRU, if it could be guaranteed. Part 2, the participants were then asked to write down the outcome of each success statement. For the final part of the vision exercise, Part 3, the participants were asked to consolidate a vision for each of the three groups.

8. Management were to agree on the final vision from these three vision statements, having considered the full results of each part of the vision exercise.

9. The participants and facilitators did not link the results and senior management were expected to continue discussion with the participants to determine the linkages to ensure that the strategic direction takes into account the voice and the ideas of all the key stakeholders and drivers of the FRU. This was noted as “vital to ensure plans are carried and implemented at operational level”.

46 10. Two of the three groups came up with the same vision statement. The two statements created from the exercise are:

(1) To be the number 1 Rugby Team in the World; or

(2) To be World Leaders in Rugby.

The Mission Exercise

11. The mission exercise was broken into two parts. In Part 1, each participant was asked to write down their answers to the following three questions:

(1) Our collaborative group will do what (action);

(2) For whom (who do we serve); and,

(3) So that (result of our action).

12. In Part 2, the SWOT results from a previous IRB facilitated strategic planning workshop was relied upon. Each participant was asked to rank their top five findings for each of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats previously determined, and classify whether each of the five selected were internal or external factors to the FRU. The consolidated rankings of each participant were statistically analysed to ensure that there was uniformity in the top five SWOTs selected. The top five consolidated SWOTs had a 95% confidential interval of being the choice of all the participants of the workshop.

13. The SWOT ranking exercise resulted in 20 strategic goals being selected, as set out below in Table 4.

Table 4 – July 2012, top five SWOTs

Strategic Planning / GAP Exercise

14. From this exercise templates were created that were used to determine the balanced scorecard strategic goals. The five SWOT results were used as a baseline to establish the current situation of the FRU. The three groups were asked to envisage the desired situation for each SWOT, key indicators for the current situation and objectives for the desired situation.

15. The exercise did not define the actions to be undertaken to achieve the objectives for the desired situation, as intended, except in the case of five SWOT results where action plans were created and in one case key indicators for such action plans. A particularly detailed strategy or action plan was created to achieve the benchmark domestic competition in the Oceania region, including detailed key indicators for each month of the year.

16. The workshop did not develop strategies or actions to achieve identified opportunities for: ‘International Exposure’; ‘Local domestic competition

48 (expand regionally)’; ‘Promotional opportunities’; or ‘Branding – awareness’; Similarly, no strategy or actions were developed for the threat of ‘Political Instability’.

Balanced Scorecard Exercise

17. From these templates the participants developed the strategic goals for the balanced scorecard method. The participants weighted the importance of each strategic goal based on the vision and mission exercises. The strategic goals were then grouped under four quadrants from the Fiji Business Excellence Awards model. Leadership and People; Finance; Customers; and, Processes and Risk; the results of which are set out in Appendix 8.

18. The balanced scorecard did not include a fifth quadrant for the “social aspect of” Fiji Rugby, but it was noted that it should “to ensure that this area remains separate and becomes and area not to be forgotten as the game becomes more and more professional and more corporate in nature”.

19. The resultant scorecard focused on the Customer Quadrant, which participants defended by stating that “rugby in Fiji [was] ultimately for the people, both players and spectators”. The scorecard Table 5 and pie Graph 4 developed and results are set out below.

Table 5 – July 2012, Balanced Scorecard

Graph 3 – July 2012, Balanced Scorecard

Formulation of Strategic Plan and other initiatives

20. It was recommended for management to establish a concise strategic plan from the two-day workshop and FRU Working Document, and undertake a list of initiatives to “ensure that the objectives and actions” of the scorecard are achieved effectively and efficiently, as follows: Establish a Corporate Scorecard, Departmental Scorecard, Provincial Union Scorecard and Club Scorecard; Initiate and establish a process mapping, tagging, analysis, improvement and management system; Establish a dashboard system; and, establish the Fiji Business Excellence System throughout Fiji Rugby, beginning with the High Performance Unit and piloting Club level.

2.2 FRU Strategic Plan, 2012 - 2022 – ‘Leaving a Legacy’

1. During an interview with management it was revealed that a strategic plan, the FRU Strategic Plan, and development plan, the FRU Development Plan, had been developed from the FRU Strategic Working Document. The FRU Strategic Plan is 17 pages in length and claims to set out the “Fiji Rugby Union’s Strategic Plan for the next ten years from 2012-2022”, however, the cover page says from 2012 to 2020.

2. The purpose of the Strategic Plan was to outline “how Fiji Rugby will continue to implement and develop strategies to enable Fiji Rugby to be more consistently competitive internationally and support the next generation of players in becoming world class rugby players”.

3. The vision, mission and values of the FRU were defined as follows in Table 6 below:

Vision Mission Values The Fiji Rugby Union will 1. Achieve Rugby foster: Excellence through 1. Dynamic rugby discipline and development teamwork TO BE 2. Create a sustainable 2. Lead with Passion WORLD vibrant and competitive and Integrity LEADERS rugby culture IN RUGBY 3. Provide equitable return 3. Invest in our People to stakeholders and our Players 4. Promote growth and 4. Honour God and development of Rugby Respect the Vanua in the Fiji Islands

Table 6 – FRU Strategic Plan Vision, Mission and Values

4. The key strategic goals of the FRU were aligned to two selected key stakeholders, the IRB’s strategic goals and the Government of Fiji’s strategic framework for change pillars, illustrated in the comparative Table 7 below sourced from the FRU Strategic Plan.

5. Whilst the comparative Table 7 summarized 7 strategic goals for the FRU. The document only developed basic strategies and actions for 3 of the 7 strategic goals listed, and added a new strategic goal for high performance structures and processes to underpin the national team.

6. The FRU Strategic Plan defined four strategic areas or goals for the FRU:

51 (1) Ensure sustainable financial performance and growth;

(2) Develop sustainable Rugby development and infrastructure;

(3) High Performance; and,

(4) Governance, Planning and Leadership.

7. Strategic goals 1 (Ensure sustainable financial performance and growth) and 2 (Develop sustainable rugby development and infrastructure) of the FRU Strategic Plan link with the workshop defined strategic goals 1 (To be a financially sustainable rugby union) and 2 (Develop sustainable rugby development infrastructure).

Table 7 – FRU’s Strategic Goals

8. However, strategic goal 2 of the FRU Strategic Plan included strategies and action plans for the development of domestic competitions for 7s and 15s, the development of the governance, administrative and financial competence and capability of member unions. These strategies do not fit squarely under this strategic goal and link more with the opportunity identified in the previous workshop SWOT/GAP analysis exercise (Table 4) for the development of local domestic competitions (vibrant and competitive), which dropped out of the 10 strategic goals developed by participants of the July 2012 workshop using the balanced scorecard framework.

9. Strategic goal 3 (High Performance) and objectives (strategies for high performance across the member unions) of the FRU Strategic Plan links with the workshop strategic goal 6 (Develop and maintain the best HPU centre in the region (centre of excellence – COE)) and workshop goal 7 (Produce world class national teams, presence, and players – produce world champions).

10. Strategic area 4 of the FRU Strategic Plan - Governance, Planning and Leadership, is described differently in Table 7, as “SG 4 Strengthen good governance and professionalism in Fiji Rugby”. Five strategies are proposed. The first four are related to the ‘other initiatives’ intended for management to establish after the July 2013 strategic planning two-day workshop, namely implementation of the balanced scorecard system, adopt the Fiji Business Excellence Framework, introduce process mapping and a quality circles model. The fifth and final strategy relates to strengthening the community and ‘Vauna’ (Indigenous Fijian) participation which links to one of the 10 FRU strategic goals established in the July 2012 strategic planning workshop, strategic goal 10, “To ensure mass participation of rugby at all levels for everyone and to till the social role in the country” (see Appendix 8, The FRU’s 10 Strategic Goals).

53 11. The Fiji Government’s 5 pillars of strategic change are general and deal with good governance, efficient, effective, sustainable and accountable leadership, management, and performance. The competitiveness and accountability of the FRU are driving forces for the improved strategic management of the FRU. The IRB’s 7 strategic goals are general: the promotion of Rugby; increase participation in sport; player welfare; sustainability of the FRU operations; Fiji’s participation at the Olympics; and, strong and effective leadership. These pillars and goals are drivers for the FRU to further develop its strategic management, planning and performance management processes, practice and capacity.

2.3 FRU Development Plan 2014-2015

1. The FRU Development Plan is only 6 pages in length. Excluding the title page, vision and mission statements repeated from the FRU Strategic Plan, the development plans for Fiji Rugby are contained on three pages, consisting of three strategic goals.

2. The strategic goals for the development of Fiji Rugby are:

(1) Participation – to deliver a mass participation program through the Get into Rugby (GIR) program;

(2) Training & Education – to deliver a program which provides a holistic approach for all rugby stakeholders; and,

(3) Woman’s Rugby – to delivery programs that provide accessibility into rugby for girls and woman. The defined actions for each goal are concise.

3. Goal 1 (Participation) links with workshop goal 10 (to ensure mass participation of rugby at all levels for everyone and to fill the social role in the country). Goal 2 (Training & Education) has no obvious direct link to the previous workshop, but does link vaguely to the 7s and 15s development

54 part of strategic goal 2 of the FRU Strategic Plan, which links back to the SWOT/GAP analysis of the workshop.

4. Goal 3 (Woman’s Rugby) links directly with strategy 3 of strategic goal 2 (Develop sustainable Rugby development and infrastructure) of the FRU plan. There is no obvious direct link to the SWOT/GAP analysis or balance scorecard goals.

2.4 Fiji National Sports Commission Decree 2013

1. The Fiji National Sports Commission Decree 2013 came into existence on 22 January 2013. The Decree is only 7 pages in length, broken into 5 parts, and contains 26 provisions. The Decree establishes the Fiji National Sports Commission (“FNSC”), which has the following objects:

(a) Institute a clear and manageable framework to guide and enhance the delivery of sports programs in Fiji through a coordinated and partnership approach at all levels of participation;

(b) Provide coordination, direction and support the development of sports in Fiji;

(d) Improve participation in structured physical activity at all levels of participation; and,

(e) Support and encourage excellence in the performance of athletes and coaches by developing sports science and encouraging research in high performance athletics.

2. The FNSC functions as a sport funding and grant agency for the Government of Fiji, whose other functions relevant to this research includes but is not limited to the following:

(a) Regulate all matters relating to sports in Fiji to ensure that all sports and elected officials comply with their constitutions, regulations and guidelines;

(b) Intervene and solve disagreement within sporting bodies;

(c) Support national sporting organisations and other related organisations in their planning, administration and development;

(d) Co-operate with national and international sporting organisations in aiming to foster a sporting environment that is free from the unsanctioned use of performance enhancing drugs and doping methods;

(e) Affiliate bodies such as schools and districts to national sporting organisations; and

(f) Administer tax incentive rebates.

3. The FNSC has the power to intervene and solve disagreement within sporting bodies and to regulate sports in Fiji to ensure compliance with their constitutions.

4. However, the FNSC has not yet established any body to investigate or solve any disagreements in Fiji. Also, the FNSC has not passed any regulations to ensure that all sports and elected officials comply with their constitutions.

2.5 2013 IRB Report

1. In July 2013 the IRB produced a detailed 39 page report reviewing the FRU’s governance, administration and finances, concluding that the FRU was in crisis and that change was required. Positively noting there was

56 strong potential to grow the game in Fiji, but that the FRU was not well governed or managed. A new board had been elected in April 2013, so these problems were largely a legacy issue for the new board.

2. The following key recommendations were made, amongst others, for the FRU:

(a) To develop a new vision and strategic direction for Rugby in Fiji. A new vision and strategic framework, with clear implementation, strategy and KPIs. A clear outline of what Fiji wants to achieve in World Rugby and what the FRU needs to do to get there and how.

(b) To strengthen, reform and change its leadership and governance model, with a new approach to the appointment of people with skills, rugby knowledge, leadership, strategy, and effective decision- making and controls to govern.

(d) To undertake a thorough review of the competencies and skills of management.

2.6 2012 PWC Report

1. Following the poor performance of the ‘Flying Fijians’ (Fiji’s national men’s 15s team) at the 2011 Rugby World Cup, PWC was commissioned to produce a report reviewing the structure of the FRU. The report was 29 pages in length.

2. PWC made several key recommendations, including the following that are relevant to this research:

57 (1) A strategic plan needed to be developed and reviewed annually. The FRU needed to have a clear understanding of its strategic aims and direction. The strategic plan would be a useful tool to guide the organisation;

(2) The development of a performance management system for the FRU; and,

(3) The review of the FRU’s constitution, as requested by a number of its member unions.

3. Results of Interviews

3.1 Part A – Preparing to Revise

(A) Who are the key stakeholders for the FRU, which key stakeholders should be involved in the planning process, and how would you involve the Vanua?

1. Primarily, the major provincial unions and the ‘Vanua’ or the indigenous people of Fiji, their chiefs, land and customs (Ravuvu, 1983), at least for the Vanua based provincial unions, were identified as key stakeholders for the FRU.

2. In summary, the following list of groups or organisations were identified as key stakeholders for the FRU:

(a) Affiliated unions, made up of major and minor provincial unions, the B Division, Island Zone unions and woman’s rugby;

(b) Vanua and village teams;

58 (d) Players, including overseas based players and former players;

(e) Board, FRU management and Staff, Coaches and Referees;

(f) IRB;

(g) Government of Fiji, Ministry of Sports, Fiji Sports Commission and Fiji National Sports Commission;

(h) Town Councils;

(i) FASANOC;

(j) Sponsors.

3. The general view was that all key stakeholders should have some involvement in the strategic planning process, but that the major provincial unions are the primary stakeholders in Fiji Rugby and should have most say in the direction of Fiji Rugby.

4. As a majority of provincial unions are Vanua based, the inclusion approval and support of the Vanua in the strategic planning process is indirect through each particular union, however, the further direct support and approval of the Vanua for the direction and activities of the FRU may be sought through engagement at village level with the people and their chiefs. Any existing, new or revised strategic plan for the FRU may be presented to the Vanua to avoid any misunderstanding and to seek their support.

5. In the past, the FRU held training camps for national teams in selected villages, be it a chiefly village for a particular area or the village of an incumbent player in a national team. The pride of the village in their national representatives and the pride of the players in having their chiefs

59 and fellow villagers present during international matches helped to sustain and develop part of the FRU’s identity, motivate and inspire the on-field performance of players.

(B) How would you go about revising and developing the FRU Strategic Plan?

Strategic Planning Committee

1. In 2003, one employee of the FRU and three master’s students from the University of the South Pacific wrote a strategic plan for the FRU over several evenings. The plan was then presented to all major provincial unions over approximately a three-week period and their support solicited.

2. Following this, the plan was presented to the FRU Council at general meeting, consisting of the FRU’s affiliated unions or provincial unions, for approval. Approval was not expressly given by the FRU Council on the debated merits or demerits of the plan, but rather by way of provincial and tribal alliances. The individuals presenting the plan to the FRU Council each had the support of particular provincial unions and these individual presenters together had the collective support of a majority of the provincial unions leading to the plan being accepted and passed at the meeting.

3. This 2003 plan, amongst other things, is partly credited with the establishment of Fiji’s first and only professional league, the Colonial Cup between 2004 and 2008 (see Appendix 4) and the performance of the national men’s 15 aside team, the Flying Fijians, at the 2007 Rugby World Cup, where they made history by reaching the quarterfinal, after beating Wales, a Tier One nation, for the first time.

4. The establishment of a competent and capable committee, in general, was seen as practical and necessary. The committee made up of individuals from key stakeholders who had suitable Rugby knowledge, strategic

60 planning experience and business skills. Made up of a workable and practical number of say 3 members. Ideally, the FRU CEO, a member of the board, and a representative of the provincial unions.

5. Given the urgency for this revision and the short timeframe suggested by participants the committee may decide how to revise the strategic plan for Fiji Rugby and then create a revised strategic plan; procure the approval and support of key stakeholders to the revision process and revised strategic plan.

Consultant and Balanced Scorecard

1. A consultant may be of value facilitating the planning process, including running workshops, clarifying the role of strategic management in an organisation is an essential step that highlights the importance that stakeholders should place on the development and implementation of a strategic plan, to introduce any new concepts, explain the process and rationale behind planning, create some independence and objectivity, guide participants through the process, and collect and analyse data.

2. As provincialism or the traditional, customary and organisational interests of different provincial unions and Vanua, including the mustering of modern alliances for various reasons, foreseeably and naturally collide the use of a consultant for the revision or development of a strategic plan for Fiji Rugby, was seen as important, but not critical or essential.

3. The use of an independent and neutral consultant in the planning process was seen as beneficial to maintain some level of independence and objectivity, integrity, trust and confidence in the process and eventual plan itself.

4. The cost of engaging a consultant and the revision process itself was seen as a barrier to undertaking any revision of the FRU Strategic Plan, as the

61 finances of the FRU are in a precarious state, unless a funding agency was willing to fund the costs. A number of participants believed that the IRB would be a possible funder and partner in the revision of the FRU Strategic Plan, perhaps being able to provide an expert consultant for the exercise.

5. However, the IRB’s past efforts and approach in facilitating the development of the current FRU Strategic Plan was perceived by a few participants as superficial, being focused only on the process and primarily for funding purposes, “a cut and paste job from Australia”, format driven and there was no effort to think creatively or “outside the box”.

6. The documentary review and analysis of the FRU Strategic Plan and FRU Development Plan concluded that they were not fit for purpose. The consultant left management to formulate an effective strategic plan and operational plan which was not achieved. Thus, any consultant may be required to also assist in the completion of effective strategic and operational plans for the FRU.

7. A number of participants believed that any consultant needed to be open minded, pragmatic, not format driven, and adopt or use methods of strategic planning that are suitable, adaptable or adapted to Fiji’s context.

8. In general, it was perceived that many office bearers from provincial unions or from other key stakeholders lacked any requisite training, knowledge, skill or qualifications to effectively implement the initiatives proposed in the FRU Working Document, including the balanced scorecard method. Thus, any consultant may be required to also assist in the development of any strategic management and performance management initiatives across all levels of Rugby in Fiji.

9. Management purportedly undertook two other strategic planning workshops in 2012/2013 involving all of FRU’s managers, officers and employees. One with an external consultant and one internally. These

62 workshops reportedly were long, hours and hours were spent going round and round in circles debating issues that ultimately yielded superficial results. There also seemed to be a real resistance to change within the FRU, everyone protecting their own patch, and not willing to be innovative or think outside the box in addition to struggling to efficiently and pragmatically work through the strategic planning process.

10. The use of the balanced scorecard method was seen as overly complicated which perhaps partly explains why the July 2012 proposed initiative to adopt this performance management tool from the club level up was never implemented. These initiatives have been retained in the FRU Strategic Plan, under strategic area 4, Governance, Planning and Leadership.

11. A perceived disadvantage of bringing in consultants is that they may not have the time or capacity to adequately appreciate the problems within Fiji Rugby and do not have the time or capacity to comprehensively solicit this information from key stakeholders whom retain this knowledge. Also, that key stakeholders with relevant knowledge do not share that information either because they do not believe the information they have to share is of value or they are not able to express themselves openly for various reasons.

12. Where possible, the inclusion of traditional customs in the consultation process with stakeholders may help to establish an environment where information is share more freely and openly. For example, the custom or practice of ‘Talanoa Na Yagona’ or the consumption of kava (also known as yagona), which has a calming effect, and conversation round a kava bowl (Sundowner, 1896).

13. This custom is an integral part of the iTaukei (indigenous Fijian) culture, and is consumed ritually when welcoming visitors, sending village members on journeys, christening boats, laying the foundations of homes, casting magical spells, making deals, settling arguments and, as is usually the case, chatting, is presented as a sevusevu or a traditional gift offered by guests to

63 the host, or as a token of respect to visitors of higher rank (Fiji Guide, 2014).

14. Basil Thomson, a 19th-century ethnologist, described the custom of drinking kava around a kava bowl, as following (Fiji Guide, 2014):

The chief’s yaqona circle supplied the want of newspapers; the news and gossip of the day were related and discussed; the chief’s advisers seized upon the convivial moment to make known their view; matters of policy were decided; the chief’s will, gathered from a few careless words spoken while drinking, was carried by mouth throughout his dominions.

15. The most important aspect being its psychological effect, creating a sharing atmosphere and invisible bond between participants, where visitors feel warmth and acceptance with the group or gathering, as if family or close friends. It is no accident that in Fiji business deals and social contracts are consummated around a yagona bowl.

16. Whilst kava may be appropriate for workshops the critical cultural aspect of the yagona custom is to make all participants in the planning process feel warm and accepted as though they are family or close friends.

Workshops in 4 Divisions

1. The use of a large assembly, general meeting or gathering for the strategic planning process and to discuss the direction of Fiji Rugby was discouraged by participants because of the plurality of stakeholders, provincialism and a lack of strategic planning experience in general meant large meetings were perceived as unworkable and unmanageable.

2. However, having obtained the support an approval of homogenous groups of stakeholders, the final strategic plan may be endorsed by the provincial unions at a properly convened general meeting of the FRU’s members.

3. Thus, strategic planning workshops were generally seen as the most effective and efficient way to reach a majority of the FRU’s key stakeholders, although the availability of key stakeholder representatives and the costs of attending any workshops was seen as a barrier, given the FRU’s poor financial position, unless funding agencies step in to help with these costs.

4. The organisation of any workshops for key stakeholders should be according to the existing four administrative divisions in Fiji (which themselves are further subdivided into fourteen provinces), as follows:

(a) The Central Division (Suva City) – made up of the provinces of Naitasiri, Namosi, Rewa, Serua and Tailevu;

(b) The Northern Division (Labasa Town) – made up of the provinces of Bua, Cakaudrove and Macuata;

(d) The Western Division (Lautoka City) – made up of the provinces of Ba, Nadroga-Navosa and Ra.

5. Whilst any workshops in these 4 divisions should be open to all stakeholders, the general consensus of participants was that these workshops should primarily be for the benefit of provincial unions, especially the major provincial unions on the main island of Viti Levu or the Central and Western Divisions, who should be logistically accommodated first and foremost.

65 (C) How much time is required to revise the FRU Strategic Plan, how long should the plan be for, and when should the plan be reviewed?

1. Unless urgently required, the participants proposed two time-periods convenient to provincial unions and management for the periodical revision, review or development of a strategic plan for the FRU, as follows:

(a) One window from June to October outside of any international test matches for 15s. This window is also convenient for 7s to have its budget concluded by August for the following year’s Sevens World Series.

(b) The other window from November to April, which is after the conclusion of the national provincial competition and prior to the FRU AGM, usually held annually at the end of April.

2. Most participants believed that any revision, review or development of the FRU Strategic Plan should, for practical reasons, be done as quickly as possible. There was a perceived risk that if momentum in the planning process is lost and the process stall for any amount of time the presidents and secretaries of provincial unions would lose interest or become distracted. Also, that the provincial unions could not sustain and lengthy planning process of more than three months.

3. The revision, review or development of a strategic plan for FRU within three months is not unrealistic. In 2003, the FRU developed a strategic plan. This plan was formulated over a handful of weekends, approved by certain provincial unions over a three to four week period and accepted by members of the FRU at a general meeting. This plan was accepted without any serious debate as to its merits but more so as a result of the earlier consultations with certain provincial unions and overall through faith and trust in the committee that formulated the plan and because of the committee members’ individual Vanua and provincial links.

4. One participant believed that due to the governance, administrative and financial crisis of the FRU, it is not realistic for the FRU to plan long term for more than 8 years at present. In general, most participants believed that a 4 year strategic plan, reviewed annually would be suitable.

5. An 8 year strategic plan may be suitable once governance, administration and finances of the FRU normalize and improve to cope with such long term planning at an operational level.

3.2 Part B – Revision of the FRU’s Vision, Values and Objects

(A) What are the core values for Fiji Rugby?

1. The FRU Working Document and 2012 workshop did not develop a set of core values for the FRU. The FRU Strategic Plan nevertheless defines four values and it is not clear how these were developed, but it seems likely the management developed these values independently of other stakeholders. In addition, the FRU is also promoting the IRB’s five core values.

2. In summary, the interviewed participants, without knowledge of the IRB’s 5 core values, specifically identified four of the five values. Participants did not identify two of the four values defined in the FRU Strategic Plan, “Invest in our People and our Players” and “Honour God”, but the later value in God is implicit in the context of Fiji Rugby and Fiji in general.

3. A summary of core values for Fiji Rugby, as suggested by participants is outlined below in Table 8, as well as the IRB’s Core Rugby Values being used by management and staff of the FRU, and the values defined in the FRU Strategic Plan.

Table 8 – Core values for FRU

Research IRB’s Core FRU Strategic Plan Rugby Values

67 Passion Integrity Achieve Rugby Excellence through Discipline Discipline and Teamwork Pride / Honour Respect Respect Lead with Passion and Integrity Humility Trust Solidarity Invest in our People and our Players Hard work Dina Passion Honour God and Respect the Vanua Vanua Concept of One Discipline Good governance,

transparency and accountability Integrity

4. One participant believed the ethics of Fiji Rugby were of a very high standard as compared to more developed countries, with athletes in Fiji treating each-other with more respect than athletes in more developed countries.

5. Several participants believed the Vanua or the indigenous people of Fiji, their chiefs, land, customs and traditions (Ravuvu, 1983) underpin Fiji Rugby, and that the Vanua is at the core and foundation of Fiji Rugby. This relationship, history and identity with the Vanua inspires and motivates the individual behavior of all participants in Fiji Rugby, from supporters to players and voluntary board members.

6. The diversity of iTaukei or indigenous Fijian customs, traditions and cultures in Fiji means that when players assemble for national duties, they “can be like chalk and cheese”. Galvanizing a national team and overcoming the cultural diversity was seen by one participant as an ongoing challenge for coaches to bring out players pride and passion for Fiji.

7. One participant believed that Rugby belonged to the people of Fiji, all cultures. Whilst another participant believed Rugby belonged to the FRU’s major provincial unions. The people or public were seen as the driving force behind Rugby, their love and passion for the game, their coming

68 together despite their differences in culture, religion and background.

8. According to one participant, “if you haven’t got any passion for the game then you shouldn’t be involved at any level of the sport”. The passion for the game was thus seen the most important value. It was believed that if you haven’t got passion for the game at any level or in any capacity you should not be involved in Rugby.

9. Discipline was seen as a value for the players. Whilst one participant observed that the players were very respectful with each other, their tendency to lose concentration at critical times was attributed to a lack of discipline leading to the inconsistent performance of the team. Often wining one game convincingly and then losing the subsequent game, presumably due to overconfidence. There could be other factors involved though, like the players not knowing what to focus on, poor preparation and coaching for the subsequent game, poor game plan and poor on-field leadership to keep players focused and disciplined.

(B) What should be the vision for Fiji Rugby overall, and for 7s and 15s?

1. The July 2012 workshop’s vision exercise came up with two possible vision statements for Fiji Rugby. These vision statements were very broad and meant to cover the period to 2020 or 2022, as well as, impliedly both the 7s and 15 a-side formats of Rugby.

2. The July 2012 participants were asked to write down “what they believed to be true if the Fiji Rugby Union’s success could be guaranteed, what would be the end result of their efforts”, and came up with “To be World Leaders in Rugby”, which was subsequently approved and adopted by FRU management and included in the FRU Strategic Plan.

3. The participants generally accepted this broad overall vision for Fiji

69 Rugby, but the participants for this research were also asked to explain what their vision for Fiji Rugby would be if focused on 7s and 15s Rugby independently.

4. The participants had to be guided somewhat and context given as to the rationale for developing a separate vision for 7s and 15s, like the Fiji 7s team consistently performing to a higher level on the World stage than 15s (see below for more detail).

5. This guidance did unintentionally end up coaching out of many of the participants a vision based on performance outcomes, however, the discussion around what the vision for 7s and 15s should be was more valuable for the purposes of formulating a useful vision for Fiji Rugby, 7s and 15s.

6. In general, the participants believed that the Fiji 7s team should be the best; number one; the top in the IRB Sevens World Series; and win everything else on offer, the World Cup, Commonwealth and Olympic games; and for Fiji to be the most consistent 7s Rugby playing nation in the World.

7. Also, for one participant Fiji’s vision for 7s:

(a) Needed to play or build on the national backing and support for the team, the fervor, the style of 7s played at all levels of the game in Fiji. Fiji was believed to be the only country in the World where the same style of 7s played by the national level is also played at village, club, and school levels;

(b) Should build on Fiji’s enviably player base, as well as its reputation for being unbeatable when the team’s ‘tail is up’.

70 (c) Needs to include development of Woman’s Rugby as there is huge potential for Woman’s 7s.

8. In relation to 15s, the participants generally thought Fiji should aim for consistency; and to go one step further than the best performance at the Rugby World Cup, to reach the semi-finals; as well as, to be competitive with Tier One nations (Fiji being rated by the IRB as a Tier Two nation).

9. The general feeling being that, if success could be guaranteed, the participants would love to beat the All Blacks and compete against the other Tier One nations, even be recognised as a Tier One nation in time. Another participant did not believe that was a realistic vision at present, especially given the financial and operational problems of FRU.

10. Put another way, Fiji has a much longer way to go to reach any vision of being a Tier One nation in 15s and many obstacles, both organizationally and economically to overcome before reaching that vision, whereas, a vision for Fiji to be World Leaders in Rugby Sevens is not a stretch of ones imagination at all, but which is still dependent to a lesser degree on solving some of the organisational and economic woes of the FRU.

11. Another participant, who had a coaching bias believed a vision for Fiji Rugby should be to create an identity for itself or in other words define a style of playing Rugby and work backwards to design coaching, systems and competitions that develop and produce players to a national level capable of playing this defined style of Rugby. For example, a style that keeps the ball alive and to play entertaining rugby.

12. Fiji already produces a pool of special and skillful players suited to running rugby. The danger, according to this participant, is that Fiji stops producing these special players.

13. Another participant did not want to talk of a vision based on outcomes,

71 but rather something to do with where Rugby is at in Fiji, and what created the environment for Fiji Rugby. Where is Fiji Rugby now and search for a more holistic vision. The participant was influenced by other professional exercises undertaken previously for a Public Enterprise in Fiji. The participant wanted more time to think about a suitable vision for Fiji Rugby but for the sake of the interview was kind enough to brainstorm a number of visions that formed into short, striking, memorable phrases, much like that used as an advertising slogan for a company. For example, all people look to Rugby, the love of Rugby, for the love of Rugby, sport of choice for Fijians, Rugby something Fiji can be proud of, and Rugby: Inspiring our Nation!

1. The interview results are summarized below in Table 9. The results can be linked and a number of priorities and categories can be gleaned from the participants responses, as follows:

(a) There was a real desire for the ‘corporatization’ of the operations of the FRU, to operate more professionally like a corporate or business, to put ‘its house in order’, ‘to live within its means’. From that, impliedly a number of other objects would be achieved. Improved standards of governance and management. The development of a culture of strategic management, planning and performance management. The development of organisational capacity. Better financial management, sustainability and consistent funding.

(b) The training and development of both paid staff and volunteers at all levels of Rugby to improve the qualifications, skills and experience of FRU’s human resources, including coaches, referees, medical staff and administrators.

72 (c) The alignment and development of competitions and infrastructure for both 7s and 15s at all levels designed to raise the quality of players produced, mapping of player pathways from the lowest grades through to the national team, the identification, development and retention of the best talent, professional career opportunities and contracting of key talent. The re-establishment of a professional/semi-professional competition for both 7s and 15s was seen as a major step forward.

(d) The need for FRU to be more transparent and accountable to its members. Improve access and communication between FRU and member unions.

2. The development of Fiji’s own style of Rugby was seen as important for the 15 aside game. However, the style of 7s Rugby in Fiji appears to have developed through competition and spread throughout all levels to the national team, perhaps because of its entertainment value or perhaps more so because of its winning characteristics and coaching. When Fiji dominated 7s Rugby during the 70s, 80s and 90s, Fiji’s domestic competition was literally decades ahead of the rest of the World. Little wonder, Fiji produced such remarkable results for a tiny island nation on the World scene during that era. Even more remarkable is the fact that Fiji still retains the best domestic 7s competition in the World despite the FRU doing little or nothing of late to oversee or develop the level of domestic competition, and despite the massive growth of the sport internationally and competitiveness of more developed nations, resulting in 7s being included in the 2016 Rio Olympics.

3. Perhaps there is a lesson here from 7s Rugby for the development of a 15s style of Rugby for Fiji. One that comes out of the trenches on the field of play. One that involves the development of Fiji’s domestic game and the quality of its coaches, fields, facilities, gyms, referees, medical staff, and administrative staff and volunteers.

4. There was a suggestion that Fiji consider developing its players in competitions offshore in New Zealand and Australia. To develop perhaps a player exchange system to develop the skills and maturity of players and build and strengthen ties with unions and clubs in those countries. This initiative would certainly avoid the costs of strengthening the local competition in the short term and potentially lift the standard of play, when and if these players rejoin the local competition.

5. The hosting of international events was seen as a worthwhile objective, which it is, in and of itself. However, the FRU has no capacity to adequately host, stage or promote such events at present, and is unlikely to unless or until the themed objectives and priorities summarized above are achieved.

6. One participant saw the breaking of provincialism or the disunity and competing interests that exist between the provinces themselves and between them individually or collectively and the FRU as a strategic objective. In otherwords, the need to bring these parties together for the sake of Rugby, moving Rugby forward in Fiji, and for the development of Rugby. Again, achieving the themed objectives and priorities summarized above would go a significant distance towards getting these parties to all ‘sing the same tune’. Similarly, the proper development of a strategic plan for Fiji Rugby.

7. The iTaukei concepts of Ke davo donu na vanua, ena qai muri mai na Sauta and Solesolevake were raised as being apt or applicable to the Fiji Rugby context, the governance, administration and operation of FRU, at least in a form adapted to the modern context of Fiji Rugby.

8. The first concept, Ke davo donu na vanua, ena qai muri mai na Sauta, figuratively means that if the FRU Council, Trustees, Board of Directors, and Management perform their role competently and the staff and

74 volunteers perform their role diligently, blessings and mana will follow.

9. The second concept, Solesolevake, figuratively means that by working together to achieve both individual and common goals, these goals can be achieved more efficiently and effectively than had each individual worked alone towards their own goals.

Table 9 – Mission Research Results

Research Results

General / 15s • To operate FRU more as a corporate business or to ‘corporatise’ • To oversee the game at all levels of the sport, • Training and development of people involved in Rugby to uplift standard. • Building organisational capability and capacity e.g gym, technical expertise • To look at domestic competitions first and foremost, establish systems and competitions to develop players to the highest level, which captures players in areas where there is no competition and provides more game time for players, add fixtures like East vs West, Fiji residents v overseas, top club challenge, top provincial team v national team, to phase out the U20 competition, not suitable for Fiji, stick with an U19 competition, • Align primary (Kaji) and secondary schools, provincial unions and national systems, and develop player pathways for talent identification, development and retention purposes, build framework that encompasses all levels, pathways and an alignment of player pathways e.g club level having under 9 and 10 year old competition • Financial sustainability / customer service • The sharing of information with other countries and building stronger ties and relationships with overseas unions for player exchange programs • Develop our own Fijian style of Rugby • To ensure quality teams at the top • To ensure adequate facilities, infrastructure • To ensure qualified and competent staff, referees, medial, and coaches (coaching much more professional now, compared to 20-30 years ago) • For the FRU to be more transparent and accountable • To have a powerful marketing team • To host and stage international sports events • When a critical mass has been reached to export skilled and qualified staff to the Pacific

75 • To break provincialism, come together, for the members and FRU to ‘sing the same tune’ • To develop competitive teams • Firm up in-house processes, finance and player contracts worked out, build systems and organisational capacity of Rugby at all levels • Good strategic planning • Consistent funding, development of a building to generate income • Selectors to be appointed by the board, call for nominations from the unions, select good qualified people, need criteria for selection and nomination

7s • FRU to administer and set rules for game locally, • the development a national provincial 7s competition, aligned to provincial unions, including clubs, villages and schools, able to select national team from teams competing, provides for weekly conditioning ready for international duties, • for all 7s tournaments in Fiji to be sanctioned by FRU, too much sevens, players need to be rested when required • create the potential for players to earn a full time wage to stay in Fiji, and play in the World Series, train in a full time environment. Fiji is the only place in the World where players are unemployed during the IRB World Series! • Clear career pathways and professional pathways for youth to be retained and not lost abroad on scholarship • Coaching, conditioning, management and referee development program for 7s, use of workshops around tournaments and roping in the IRB to assist

4. Discussion of Case Study Results

4.1 A diagnosis of strategic planning by the FRU

Introduction

1. In short, the FRU Working Document, FRU Strategic Plan and FRU Development Plan are not fit for their stated purposes and certainly these first two documents have not achieved their stated aim. The strategic visions, values and objects identified have not been properly defined, linked, prioritised or operationalised. There is no complete or detailed operational action plan or budgeting (between priorities). The links

76 between the strategic objects of the FRU Development Plan and the FRU Strategic Plan or FRU Working Document, either do not exist or are tenuous and unclear. The strategic objects of the FRU Development Plan may be a result of board, management and IRB priorities and the financial impecunious state of the FRU.

2. The operations of the FRU appear to be rolling along, as usual, responding to or reacting to urgent demands from all quarters, as and when they arise, which demands are not necessarily strategically important or strategic priorities for the FRU. Thus, resulting in already stretched and limited human and financial resources being allocated without strategic direction or management from the board and management of the FRU.

3. Without the revision or formulation of a strategic plan and operational action plan fit for purpose, the strategic direction of the FRU to achieve any vision for Fiji Rugby cannot be adequately managed by the board or management. The stretched and limited human and financial resources of Fiji Rugby cannot be carefully and shrewdly managed, directed and allocated between the many competing priorities and strategic objectives or aims of the FRU.

4. Similarly, the performance of the FRU cannot be performance managed at present until:

(a) There is a positive acceptance of strategic management, strategic planning and performance management by the board, management, staff and volunteers within Fiji Rugby. There is an organisational culture change, away from protecting one’s own patch and being resistant to change; and,

(b) Effective performance measures have been established to adequately manage and reward performance when necessary.

77 5. The recent conflict between provincial unions and the FRU is derived partly out of, according to the research, amongst other things the following:

(a) A perceived lack of transparency, accountability and communication, the need for ‘corporatisation’ or professional development of the FRU’s governance, administration and operation, including the up-skilling of all those involved in Fiji Rugby at all levels, and development of competitions and infrastructure for both 7s and 15s at all levels, and the re- establishment of a professional/semi-professional competition for both 7s and 15s.

(b) The announcement in early February 2014 of the “biggest sports sponsorship deal in Fiji to date”, a $40 million dollar 5 year sponsorship deal that did not materially change the financial circumstances of provincial unions or improve the national provincial competitions, but which sponsorship reputedly did not undersell local competitions, and where national icons and families were prioritised and protected, and where Rugby at large was to become sustainable and financially strong, be it on the global stage, national level or at local union level.

6. Whilst the Fiji National Sports Commission has the power to intervene and solve disagreement within sporting bodies and to regulate sports in Fiji to ensure compliance with their constitutions, the commission is not able to exercise this power until a body is established to be able to investigate or solve any such disagreement and suitable regulations are passed to ensure that all sports and elected officials comply with their constitutions. Thus, at present the FNSC is not formally able to assist with any conflict, constitutional or otherwise, between the FRU and its members.

78 The FRU strategic documents are not fit for purpose

Key stakeholders not identified

1. The FRU Working Document is silent as to whether any process was undertaken to identify the key stakeholders of the FRU or determine how much attention any particular stakeholder or class of stakeholders should receive from the FRU during the planning process.

2. The research identified the following three classes of key stakeholders for Fiji Rugby:

(a) Chief Stakeholders - Board, FRU management and Staff, Coaches and Referees; Affiliated unions, made up of major and minor provincial unions, the B Division, Island Zone unions and woman’s rugby; and Vanua and village teams; Players, including overseas based players and former players; Primary (Kaji) and Secondary Schools; IRB;

(b) Facility Stakeholders – Ministry of Education, Fiji Sports Commission, City and Town Councils, Primary (Kaji) and Secondary Schools, Villages; and,

(c) Funding Stakeholders - Government of Fiji, Ministry of Sports, Fiji National Sports Commission; IRB; FASANOC; and Sponsors.

No Rationale for Strategic Management

3. The FRU Working Document did not define the rationale for developing a strategic plan for the FRU and management do not appear to have done so, although, having developed a strategic plan. Given, that only a narrow range of stakeholders were involved in this strategic planning exercise, which excluded provincial unions, no defined rationale seemed necessary

79 for communication purposes.

4. The research identified a strong rationale for revising the current FRU Strategic Plan and need for the development of and move towards a culture of effective and competent strategic management practice for the FRU, as follows:

(a) The FRU Strategic Plan is incomplete and not fit for purpose;

(b) The need for the support and approval of affiliated unions to the process, method, values, vision, and objects or future direction of Fiji Rugby and how its resources are to be allocated between elite sport and the development of say infrastructure and local competitions;

(d) The need for a current environmental scan or up to date SWOT analysis for Fiji Rugby. The results of this research is helpful, but not comprehensive or thorough;

(e) To meet the standards of accountability and competitiveness established by the Government of Fiji’s pillars of strategic change and IRB strategic goals;

(f) The IRB report recommending the development of a new vision and strategic direction for Rugby in Fiji. A new vision and strategic framework (excluding the FBEA and balanced scorecard methods), with clear implementation, strategy and KPIs. A clear outline of what Fiji wants to achieve in World Rugby and what the FRU needs to do to get there and how; and,

(g) The PWC report recommending the development of a strategic plan

80 to be reviewed annually, to have a clear understanding of the FRU’s strategic aims and direction, and the development of a performance management system.

(h) The announcement in July 2014 of the admission of a Fiji Rugby League Team into the New South Wales Cup from 2016, which can ultimately lead to Fiji having full representation in the National Rugby League competition.

No ownership by Provincial Unions

5. The FRU Working Document, FRU Strategic Plan and FRU Development Plan did not achieve their stated aims to develop a strategic plan that was “holistic, have a long term effect and focused on long term rugby success for the nation” and that outlined “how Fiji Rugby will continue to implement and develop strategies to enable Fiji Rugby to be more consistently competitive internationally and support the next generation of players in becoming world class rugby players”.

6. The FRU’s founding members, affiliated unions and provincial unions did not significantly, if at all, participate in the strategic planning process that created these documents. The planning process was largely restricted to FRU management and thus, the provincial unions did not have any “say in the direction in which Fiji Rugby would progress towards” or take “ownership” of the process.

7. All stakeholders, especially the provincial unions and their constituent Vanua (excluding non-Vanua based teams), should ideally be made aware of the need for strategic planning and are committed to helping with its development, if required, and before beginning the process obtain their support and approval (Camy & Robinson, 2007, pp. 64 & 67).

81 Improvements to Process

8. The research indicated that the provincial unions are aware of the need for strategic planning, and are committed to helping with the revision of the FRU Strategic Plan, if necessary, but that any revision process needed to achieve the following;

(a) The role of strategic management, strategic planning and performance management needs to be further clarified for key stakeholders, especially for the FRU board, management, staff, volunteers, presidents and secretaries of provincial unions;

(b) Any revisions of the plan needed to be done efficiently and over a short time frame of no more than 3 months maximum, ideally 6 to 8 weeks, so that provincial unions do not become disillusioned, frustrated or lose interest in the process;

(c) Any committee or consultant be open minded and adopt a suitable approach for the Fiji context and not blindly apply concepts and models from overseas;

(d) The problems are adequately defined and understood by the committee, stakeholders, and especially the consultant (if overseas based and unfamiliar with the context and problems);

(e) The process, led by the committee and/or consultant is culturally appropriate and respectful, to encourage information sharing and cultural change towards strategic management:

1. By the addition or inclusion of a member or members versed in iTaukei customs and traditions;

2. By achieving the same psychological effect as the custom of

82 ‘Talanoa Na Yagona’ by making all participants feel warm, respected, accepted and as though they were family, close relatives or friends.

3. By the promotion of the following customs ‘Ke davo donu na vanua, ena qai muri mai na Sauta’ and ‘Solesolevake’.

Unclear Values for Fiji Rugby

9. The vision and values of the FRU help members or provincial unions, strategic partners and key stakeholders to share the organisation’s dream for the future. The vision corresponds to what the FRU wants to be in the long term, whilst the values are the underpinning beliefs that the organisation promotes. The vision and values provide a framework for the rest of the strategic planning process. This is why it is important to be sure of the values that an organisation wants to promote.

10. The FRU Working Document did not define a set of core values for Fiji Rugby. The FRU Strategic Plan defines four values, and additionally the FRU’s management is promoting the IRB’s five core values. The provincial unions do not appear to have participated in the development of the vision and values for Fiji Rugby and thus cannot be said to share in the FRU’s dream for the future.

11. The interviewed participants, without knowledge of the IRB’s 5 core values, specifically identified four of the five values. However, they did not identify two of the four values defined in the FRU Strategic Plan, “Invest in our People and our Players” and “Honour God”. The first value being defined more as a strategic objective and the latter more assumed than explicitly expressed during the planning process.

12. Any vision and values developed for the FRU need to be underpinned by the beliefs, customs, traditions and importance of the Vanua (the indigenous

83 people of Fiji, their chiefs, land and customs), the bedrock of Fiji Rugby, its core and foundation, which inspires and motivates the individual behavior of those involved in the Rugby. Also, the provincial unions, which are largely Vanua based or a part of the Vanua’s social and political institutions.

13. The public of Fiji was also seen as the driving force behind Rugby. The general public’s love of the game, passion for the game, their traditions, customs and support need to also be recognised, nurtured, strengthened and promoted by the FRU. Rugby is clearly a valued way of life in Fiji and an indelible institution for iTaukei.

14. The call by provincial unions for more transparency, accountability and competitiveness in the operations of the FRU also needs to be factored into any approved vision and values for Fiji Rugby.

Unclear Vision for Fiji Rugby

15. Due to the serious and significant financial, governance, administrative and operational challenges facing the FRU, as an organisation, over the next 4 to 8 years any vision for Fiji Rugby needs to factor this in.

16. The success or ability of the FRU ‘To be World Leaders in Rugby’ is directly correlated to and fundamentally dependent upon necessary reforms to address these financial, governance and administrative challenges.

17. As the status and ranking of 7s and 15s Rugby Union in Fiji differ significantly, the research determined what separate vision statements for both of these formats would look like.

18. The Fiji 7s team is one of the most popular and successful teams in the World, winning the Honk Kong Seven’s tournament a record 13 times since its inception in 1976, winning two World Series, and is currently ranked within the top three teams in the World Sevens Series. Whereas, the Fiji

84 15s team, is currently ranked 11th in the World, out of 102 countries, and despite their low ranking, at the 2007 Rugby World Cup, the Fiji team defeated Wales 38 to 34 to claim a quarter-final spot, theoretically placing them in the top 8 teams in the World. Also, Fiji 15s has a remarkable history, and in 1939 set a record that remains intact today for being the only team to tour New Zealand unbeaten. Also, in 1977, Fiji beat the British Lions at Buckhurst Park, Suva.

7s Vision for Fiji Rugby

19. Fiji is already a leading team in the IRB World Sevens Series. As an organisation, the FRU, is not a World Leader in Rugby. Any vision developed for a 4 or 8 year period should take into account the following performance goals of the team and the state of the FRU, as identified in this research:

To be the best, number one, the top in the IRB Sevens World Series, and win everything else on offer, the World Cup, Commonwealth and Olympic games, and for Fiji to be the most consistent 7s Rugby playing nation in the World.

20. The development of a vision for 7s that includes the huge potential to expose woman to the World of 7s Rugby on an International scene. A vision that builds on the national backing, support, love and fervor for the team, that recognizes and promotes the Fijian style of 7s, which casts Fiji as unbeatable and indomitable (impossible to subdue or defeat).

15s Vision for Fiji Rugby

21. Similarly, a vision for 15s over the next 4 to 8 years needs to factor in the state of the FRU, as an organisation, and the current performance and ranking of the team.

22. Compared to 7s, 15s has a much longer way to go to reach any vision of being a Tier One nation, and consistently competing, if not win, against Tier

85 One nations, including the All Blacks, and many obstacles, both organizationally and financially to overcome before reaching that vision.

23. The fact Fiji is a small island and isolated state, with a relatively small GDP compared to Tier One nations reinforces the need for prudence and shrewd management of already limited human and financial resources as being critical to improve Fiji’s on field performance.

24. As identified in the research, there is a desire for long-term commitment and allocation of resources to the development of competitions, infrastructure and people on a domestic level, in conjunction with, not at the expense of high performance and elite programs that only finesse the ‘raw’ being produced by the existing competitions and structures.

Strategic Objects for Fiji Rugby

25. The FRU Development Plan identified 3 strategic goals or prioritise, as follows:

(a) Participation (to deliver a mass participation program through the Get into Rugby (GIR) program);

(b) Training and education (to deliver a program which provides a holistic approach for all rugby stakeholders); and,

26. One participant in the research observed that whilst participation of the game in Fiji can be grown significantly, Fiji already has, per head of capita, the highest participation rate in the World. The Get into Rugby (GIR) program appears to be an initiative of the IRB and an example of a funder influencing the direction and resource allocation of Fiji Rugby. This goal

86 does not link back to the FRU Strategic Plan, but back to goal 10 identified in the July 2012 workshop. This goal does not appear to be a strategic priority for the FRU, and as one participant observed, directing resources to improving facilities, fields, infrastructure, coaching, refereeing, and improving scrummaging would be more strategically and competitively advantageous for Fiji Rugby.

27. Whilst the development goal of training and education can be loosely linked back to strategic goal 2 of the FRU Strategic Plan and July 2012 workshop SWOT/GAP analysis, there is no direct link with that workshop. The research indicated that this development goal is a priority for provincial unions. The training and development of both paid staff and volunteers at all levels of Rugby to improve the qualifications, skills and experience of FRU’s human resources, including coaches, referees, medical staff and administrators.

28. The development goal of Woman’s Rugby, appears to be a priority influenced by the IRB and board because of the social importance of promoting Woman in sport in Fiji. This goal links with strategic goal 3 of the FRU Strategic Plan (Develop sustainable Rugby development and infrastructure), but there is no direct link to the SWOT/GAP analysis or balance scorecard goals developed out of the July 2012 workshop. The research reaffirmed strategic goal 3 to develop competitions and infrastructure, particularly the re-establishment of a professional/semi- professional competition for both 7s and 15s. Whilst the development of Woman’s Rugby is important, this development should not be at the expense or sacrifice or lack of focus on the development of competitions and infrastructure in Fiji as a whole, but more concurrently and in step with such development.

4.2 Revision of FRU Strategic Plan

1. Clearly a lot of effort and cost has been expended already to develop the FRU Working Document, FRU Strategic Plan, and FRU Development Plan.

2. However, the FRU Strategic Plan is not complete or fit for purpose. 4 of the 7 strategic goals have no strategy or action plan. The FRU Strategic Plan has not been operationalized and therefore cannot be performance managed. The links between the mission, objects, and goals are not all clear and the strategic planning process appears disjointed. Also, there is no effective mechanism in place for monitoring or evaluating the performance cycles of the FRU or strategically manage achievement of the FRU’s existing objectives and action plans.

3. The balanced scorecard method is very complicated and difficult to follow. Robinson & Palmer (2010, pp. 129-134) identify several problems with the implementation of the balanced scorecard framework, as follows:

(c) Finally, managers need to have the skills to be able to interpret the information that the Balanced Scorecard generates.

4. The preparation and development of the FRU Working Document, FRU Strategic Plan, and FRU Development Plan appeared to suffer from the same barriers identified by SPARC (2004):

(a) Poor preparation. Limited analysis of the external environment,

88 current capability and stakeholder expectations;

(b) Time pressure. The planning process is often squashed within a busy operational environment. There can be very little time to properly examine strategic possibilities; and,

(c) Focus on ‘business as usual’. Plans often focus on doing what we’ve always done but perhaps aiming to do them a little better. There can be unwillingness to think ‘outside of the square’ and respond to the realities of the external environment; and,

5. In place of the balanced scorecard framework and associated initiatives it is recommended that the FRU follow a more sport relevant and less complicated framework developed by Camy and Robinson (2007, p. 62), the five-step process for strategic management outlined in Figure 1. In addition, the adoption of Robinson and Palmer’s (2010, p. 127) performance management process outlined in Figure 2.

6. As a result of the research the following methodology is suggested to revise the FRU Strategic Plan and start an operational action plan, as shown in Table 10 below.

7. A separate workshop for the input and feedback of Primary (Kaji) and Secondary Schools was considered important and critical to the future direction of Fiji Rugby, as these two organisations are responsible for the development of players for the future. These two organisations are responsible for the largest pool of players in Fiji, having 100,000 and 20,000 registered players respectively. The strategic development of the

89 organisational capacity of these organisations, the level of coaching, facilities, competitions and systems are important to the FRU achieving its vision ‘To become World Leaders in Rugby’.

Table 10 – Proposed Methodology for the Revision of FRU Strategic Plan

Person Responsible Time frame Task • Board • CEO • At the earliest Start Planning Process IRB (IRB financial and technical opportunity support to process important) Appoint Strategic Management Committee (SMC) • Max 3 + Consultant • Need relevant rugby knowledge and strategic planning experience • CEO • Commitment and time available • IRB for process • Ideally made up of CEO, member of board, member from provincial Within 1st week unions, and consultant Appoint Strategic Management Consultant (C) • Open minded and practical • SMC approach • IRB • Use of uncomplicated framework • Culturally appropriate and respectful • SMC & C Approve Budget & Method of • Funders (IRB, Within 3rd Revising Plan FNSC, FASANOC Week & Sponsors) How going to Revise Plan? • SMC & C Up-to-date SWOT/Environmental • SMC & C Scan Revision of Values, Vision and Within 6th • SMC & C Objectives Week Draft Revised Plan • SMC & C Approval of Revised Plan • SMC & C Series of Workshops 1. Board ½ day 2. FRU Management 1 day • SMC & C Within 10th 3. Provincial Unions, Vanua and • FRU Management Week Chief & Facility Stakeholders - Western Division – 1 day - Central Division – 1 day

90 - Northern Division – 1 day - Eastern Division – 1 day

* proactive – need to set up at a convenient time and venue to encourage attendance 4. Funding Stakeholders – 1 day - IRB - FNSC - FASANOC - Sponsors 5. Primary (Kaji) and Secondary Schools – 1 day • SMC & C Within 11th Further Revision of Plan Week • Board Within 12th Week • FRU Council at Adoption of Plan AGM / SGM At the earliest * critical due to series convenience of crises • CEO At the earliest • FRU Management, Develop Operational Action Plan opportunity, Staff and and Budget not more than 3 Volunteers months

4.3 Governance, Constitutional Review, Incorporation, Performance Management

Governance and Quality People

1. One area highlighted by the research that required urgent attention is the strengthening, reform and change of the FRU’s leadership and governance model, with a new approach to the appointment of people with skills, rugby knowledge, leadership, strategy and effective decision-making and controls to govern. Associated with this reform would be the undertaking of a thorough review of the competencies and skills of management.

2. The FRU may adopt the CaS governance framework, which provides a flexible and adoptable governance model that is reflective of the culture, traditions and customs of Fiji Rugby.

3. However, it does not matter whether the FRU adopts this model or

91 implements or develops any other standards, policies or rules; good governance is totally dependent on the quality of the people that participate and are involved in it, combined with the synergy, trust and communication that exists between the board and executive teams of the organisation.

4. According to Mowbray (2011, p. 26), there is no model of governance that will transform a poor-performing organisation into a pillar of high performance. The performance of the board is almost entirely dependent on the people involved; models or frameworks can only help them by providing tools to work with.

Constitutional Review and Incorporation

5. Another key area highlighted in the research requiring urgent attention is the review and reform of the FRU’s constitution and transitioning the organisation to a company limited by guarantee, and a skill’s based board.

6. This area of enquiry was outside the scope of this research, however, was raised by participants as a strategic objective of the FRU and part of the general call to ‘modernise’, ‘corporatise’ and ‘professionalise’ the governance, management and operations of the FRU.

Culture of Strategic Management and Performance Management

7. The research identified a culture within the FRU resistant to change and the practice of strategic planning, and personnel insufficiently qualified to effectively practice strategic management and performance management methods.

8. Also, the need for effectively defined strategic objectives or strategic actions that are measurable, achievable, specific, time-specific, ends not means, and ranked.

92 Chapter 4 – Conclusions

1. The Fiji Rugby Union

1.1 Fiji Rugby has humble beginnings in 1913, as an amateur sport (see Picture 1 below), and a more recent history of Government and IRB involvement and subsidization, especially since the professionalization of rugby union in 1995, driven by the need for ‘commercialization’ of the sport and by increased public pressure for the FRU to be more accountable and transparent. The FNSC, IRB and FASANOC continue to be involved and heavily subsidize the operating costs of the FRU. Thus, commercial agendas have competed with social and political agendas.

1.2 The development of human capacity is the key to lifting the governance and strategic management standards throughout rugby union in Fiji. Over the years, it appears as though there has been little incentive for rugby union administrators to improve their skill levels. Administrators in general have learned their skills informally and current practices mirror those of earlier generations. These practices are more suited to the amateur days of rugby union than modern commercial practice.

Picture 1 - The first committee of the Fiji Rugby Union - 1913

93 2. Rationale for Strategic Management

2.1 In general, Fiji’s OSOs need to develop the governance and strategic management of their organisations to improve accountability, transparency and competitiveness, as well as, become more independent of funding agencies.

2.2 Such governance and strategic management development of Fiji’s OSOs would help to:

(a) Avoid a culture of short cuts and consumption, shooting for the stars, but ending in disappointment (Minikin, 2011, p. 44);

(b) Encourage the allocation of adequate resources to the development of an OSOs capacity, sporting systems, strong competitive structures and infrastructure as opposed to being drawn away to support elite programs (Rapilla, 2008, pp. 9-10);

(d) Use as a unifying tool for management and internal communication, encourage staff and volunteer involvement and a more effective collaboration between them;

(e) Show any sponsors and funding agencies how an OSO is using its resources in general and particularly the resources provided by a funder; and,

(f) Reinforce the image and legitimacy of OSOs’ activities to the public, private partners and members.

3. Strategic Management of Fiji’s OSOs

3.1 The research found that governance is of a basic to moderate level of

94 development, organisational performance is not being adequately evaluated or monitored, if at all, and that generally the practice of strategic leadership and strategic planning is below the Sport Industry Benchmark.

3.2 As the governance and performance of an OSO is totally dependent on the quality of people that participate in governance, for Fiji’s OSOs to move towards a culture of strategic management those responsible at the highest level of governance and management from village to national levels need to be developed and trained accordingly.

3.3 The development of human capacity is the key for Fiji’s OSOs to move towards a culture of strategic management and financial independence from funding agencies. The training and development of those responsible for governance and management at village, school, club, provincial and national levels in the practice, theory and applicable tools of governance and strategic management is at the heart of improving the accountability, transparency and competitiveness of Fiji’s OSOs, reinforcing the public’s trust and confidence in these sport organisations, and sustainably lifting the standard and performance of Fiji’s athletes and national sporting teams.

3.4 The clarification of the role of governance, strategic management, strategic planning and performance management in a sport organisation for the administrators and stakeholders of Fiji’s OSOs is an essential first step in the development of human capacity across Fiji’s sport industry and developing an industry-wide understanding, appreciation and commitment towards the practice of good governance and strategic management, and the avoidance of the following bad practices:

(a) Poor preparation – the successful formulation of a detailed political and administrative plan for the revision or development of a strategic plan requires careful preparation and forethought, if not, the result can be the limited analysis of an OSO’s external environment, current capacity, and stakeholder expectations.

(b) Rushing the planning process - the planning process is often squashed within a busy operational environment, leaving little time to properly examine strategic possibilities;

(c) Cultural resistance - a cultural resistance to change, to think outside the square and respond to the realities of the external environment; focus on business as usual and doing what has always been done but perhaps aiming to do them a little better.

(d) A ‘stretched’ vision that is not feasible - if a ‘stretched’ vision is set by an OSO, there is often no resource plan for people, finance and infrastructure to support the vision, and thus, the feasibility of the plan is called into question.

3.5 The Fiji Government has recognized the general social need in Fiji for the development of human capacity in Pillars 1 (ensuring sustainable democracy and good and just governance), 3 (ensuring effective, enlightened and accountable leadership) and 4 (enhancing public sector efficiency, performance effectiveness and service delivery) of its ‘Strategic Framework for Change’.

3.6 The Fiji Government has also provided for the institutional framework and mechanism to support Fiji’s OSOs develop their human capacity, by the establishment of the FNSC in 2013 with the following relevant functions and powers: to “administer money appropriated by the Government or raised by the Commission for the purposes of the Commission”; to “make grants and provide scholarships or like benefits for sporting activities and related purposes”; to “co-ordinate and promote activities for the development of sports”; to “initiate, encourage, facilitate research and development in sports”; to “provide support and financial assistance to national federations, in the development of their sport and of their high performance athletes”; and to “organize and provide research, professional, and technical services in the areas of sports science, sports medicine and sports management”.

3.7 The FNSC’s 2013 to 2018 strategic plan also includes the following relevant corporate objective to “provide coordination, direction and support the development of sports in Fiji”, and strategic goal to “Initiate, encourage, facilitate research and development in sports by organising and providing research, professional, and technical services in the areas of sports science, sports medicine and sports management”.

3.8 Similarly, FASANOC, ONOC, the International Federations or Regional Organisations for each NF in Fiji are likely to provide support for the human development of Fiji’s OSOs from the village to national levels in governance and strategic management.

3.9 Therefore, the above demonstrates that the Fiji Government and OSOs have a genuine intention to bring about a positive change in the culture or practice of governance and strategic management in Fiji and have taken the first steps towards the development of human capacity of Fiji’s OSOs through policy and funding opportunities.

3.10 The next step is for the FNSC, FASANOC and Fiji’s OSOs to cooperate collaborate and agree to prioritise the design funding and implementation of a suitable development program in governance and strategic management for Fiji’s OSOs.

97 List of References

Australian Institute of Company Directors (2014): Introduction to the Strategic Role of the Director, Fiji Directors Course, Strategy and Risk for Directors, p. 1-72.

Barney, J. (2001): Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view, Journal of Management, 27, 643-650. Retrieved from source http://jom.sagepub.com/content/27/6/643.

Bayle, E., & Robinson, L. (2007): A Framework for Understanding the Performance of National Governing Bodies of Sport, European Sport Management Quarterly, 7 (3), 249-268. Retrieved from source http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16184740701511037.

Bayle, Duncan, Chappelet & Kartakoullis (2007). Managing strategically. In Camy, J., & Robinson, L., Managing Olympic Sport Organisations. Lausanne, Switzerland: Olympic Solidarity.

Boyd, P. (2005). Strategic Planning Guide for Fiji’s National Sports Federations, 5-8.

Camy, J. & Robinson, L. (Eds) (2007), Managing Olympic Sport Organisations, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.

Carver, J. (1997) Boards that Make a Difference: A New Design for Leadership in Nonprofit and Public Organizations (2nd edn). New York, Jossey-Bass, John Wiley.

Chappelet, J.-L. (2010). Strategic management and planning. In Robinson, L., & Palmer, R., Managing Voluntary Sport Organisations (pp. 55, 56, & 69). United Kingdom: Routledge.

Chappelet, J.L. and Bayle, E. (2004), Strategic and Performance Management of Olympic Sports Organisations, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.

Chappelet, J.-L., & Bayle, E. (2005) Strategic and Performance Management of Olympic Sport Organisations. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Fiji Bureau of Statistics (2007) retrieved from source http://www.statsfiji.gov.fj/index.php/2007-census-of-population.

Fiji Guide (2014) retrieved from source http://fijiguide.com/page/4351878:Page:55.

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1996) ‘The volitional benefits of planning’, in M. Gollwitzer and J. A. Barch (eds.) The Psychology of Action: Linking Cognition and Motivation to Behaviour, New York, The Guildford Pres.

Graves, T. (2006) An introduction to SCORE. Beyond SWOT analysis: strategy, capability and effectiveness, Colchester, Teradian Consulting.

Kikulis, L., Slack, T. and Hinnings, B. (1995), “Understanding the role of agency and

98 choice in the changing structure of Canada’s national sports organisations”, Journal of Sports Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 129-50.

Kikulis, L., Slack, T. and Hinnings, C.R. (1992), “Institutional specific design archetypes: a framework for understanding change in national sports organizations”, International Review of Sociology of Sports, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 343-70.

Minikin, B. (2009). A Question of Readiness, Unpublished MEMOS Project. Lausanne, Olympic Solidarity. Retrieved from source http://www.sportingpulse.com/get_file.cgi?id=683744.

Minikin, B. (2011). A planned development of sport organizations. In Robinson, L., Guillaume, B., Downward, P., & Chelladurai, P., Routledge handbook of sport management. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Mowbray, D. (2011). The contingent and standards governance framework for national governing bodies. In Robinson, L., Guillaume, B., Downward, P., & Chelladurai, P., Routledge handbook of sport management (p. 26). United Kingdom: Routledge.

NZOCGA (1994), Pathway to Gold Report, New Zealand Olympic and Commonwealth Games Association Inc, Auckland.

Owen, N. (2003, April), The Failure of HIH Insurance, Volume 1, HIH Royal Commission, Australia.

Ravuvu, A (1983) quoted in: Stephanie Sienkiewicz, “Ethnic relations in Fiji: Peaceful coexistence and the recent shift in the ethnic balance”, Union College Department of Anthropology, June 2000. Retrieved from source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanua.

Papadimitriou, D. (2007), “Conceptualizing effectiveness in a non-profit organisational environment”, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 571-87.

Rapilla, A. (2008), “A strategic planning tool to assess and enhance performance of National Federations in Papua New Guinea”, unpublished MEMOS Project, IOC, Lausanne. Retrieved from source http://www.sportingpulse.com/get_file.cgi?id=604377.

Robinson, L. (2013 L2) Principles of strategic management, power point presentation lecture notes, MEMOS XVII.

Robinson, L., Guillaume, B., Downward, P., & Chelladurai, P. (2011). Routledge handbook of sport management. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Robinson, L., & Minikin, B. (2011): Developing strategic capacity in Olympic sport organisations, Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 1 (3), 219-233. Retrieved from source http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=2042-

99 678x&volume=1&issue=3&PHPSESSID=p6hja5jgsdlac4diae1no7rb32

Robinson, L., & Minikin, B. (2012): Understanding the competitive advantage of National Olympic Committees, Managing Leisure, 17 (2-3), 139-154. Retrieved from source http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13606719.2012.674391.

Robinson, L., & Palmer, R. (2010): Managing Voluntary Sport Organisations. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Sundowner (1896) Talanoa Na Yagona: Stories from The South Seas. Reprint. London: Forgotten Books, 2013. 40-1. Print. Retrieved from source http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Stories_from_The_South_Seas_ 1000077952/49.

Schieder, D. (2012) “Rugby in Fiji: Unifying and Dividing a Multi-Cultural Society”, Pacific News, 37, p. 23.

Skinner, J., Stewart, B. and Edwards, A. (1999), “Amateurism to professionalism: modelling organisational change in sporting organisations”, Sports Management Review, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 173-92.

Slack, T. (1997), Understanding Sport Organisations: The Application of Organisation Theory, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.

SPLISS (2006), “Sports policy factors leading to international success”, Research report, UK Sport, London.

Sport and Recreation New Zealand (“SPARC”) (2004) “Nine Steps to Effective Governance” guide

SPARC (2004) “Guide to Strategic and Business Planning in Sport”, four phase strategic planning process, p. 8.

SPARC (2004) Nine Steps to Good Governance. Retrieved from source http://www.sparc.org.nz/Documents/Sector%20Capability/effective_govt_2nd.p df.

Strebel, P. (2004) ‘The case of contingent governance’, MIT Sloan Management Review, 45 (2), 1532-9194.

Tourism Fiji (2014), Happy in One, retrieved from source http://www.fiji.travel/information/guides/sports-golf/rugby.

Winand, M., Zintz, T., Bayle, E., & Robinson, L. (2010): Organizational performance of Olympic sport governing bodies: dealing with measurement and priorities, Managing Leisure, 15 (4), 279-307. Retrieved from source http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13606719.2010.508672.

100 Appendices Appendix 1 - Chronology of Events of Governance and Management

Fiji Rugby Union 15s, Governance and Management

• 1987 – Rugby World Cup, eliminated in quarter finals • 1991 – Rugby World Cup, eliminated in pool stages • 1995 o Professionalization of Rugby Union Worldwide o Rugby World Cup, did not qualify • 2003 o Rugby World Cup, eliminated in pool stages o Strategic plan developed • 2007 – Rugby World Cup, eliminated in quarter finals • 2009 – National mens 15s coach terminated • 2011 o January - FRU Lottery, fundraiser for the 2011 Rugby World Cup, resulted in the potential losses of over $250,000 in prize money. o January - FRU Board resigns o April new chairman and board elected/appointed a annual general meeting call from affiliated unions for constitutional and operational reforms to Fiji Rugby o June – CEO Resigns o Rugby World Cup, eliminated in pool stages o Commission of enquiry as to performance of team o November – appointment of new CEO • 2012 o January – appointment of new national men’s 15s coach o PWC report on structure of FRU • 2013 o April new chairman and board, except for two continuing members renewed call from affiliated unions for constitutional and operational reforms for Fiji Rugby o May/July – FRU insolvent, IRB enquiry into governance, administration and finances of FRU o September – CEO removed o December – several senior managers removed • 2014 o January Board changes structure of FRU IRB suspends funding until FRU implements reforms National men’s 15s coach terminated o May New national men’s 15s coach

101 Three board members removed at special general meeting o June Three board members claim SGM unconstitutional and continue to act as directors IRB funding continued Board moves back to original structure of FRU o July - Announcement of admission of Fiji Rugby League Team into the New South Wales Cup from 2016 o August Appointment of new CEO Nadroga Rugby Union and Suva Rugby Union request postponement of semifinals Ratu Kadavulevu School failed to release five players to participate at the 2014 Youth Olympic Games in Nanjing China. FRU seeks to suspend school from the Coke Zero Deans competition

Fiji Rugby Union 7s

• 1977 – Won Hong Kong 7s • 1978 – Won Hong Kong 7s • 1980 – Won Hong Kong 7s • 1981 – Won Hong Kong 7s • 1984 – Won Hong Kong 7s • 1990 – Won Hong Kong 7s • 1991 – Won Hong Kong 7s • 1992 – Won Hong Kong 7s • 1995 – Pacific Games Gold Medal • 1997 – Won 7s Rugby World Cup • 1998 o Won Hong Kong 7s o Commonwealth Games Silver Medal • 1999 o Won Hong Kong 7s o Pacific Games Gold Medal • 2001 – World Games Gold Medal • 2002 – Commonwealth Games Silver Medal • 2003 - Pacific Games Gold Medal • 2005 o Won 7s Rugby World Cup o World Games Gold Medal • 2005/2006 – IRB World Sevens Series Winners • 2007 - Pacific Games Gold Medal • 2009 o Won Hong Kong 7s o World Games Gold Medal • 2012 – Won Hong Kong 7s

102 • 2013 – Won Hong Kong 7s

Athletics Fiji

• 2013 - December – two factions claiming control of the organisations • 2014 - May – three new members of board elected and impasse resolved

Netball Fiji

• 2013 - December – two factions claiming control of the organisations

National Golf Association of Fiji

• 2009 – July – dispute over the presidency of the organisation and whether the incumbent had been properly replaced • 2014 - July – merger of National Golf Association of Fiji and Fiji Woman’s Golf Association

Boxing Fiji Association

• 2013 - August – differences between the Fiji Boxing Commission and Fiji Association of Sports and National Olympic Committee resolved which had stopped amateur boxing in Fiji for the last 13 months

103 Appendix 2 - FRU Structure, Background and Pictures

1. Rugby Union was introduced to Fiji in the 1880s. The Fiji Rugby Union is the governing body for the sport. The FRU was founded in 1913, and joined the sports international federation, the IRB, in 1987.

2. In 1995, the IRB changed the worldwide game of rugby union by transforming it from an amateur to a professional sport. The challenge then for the FRU was to develop in step with the global professionalization of the sport, and to remain competitive.

3. The FRU administers rugby over Fiji's 14 provinces and approximately 100 inhabited islands covering an area of 230,000 square kilometers centered in the hub of the South Pacific.

4. Fiji is one of the few countries in the World where Rugby Union is its national sport.

5. From a population of almost 900,000, an estimated 15,000 senior players, 20,000 high school students, and 100,000 primary school children participate in Rugby Union. Fiji has probably the highest ratio of rugby players of any country registered and active; a recent survey by the International Rugby Board (IRB) showed Fiji had more post-schools rugby players than New Zealand (with more than 5 times the population of Fiji) and only slightly less than Australia (with almost 25 times the population of Fiji).

104

6. The FRU is the largest Olympic Sport Organisation and National Federation in Fiji and is a leading sport organisation.

7. The FRU comprises of 36 affiliated unions and associations, each with their own administration and constitution. There are 13 unions in Viti Levu (the largest and main Island) and 5 in Vanua Levu (the second largest island), with the remaining 18 on smaller outer islands.

8. The 36 affiliated unions conduct club competitions with their respective areas, with numbers of clubs numbering more than 600 in total. Primary Schools 714 and Secondary Schools 174. In addition to this structure, there are many village teams which are too isolated or too few in numbers to form a union. Almost every village has a team although those not attached to a union may play only occasional matches.

9. The Fiji men’s Sevens team is one of the most popular and successful teams in the World. Fiji has won the Hong Kong Seven’s tournament a record 13 times since its inception in 1976 and won two World Series. Rugby Sevens is now part of the Olympic program for the 2016 Rio Games;

10. Between 2003 and 2014, the IRB has ranked the Fiji men’s XVs team, excluding 2011, between 9th and 13th out of 102 countries worldwide. The 2007 Rugby World Cup was a particularly good year for Fiji, beating Wales to make the quarterfinals. The 2011 Rugby World Cup was not a good year and Fiji temporarily dropping to 16th on the IRB rankings. In 2014, Fiji is ranked 11th;

11. The FRU, as an organisation, is perceived to not be accountable and competitive, despite its on field successes. The FRU is reputedly insolvent with governance, administrative and financial problems.

12. Rugby Union in Fiji is part of the national culture and identity supported by the whole nation made up of a multi-cultural, multi-racial and multi-religious citizenry; and

13. Importantly, because Rugby Union in Fiji is an integral part of the vaka i taukei or indigenous Fijian way of life, alongside their devotion to religion, the chiefly system and British Monarch. Rugby Union is almost exclusively played by indigenous Fijians, which makes up just over half the population of Fiji, with an estimated population in 2007 of 475,739 (Fiji Bureau of Statistics, 2007) roughly evenly spread between rural and urban areas.

14. The inclusion of sevens rugby in the 2016 Rio Games has given extra incentive and increased pressure for the FRU to be more accountable and competitive.

15. The FRU is a member of the Fiji Association of Sports and National Olympic Committee (FASANOC), founded in 1949 and recognised as a member of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in 1955. In total, FASANOC has 21

105 affiliated sports on the Olympic program, including Rugby Union, Cycling and Triathlon

106 Appendix 3 - RAT Governance Pillar 1 – Strategic Management Elements

107 Appendix 4 - Colonial Cup 2004 - 2008

(sourced from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_Cup_(rugby_union)

Colonial Cup

The Colonial Cup (named after sponsors The Colonial National Bank) was the second highest level of competition within Fijian rugby union and was intended to be a stepping stone for local players into international rugby union. It was Fiji's first professional league though the players were only paid £40 a week plus lodgings.

History In 2004, with the gap between provincial rugby in Fiji and test rugby at an unacceptable level, the Fiji Rugby Union introduced a brand new, streamlined competition to identify and prepare local players for the international stage. The 30- odd provincial unions were grouped into four franchises along geographical lines. Players not selected for one team could be picked up by one of the others. The new competition started on the 3rd of April 2004 and finished the 22nd of May 2004 in time for the international test window. The four teams played a round-robin followed by semi-finals and a grand final. The Coastal Stallions held off a late rally from the Suva Highlanders to claim the inaugural Colonial Cup 26-21 In 2005 an extra team was added, Northern Sharks, made of players from Vanua, Levu, Taveuni and Ovalau. Previously the Nothern Division had belonged to the Suva franchise. Suva Highlanders won the Grand final with a 35-27 win over Western Crusaders. In 2006, with the introduction of a Super 14 style tournament called the Pacific Rugby Cup, the void in the Pacific Island competition pathway between club or provincial rugby in the respective islands and Test rugby was on its way to being filled. Coastal Stallions defeated Suva Highlanders 29-15 in a tough encounter to clinch the 2006 title. Bligh Roosters joined the 2007 competition, Western Crusaders gave up Tavua, Vatukoula, Ba and Ra to the new franchise.

108 It was announced in 2008 that the competition would cease due to not achieving its player performance aims and low crowds.

Structure Fiji’s best 150 players were divided up into 6 professionally run franchises. These franchises played each other over 10 weeks culminating in a semi-final and final. The league used 4 points for a win; 2 for a draw; 1 bonus point for scoring four or more tries in a match; 1 bonus point for losing by 7 points or less. The top four teams then proceed to the semi-finals.

Franchises • Bligh Roosters - Tavua, Vatukoula, Ba, Ra • Coastal Stallions – Nadroga-Navosa, Namosi, Serua and Malolo • Northern Sharks – Vanua Levu, Taveuni, Ovalau, and Island Zone • Suva Highlanders – Suva, Naitasiri, Kadavu • Tailevu Knights – Tailevu, Northland, and Rewa • Western Crusaders – Lautoka, Nadi and Yasawa

Past winners • 2004 Coastal Stallions • 2005 Suva Highlanders • 2006 Coastal Stallions • 2007 Coastal Stallions • 2008 Western Crusaders

109 Appendix 5 - OSOs RAT Data and Column Graph – 2014

110

111 Appendix 6 - Stakeholder Interview Questionnaire

REVIEW OF FRU STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKING DOCUMENT

Part A – Preparing to Review

Stakeholders

1. Who are the stakeholders of the FRU? 2. Which of these stakeholders have the highest interest and control or influence (or should have) over the FRU strategy and priorities (e.g high, medium or low control/influence)? Or Who are the key stakeholders for the FRU to consult with in the review and development of its strategic plan

Review of Process

1. Who should be involved in the planning process? 2. Should the FRU use a consultant from the IRB or elsewhere to review and develop its strategic plan? 3. What process, if any, would you suggest for strategic planning? Or How would you go about developing the plan? 4. How much time should be allowed for planning activities or carrying out the work of formulating a strategic plan? Or How long should the process be? 5. How often should the FRU review its plan (annually or otherwise)?

Part B – Reviewing Vision and Objectives

FRU’s Core Values

1. What are the core values of Fiji Rugby? 2. What motivates or drives the priorities of members of the FRU? 3. What motivates or drives administrators, referees, coaches, participants, volunteers, supporters and players of the FRU? 4. What are the values of the FRU? 5. What are the values that make up the culture of Rugby in Fiji? 6. What is the culture or spirit of Rugby in Fiji?

Vision

1. What should be the vision for Fiji Rugby? 2. What is your vision for 7s and what is your vision for 15s? 3. Where do you want the FRU to be in the future? 4. If the FRU was guaranteed success in both 15s and 7s, what would that look like?

Mission

1. How do you achieve this vision or what are the strategic objects of Fiji Rugby? 2. What is the mission for the FRU and what actions would you take to achieve your vision?

112 3. What is the purpose of the FRU (for 15s and 7s)? Why does it exist? What is its 4. What actions would you take to achieve your vision? 5. For whom would you be taking these actions? 6. What would be the result of your actions?

SWOT Analysis of FRU

1. 1.Do you general agree with the top 5 SWOT? If not, what would you add or take away from the top five SWOT?

FRU Strategic Goals and Priorities – GAP Analysis

1. Do you agree with these strategic goals and priorities? If not, what would you add or take away?

113 Appendix 7 - Combined Stakeholder Interview Answers

Part 1 – Preparing to Review 1. Who are the stakeholders of the FRU? P1 Prime/Chief stakeholders are provincial unions, big and little; Rugby playing public. Very conscious of them; These days sponsors to be given some value; FASANOC and Government do not see them as stakeholders. Are not entitled to dictate to the FRU; IRB got to work within the FRU’s framework and rules of the game P2 Clubs /unions; Players union – none in Fiji, but have the Pacific Players Union; Disciplined forces (Police, Military, Wardens); Schools, Universities – scholarship programs in NZ/Australia taking away player base at early age, need an incentive to stay in Fiji P3 Non-financial. Fiji Citizens – divided into joe blows and wealthy businessmen. Die hard suppporters. Unions, provisional and schools. Development network, men and woman. Support something that belongs to them. P4 Premier Provincial sides focus of Fiji Rugby. Grass root, Kaji, part of rugby fraternity but not key. B division part, but not key. Rest of affilliation, primary, Kaji, Island Zone, not key because of availability of resources. P5 Members of Rugby Council, first and foremost, Then, secondly, sponsors. Not all unions have the right people (skilled, experienced or qualified for their jobs). IRB should develop adminstrators! We need to empower unions. Through workshops for Presidents and secretaries of unions to carry out their roles property. If unions are strong the FRU would be up there. Currently only a handful of major unions, 3 or 4, working hard out of the 12 unions. P6 Provinces and overseas pro players. P7 Unions, IRB, Pacific Nations (to a less extent Australia/NZ) e.g Tonga, Samoa, Japan, USA, Pacific Rim – same tier as Fiji, level of development P8 Member of unions P9 Unions, Secondary Schools, Kaji rugby, Woman’s Rugby, Government, IRB P10 Board members, FRU management, provincial union, Fiji Secondary Schools P11 Unions, management, board and Government Ministries P12 Sponsors, Unions, Players, Staff, Management, Board, IRB P13 - P14 - 2. Who should be involved in the planning process? Or Who are the key stakeholders for the FRU to consult with in the review and development of its strategic plan? P1 • Lengthy period of time. Wide scope to include all those involved in the game, uncluding woman, down to villages and schools. Throughout the whole system down to the lowest level. • “Run the risk of the loudest voice being heard”. Mamanucas, what do they need, how do they relate to national team. • Grass roots for a start. Rely generally on School Teachers, Masters, Doctors, Police, Pasters/Ministers for coaching and referees etc, so include them. P2 All key stakeholders

114 P3 FRU – board / management, provincial / unions. Qualified facilitator. Done traditionally. Business and financial sector. Let divisions be involved. Staff. Select own. Volunteers (referees, coaches, administrators, delegates). FASANOC, co-opt to subcommittee b/c only represent 7s. Government – FNSC, FSC, Ministry of Sports. Old Boy reps. Select 7 for advisory review committee. Get views even if don’t use them. Best person qualified. A key is they need rugby knowledge and of Pacific Culture. Culture can be taken too far! Too much praying or not playing on Sunday. P4 • All unions, senior provincial unions. President’s and secretaries. Take ownership • Board • Key figures in management • Rep from the Ministry of Youth and Sport • Rep from Fiji National Sports Commission • Maybe, FASANOC, because of Olympic 7s P5 • Involve everyone involved in Rugby • Athletes, Kaji, Secondary Rugby, Vanua (the indigenous people and their chiefs)

P6 Wide as you can. Focus on different areas for different workshops e.g sponsors v provinces. Provinces need a greater say. Community, what are the pathways like. P7 • Unions • Fiji National Sports Commission • Fiji Sports Council • FASANOC (NOC) • Assets/Infrastructure/parks o Municipal Councils o Faith based organisations o Schools • Fiji Government • Ministry of Youth and Sport • Referees Association • Coaches involves with unions • Previous office bearers (board/management) • Ex Fiji reps P8 Member unions, Sponsors, Former rugby administrators – learn from things in the past to improve on now P9 Unions, Secondary Schools, Kaji rugby, Woman’s Rugby, Government, IRB P10 Board members, FRU management, provincial union, Fiji Secondary Schools P11 Unions, management, board and Government Ministries P12 Sponsors, Unions, Players, Staff, Management, Board, IRB P13 Development Unit, Referees, HPU, Games Committee/Board, Secondary School, Kaji Rugby and Provincial Unions P14 Unions/FRU Council members, Sponsors, Players, generally wide consultation, get everybody involved. “Get under one umbrella” 3. How would you involve the Vanua?

115 P5 • The support of the vanua for vanua based teams is important. Most unions require the support of their vanua. • Take vanua support through to FRU. Why not go out to the villages. Come close to the villages. Come down to them. Contributing to the vanua by holding training camps with the Fiji national team or holding over night visits to the vanua. Could go to the chiefly village of a district, rather than going to any village. Even if only over night exercise, shows respect, acknowledgement of the vanua. By contributing the costs of hosting you contribute to the development of the vanua. P8 Go and visit the vanua. Present plans. Ask for their support. Important for everyone to be on the same page. Avoid misunderstanding. Village visit. That’s our pride. If player is in Fiji team. His village hosts the Fiji team. Represent the vanua. Important for chiefs to be present when hosting games. When players see chiefs it motivates them. Know that they are being supported. 4. What process, if any, would you suggest for strategic planning? What planning, if any, is happening at present or would you recommend? Should the FRU use a consultant from the IRB or elsewhere to review and develop its strategic plan? How would you go about developing the plan? P1 Set up a framework for review. Say consult with reps from divisions. Eastern, Western, Northern and Central. Set up a committee. P2 For 7s, annual review/planning start in June for next years season, consultation with key stakeholders, set budgets August. P3 • Divide into divisions. Conduct divisional workshop. Engage with Vanua less formally. Hold workshops in the divisions, more formal, and board approve basic plan. Have to believe whoever is promoting it or behind it. Not the FRU! • Need to be able to communicate culturally and linguistically with the stakeholders. Should have a cultural advisor during the process. P4 • Level of education and knowledge of process. People need to be educated and guided through process carefully. • The board and management take around to respective unions. A Days workshop with each division. Solicit views of each division. • No National consultation, left to FRU council and member unions mandated by core rugby fraternity and reps – transparent enough! P5 - P6 • Ideas diverge. Good facilitation. Crunch the workshop information down. Reps from groups. • Stage 1 workshops with clubs, schools. Provinces. Sponsors etc. Facilitation to crunch details. Key people from above. • Stage 2 – reps of 3 groups, refining bigger document. P7 Understand what problem is! Review existing plan, what achieved. Look at annual report for FRU. P8 Talk to the member unions. To Kaji and secondary schools rugby. For Nadi our aim is to have one jersey from Kaji to provincial level. Have pride and create uniformity. Upskilling of coaches, medical staff, scrumaging. If we improve at bottom then senior teams are more competent. Focus at present on

116 seniors and national teams. P9 Next plan should involve all stakeholders. Current board involved in day to day operations, not enough time for planning and communications. Start to prepare to plan June/July and review. Have meetings July/August with stakeholders outside test window. Plan done by October. P10 Workshop for each provincial union, open for all levels P11 Involve unions, 12 major unions, 10 minor unions, secondary schools, primary schools, Government and Woman’s Rugby P12 Representative of each union and other stakeholders need to be available to do a SWOT analysis P13 Need consultant, but what type? Not a copy and past job. In 2003 a retreat was organised. One or two full days. Natova Island. Invited all key stakeholders. Everyone enthusiastic. Was high on Fiji having a strong identity. Develop Fiji’s own style and identity. Fijians to take ownership of own Rugby. Board couldn’t care less about plan and process, and had no vision for Fiji Rugby, but should be invited along to be educated on plan. The plan was taken around to the provincial unions for tacit approval. The plan was not accepted by the AGM on its merits (or the merits debated), but rather through provincial alliances. This plan can be partly credited with the establishment of a semi-professional competition in Fiji, the Colonial Cup that ran from 2004 to 2007 and arguably contributing to Fiji’s success at the 2007 Rugby World Cup in making the quarterfinals after beating Wales. In 2012/2013, everyone within the FRU was involved in the strategic planning process, but management did not have the means to implement. There was a real cultural resistance to change or innovation. Everyone has their own patch they wish to protect. IRB was merely going through the planning process, no adaptation to context or organic development of process that suited Fiji. The strategic plan was forced by IRB for funding purposes. IRB not pragmatic. Cut and past job from Australia. No adoption to context. IRB was very format driven. Cannot move outside box. People involved did not have the intellectual or cultural capacity to carry out effectively the planning and the process or methodology was way too complicated. Spent hours and hours going around in circles inefficiently debating issues. Futile exercise. No real substance in results achieved. Long meetings. Very superficial results. Not pragmatic enough. In 2012/2013 three strategic planning sessions were done. One by the IRB, one by external consultant and one in-house. All managers, officers and employees participated in the three different workshop planning sessions. Seemed like spent more time in strategic planning workshops than in doing any work to implement these. P14 Consultants do not know the problems within Rugby as well as us. We, rugby administrators, fail to appreciate our own knowledge. We (the unions) need to trust in someone independent and impartial. Consultant will help us come together. But consultant, if IRB or not, need funding for purpose from IRB or elsewhere. I would use workshops. Do in divisions. Central, West and North. Engage key stakeholders. But depends on cost of project. Travelling costs may be too much for unions to bear to get to meeting unless planned at convenient time. Look at targeting the exercise. A committee could be formed made up of management, board and union reps. Small and manageable.

117 4. How much time should be allowed for planning activities or carrying out the work of formulation a strategic plan? P1 At least three months P2 Up to three months P3 1 year P4 Carried out after SGM in November, before AGM in April. Separate workshop. Present report to AGM. Up to 6 months. Short time frame. If leave it too long may lose interest of participants. P5 Can do in three months P6 Six months, minimum because so urgent. Ideally more. Allows bring in and PR. Show consultation. P7 Minimum of three months. P8 After completions in November. Big workshop. Bring everyone together. Also, workshops in each of the four divisions. Western, Eastern, Central and Northern. Then one big family. P9 At least one to two months full time. P10 2 to 3 months, so we can cover all the provincial unions P11 3 months P12 3 months P13 formulated plan by committee over a few weeks. Then take plan around to unions over two to three weeks. P14 No more than 1 to 2 months maximum, while people are still interested. The longer you wait the plan may die a natural death. 5. How often should the FRU review its plan (annually or otherwise)? P1 Annually P2 Annually P3 Development officer report to people. Strategic plan renew every 4 years. Operational plan/action plan/business plan yearly review based on reports and reviews. P4 Annually P5 8 years. With annual review. Post World Cup, major review. FRU needs consistency. 8 years realistic because Fiji Rugby in such a poor state at present that needs to plan far into the future to build and develop. P6 Annually P7 Annually. Reviewed after every World Cup. A new plan for 4 years. P8 4 to 8 years. Annual review November to April. P9 Annual review. Given ability of organisation would rather start with 4 year plan and build to 8 or more year plan. Also, communicate to stakeholders ideally every six months. P10 Annually will be good P11 4 years P12 Annually P13 - P14 - Part 2 – Reviewing Vision and Objects 1. What are the core values for Fiji Rugby? P1 • Passion for the game - If you haven’t got a passion for the game then shouldn’t be involved at any level of the sport.

118 • Discipline - The players tend to frequently lose focus leading to inconsistent performance. • National Pride - Provincial pride and passion for the game is often not brought to national duties. E.g the pride of players in Nadroga and Naitasiri is not equaled in performance at the national level. Something to do with how the elders build them up and motivate them. Difficult to motivate a Fiji team to give it all for Fiji. Perhaps explained by Fijian being a fractured race leading to divisive attitudes. The players when assembled although being Fijian a often like chalk and cheese! Culturally and tribally different. P2 • Respect – who we are / where we are • Humility • Trust • Hard Work P3 I love my Rugby - must belong to the people of Fiji (all cultures). Bringing people together. Driving force behind Fiji. Only sport that can defer coup. Business is planned around it. P4 • Dina – honesty – honest to the country, province and Vanua • Honour / Pride – wear the FRU jersey with pridOpe P5 • Pride - In the jersey. All working for Fiji Rugby. Pushing the passion. Clear understanding of Rugby Administration. Know what player feels. Realign with their beliefs and tune into their culture. • Vanua • Concept of One! Acting together as one. Gives players a lot of meaning. If we are to win, everyone has to win. Put aside different backgrounds. Use individual experience and background to fulfill one goal. P6 • Strong connection/recognition of where people are from. Vanua. Provincial price. Cultural ties. • General to Rugby –sponsorship, community, teamwork P7 Pride P8 • Pride for Fiji Jersey • Good governance, transparency and accountability • Vanua support P9 Getting consensus from Vanua P10 • Passion • Integrity P11 Pride P12 Excellence, Team Work, Integrity and Passion P13 The ethics in Fiji are very high. They treat eachother with great respect. Good behavior. Already good values in place and strong (not defined though). P14 Like BSP, have to consider the Vanua. The culture and traditions of iTaukei. Foundations of Fiji Rugby built on the Vanua. 2. What is your vision for 7s? P1 To be the best, to be number one P2 Any vision needs to play or build on the national backing and support, the fervor, the style of 7s played at all levels of the game, the enviable player base

119 and reputation for being unbeatable when Fiji’s tail is up. P3 Sustainably in top 3 in the world. 7s and 15s on the same level. Now Olympic sport. Competing for medal or love o the game! P4 Win World Championships, talent here. Used to be sanctioned by FRU all local sevens tournaments. Player welfare. FRU Manage system. National Provincial Sevens Tournament. P5 No.1 7s team in the World, consistently perform at the World Cup, Olympics, World Series P6 Threat. Out resourced by other nations. Different sport. Conditioning sport. One weekend of competition. 6 weeks of training. Sport science high. To be the best in the World. Can win World Series. Can win Olympic Gold. Huge potential for woman’s sevens. P7 To be the most consistent 7s Rugby Playing nation in the World. P8 • To be no.1 • Win World Cup • Win World Series • Win Olympic Gold P9 • No. 1 ranking • Consistency • Win World Series • Win World Cup • Olympic Gold medal P10 To be top in IRB World Series P11 - P12 To be the number 1 Rugby Team in the World P13 - P14 - 3. What is your vision for 15s? or What should be the vision for Fiji Rugby? P1 Consistently reach the quarterfinals of the RWC. Rugby public would be happy. Reasonable aim. Bonus making semis. P2 - P3 Play tier one nations and compete, not thrashed. Make semis or top 6. P4 To be competitive with top 10 nations in the World. Make the RWC semifinals. P5 Reach semis’ of World Cup. Haven’t achieved that, but achievable. Been to quarters before. Top 5 ranking in the World. P6 Go onto tier one test matches as an equal in 2 to 3 years time. Expectation to be able to compete and win game on a constant basis against tier one competitors. P7 To be World Champions. To be a successful Rugby Nation. A leading Rugby Nation. P8 • Improve standings to top 4 over next 4 to 8 years • World Cup semi finalist P9 Top 4 to 5 ranking. World Cup semi-final P10 To be recognised as a tier one side on the World P11 - P12 To be World Leaders in Rugby P13 Create an identity for Fiji Rugby. E.g keep ball active, play entertaining and

120 successful rugby. The danger is that you stop having these special players. P14 Not an outcome goal or include values. Something about where we are in Rugby. Not looking at results, rather look at what creates the environment. Where is rugby in Fiji. Looking more at a holistic vision. E.g All people look to rugby, the love of Rugby, for the Love of Rugby, sport of choice for Fijians, Rugby something Fiji can be proud or Rugby: Inspiring our Nation! 4. What is the objective, goals or mission of the FRU? How do you achieve this vision or what are the strategic objects of Fiji Rugby? P1 FRU is the body to administer sport, agree rules to organize the game in Fiji. Important to have a strong body, not pushed around by government and others. Huge responsibility. To oversee game at all levels of the sport. Quality teams at the top. Adequate facilities. Staff. Referees. Coach a huge job now c/- what was relatively simple 20 – 30 years ago. P2 - P3 I love my Rugby, powerful marketing team, market teams equally (7s and 15s). Make the top 6/semis at RWC. Organisational structure run as corporate. Business – more transparent. Support infrastructure, physicians etc Host and stage international events for all sports. End up with huge HR base to export around Pacific for all sports. E.g 5 HPU managers in 5 years. Not sustainable. Not necessarily the best, quality and sustainable. P4 15s Unions in Fiji, administration, Provincial and Rugby House singing the same song/tune. Break provincialism of Rugby. Come together. 7s? All sevens sanctioned by FRU. Too much sevens. Limited system. Rest players when required. P5 - P6 15s put in place process. About planning, knowledge and game strategy process - assess players, review performance, communicate with players, up skill and develop support and back room staff. Team only as good as support staff around team values – play team – respect – better people make better players 7s Essential part of Rugby. Problems remember back to the day Fiji dominated. Fiji had special players then. Competition did not have specialist players. Game far more competitive. That’s the challenge. Developed periodical sport science program required. P7 - P8 - P9 1. Get in house processes firmed up. Once get that finance and player contracts will work out. Build systems and capacity of Rugby and culture of transparency and accountability. To live within our means. 2. Good strategic planning 3. Consistent funding. IRB has helped with working out financial sustainability. Development of building to generate income. P10 - P11 - P12 -

121 P13 What kind of player do we need and how are we going to develop that player to achieve the style of Rugby we want? What kind of coach do we need and how to we develop that coach for that style of Rugby? What type of competition etc Finances and management are separate issues. Mass participation not problem in Fiji more focus of resources on developing infrastructure competitions and coaching. Increase level of game in Fiji. Don’t have enough coaches, fields already. IRB participation programs flawed as do not lead to much. Priority in scrummaging and raising standard of refereeing scrums. Development of Player Pathways. Integration of departments, overcome defensive attitude and culture within FRU, management not keeping meetings. IRB coaching program started in 2006, has been going 8 years and only produced one level 3 coach now working in PNG coaching their 7s team. Coaching is a big problem. High Performance Competition, new format to improve scrumaging and create more game time for players. There are pockets in Fiji, like B Division where they only play 5 games a year over two weeks. Not enough game time compared to overseas where play 25 games a season. Opportunity to utilize and capture retiring professional players to contribute back to the sport their time skills and experience. P14 In order of priority: 1. Build framework that encompasses all levels in Fiji Rugby – pathways and an alignment of player pathways e.g club level having under 9 and 10 year old competition 2. Financial sustainability / customer service 3. Training and development of people involve in Rugby to uplift standard. Work on the fundamentals and results will follow. Long term focused. Building capability and capacity e.g gym, technical expertise Ke davo donu na vanua, ena qai muri mai na Sauta Traditionally, if the chief does his role and the people their role and perform diligently, blessings or mana will follow. Solesolevake – working together to achieve individual and common goals, more efficient and achieve more together than on their own 5. What actions would you take to achieve your vision? P1 7s • FRU to administer and set rules for game locally • revert back to regular 7s tournaments. • Play more sevens locally. • Selectors appointed by board, call for nominations from unions, select good qualified people, need criteria for selection and nomination 15s • more exposure for players the better they will play internationally. • More emphasis on age grade rugby and development to national team. • Selectors appointed by board, call for nominations from unions, select good qualified people, need criteria for selection and nomination P2 • Great structured club season for 7s – o Aligned to provincial unions. o Club/village structure o Players can earn full time contracts to stay on the Island Play in World Series

122 Train in full time environment Fiji only team in world where players are unemployed! o Youth also based out of the clubs / schools / Kaji o Clear pathways career and professional pathways for youth to retain them from being lost abroad on scholarships • Coaching / conditioning / management / refereeing development for 7s o IRB has a role to play o Workshops around tournaments P3 - P4 - P5 What we doing now is catch up rugby. What we doing now is adopting other countries practices. Why not do our own research and development. Consider our own situation, our own patterns of playing rugby. Develop our own coaches, administrators and style of play. Need to question more what other countries are doing and whether good for us or not and whether will improve our game or not. Need to be more intelligent. Being smarter about our game. We had Brad Johnstone. He brought NZ approach. Mac Mcallion brough NZ approach. Then Greg Smith changed approach slightly. Wayne Pivac brought back NZ approach but kept Fijian flair. Ilivasi kept flair. But what is Fiji Rugby developing for Fiji style? We need our own style of rugby! Align Kaji, secondary, provincial and national system. Achieved at end of 8 years. E.g NZ Akapusi Qera – left Fiji on 2 year scholarship to NZ. Played for Wanganui and recruited to Wellington Academy. Only reason returned to Fiji is because visa was not extended. We missing talent identification and development in Fiji. Sharing of experience from other countries important. We need system and competition to develop players to highest level. E.g $500,000 worth of in kind funding to FRU from Fiji Airways tickets could be given to unions for their players to go to NZ for a player exchange or skills development program. Build relationships with unions in NZ and player exchange. P6 - P7 Create a better competition for both 7s and 15s to achieve vision. Untapped talent in divisions. No access to competitions e.g Cakaudrove – no club competition so no pool of players to select from or be exposed. P8 7s - Technology has taken over. We cant rely on the past. Have to watch video and analyse etc. Have a serious e.g like the former BP national series. In that time we had core teams probably 4 to select national team from. Moved tournament around exposing players for selection. Players became conditioned week in week out on and off the field. 15s - Strengthen competition. E.g east v west. Fiji residents v Overseas. Top club team challenge. Top provincial team v national team. Nadi U20 has been champion for last 4 years, but only 3 players in national team. National team was recently humiliated at world cup and relegated from competition in future. We don’t need an u20 competition as required by IRB. Can use u19 competition with School leavers. U20 national team can be selected from secondary school players, u19 competition and senior players of age. The unions are already strapped for cash. Sponsorship – FRU has to look at our domestic competition first and foremost. E.g Nadi budget almost half spent

123 on transport. If the FRU can cover transport costs, meals, strapping etc through sponsorship would lift a huge burden on the unions. Everything coaching etc to be done e.g FRU advertised level 1 coaching again. We have too many. But we don’t have enough level 2 coaches P9 - P10 - P11 - P12 There needs to be more communication between board, players, unions and for buy-in by players P13 - P14 - 6. Do you agree with the top five ranked SWOTs? If not, what would you add or take away from the top five SWOTs? P1 FBEA criteria and framework not suitable for sport organisation. More suited to commercial business. Did not agree with strategic goals and priorities. Listed activities above. P2 - P3 - P4 • 10 goals too many • need strategy to achieve mission • 5 strategies appropriate P5 - P6 - P7 - P8 - P9 - P10 - P11 - P12 - P13 - P14 - 7. What would your SWOT for the FRU be? P1 Strengths • Huge support FRU has from people. Has to be captured and maintained and build it up. Draws all the races into the mix. Even those who have not had anything to do with rugby. Support of people is one of the great strengths of the game. However, can be fickle, as prefer winners. • Schools rugby. Maybe needs to be refined. Huge store house of talent coming up. How its natured through. More emphasis as age grade rugby. Grafted into the national team. Get classification and competition going. Lot of emphasis on Deans Trophy but what them for them to go into? Except putting them into the senior team! Need say under 20 team. • Continuing support from IRB. Wasn’t long ago that FRU got nothing from IRB. Work on building trust and confidence of IRB. The goodwill from NZ and Australia as well. More Weakness

124 • Strong leadership and right people at the helm who are capable at developing good international relations, particularly NZ, Australia and IRB. • Financial position • Movement of talent to Northern Hemisphere. • Lack clear criteria/process for selectors for 7s or 15s • Management not capable or experienced • Fair play. Culture of being bad losers! Bad sportsmanship. • FRU needs to be conscious of its unions and content. Try to keep them happy. Opportunities • Extended competition, exposure PNC to NZ/Australian teams. • Visit from NZ/Australian Super 15 teams, Maori Team Threats • Rugby League. Scouts grab young kids out of schools and Dean’s trophy. Pay kids money. League pay 19 year old kids. Game appeals more to Fijian’s. perfect game for Fijians. Made for Fijians. • Loss of support for FRU from unions. • Coaches should come up through schools and unions for national coach. Developed up the pyramid. • Beholden to sports council and municipalities for grounds. Squeezed out. Standard grounds concern.

P6 Strengths • Talented players • Passion for the game • National sport Weaknesses • Lack of infrastructure • Supporting local pathways • Financial constraints • Lack of process for up skilling volunteers in all aspects of funning community rugby Opportunities • Develop local competitions • Provincial competition and overseas teams • No super Rugby in June. June window. Send squad to play Suva and Nadroga. Threats • Continual drain of players overseas • Rugby League. Cherry pick players, but developed by FRU • 7s best players offered contracts in Europe. • More players going overseas at younger age. Lose connection to Flying Fijians. 3. What are the strengths and weaknesses of Fiji Sevens System? P2 • Fiji domestic competition is still the best in the World. Fantastic way to talent ID. So many stand alone tournaments. Need to be formalized

125 ending in a national tournament. • Invitation tournaments are no good. The teams and players are thrown together by friends and not formally affiliated to a club, union or country. • Fiji’s competitive advantage is its stand alone tournaments and competition. The coral coast sevens, Marist and Uprising sevens etc. A coordinated approach is good for selection purposes with players representing their clubs. This is the start of a structure, but can be formalized and improved upon. • Can then add on a youth structure for primary and secondary schools. The opportunity to develop a youth 7s program with age group raining camps. Could get the jump on the rest of the world, can offer financial incentives also to retain talent from being poached overseas. Other countries are not doing this yet. Like Fiji other countries have plucked their youth Olympic teams from schools etc and not a program or system and pathway of development. 8. Do you agree with the 10 strategic goals and priorities of the FRU? If not, what would you add or take away? P1 • Doesn’t all have to carry same weight • Finding a balance between development and elite programs P2 - P3 • To be financially sustainable (G1 – temporary priority) and develop sustainable rugby development infrastructure, physician/HR. • Pacific Team and Player pathways (G7 – produce world class national teams, presence, players, world champions and G 8 – create alignments, pathways at all rugby levels from Kaji to Flying Fijians) • Rugby take on a Social Roles to reduce Non-Communicable diseases (G10 - To ensure mass participation of rugby at all levels for everyone and to fill the social role in the country a. Young Fijian men dying at 50, diabetes at 30 years b. Bias because Cathy health professional c. Mellenium Development Goals / Ministry of Health • Goal 3 – to have competent and vibrant workforce with values that epitomize excellence, Goal 4 – to have efficient and effective processes and systems that drive orgainsational results, Goal 5 – to become more customer oriented (service driven, service delivey), Goal 6 – develop and maintain the best HPU centre in the region (centre of excellence – COE), GOAL 9 : To maintain a high safety standard and ensuring player welfare is paramount P4 1. Key FRU to become corporatized / Amending Constitution

a. First step brining professionalism to Fiji Rugby b. Introduce good governance, transparency, and accountability c. Remove provincialism in selection of board members 2. Operational overhaul. How to manage provincial rugby. Key secondary rugby. Possibly do away with Under 20 Rugby. Following calendar year to be created and circulated to unions in November of the preceding year i.e at the conclusion of the current season. Better

126 organized. 3. Development of HPU

a. For senior unions to use, commercialization, let coaches look after gym. Improve pool of players and coaches b. Problem – no need to affiliate with FRU e.g U18 team to Australia last year, no linkages to union members. P5 Any of 10 goals important P6 1. To be a financially sustainable rugby union (G1) 2. Aligned pathways (G8, G6, G10) 3. World class national team (G7) Other goals around staffing, some goals are connected. G8, not a good goal in itself. P7 For the FRU to be financial sustainable. To sustainably develop sporting infrastructure. Align Kaji (primary), secondary, provincial and national rugby competitions. Competent governance and management. P8 - P9 - P10 - P11 - P12 - P13 - P14 -

127 Appendix 8 - The FRU’s 10 Strategic Goals

OBJECTIVES WEIGHT WHO MEASURES TARGETS MILESTONE RESPONSIBLE GOAL 1 : To be a financially sustainable rugby union 13 13 0 GOAL 2 : Develop sustainable rugby development infrastructure OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 10 10 0 GOAL 3 : To have competent and vibrant workforce with values that epitomize excellence OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 13 13 0 GOAL 4 : To have efficient and effective processes and systems that drive organizational results OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 10 10 0 GOAL 5 : To become more customer oriented (service driven, service delivery, OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 15 15 0 GOAL 6 : Develop and maintain the best HPU center in the region (center of excellence - COE) OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 13 13 0 GOAL 7 : Produce world class national teams, presence, players,(produce world champions) OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 5 5 0 GOAL 8 : Create aligntment / pathways at all rugby levels (kaji to flying fijians / fijianas)(possibility of a rugby act) OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 5 5 0 GOAL 9 : To maintain a high safety standard and ensuring player welfare is paramount OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 10 10 0 GOAL 10 : To ensure mass participation of rugby at all levels for everyone and to fill the social role in the country OBJECTIVES MILESTONE 6 6 0

128

- The FRU’s Balanced Scorecard Quadrants and Strategic Goals

Leadership and FBEA Weight Score FBEA Finance Weight Score People GOAL 3 : To have competent GOAL 1 : To and vibrant be a financially workforce with 13 13 CAT 1 CAT 7 sustainable values that rugby union epitomize excellence

13 13 Processes and FBEA Customers Weight Score FBEA Weight Score Risk GOAL 4 : To GOAL 7 : have efficient Produce world and effective class national processes and CAT 5 teams, presence, 5 10 systems that players,(produce drive world organizational champions) results GOAL 6 : GOAL 2 : Develop and Develop maintain the sustainable best HPU CAT 5 10 13 rugby center in the development region (center infrastructure of excellence - COE) CAT 6 GOAL 8 : Create aligntment / pathways at all rugby levels CAT 5 5 (kaji to flying fijians / fijianas)(possibil ity of a rugby act) GOAL 5 : To become more customer CAT 5 15 oriented (service driven, service delivery,

129 GOAL 9 : To maintain a high safety standard CAT 5 10 and ensuring player welfare is paramount GOAL 10 : To ensure mass participation of rugby at all CAT 5 levels for 6 everyone and to fill the social role in the country 51 23

130