€250k to €2.5m: Returns on Good Governance September 2011

1. €250k to €2.5m: Returns on Good Governance September 2011 “Good Governance - The Road to Sporting Success” Sport and Recreation Alliance

2. The Batting Order • Background • Process of change • New structure • Conclusions

3. Background • Good Governance • “The system by which companies are directed and controlled. • “Openness and accountability are the watchwords, and ethical standards are the basis on which lasting governance systems are built.” • - Sir Adrian Cadbury

4. Background • Governance/commercial model • 2005 • Irish Cricket Union – unincorporated entity • Executive Committee – 18 people – fully representative • 3 on payroll – including one P/T • no contracted athletes/players • Turnover - €260,000 • Commercial revenue - €104,000 • Website traffic – 930,000 (for the year) • 2011 • Cricket Ireland – incorporated business • Board – 11 Directors – representative and independent • 21 on payroll – 11 F/T; 5 P/T; 5 consultants • 13 contracted athletes/players • Turnover (projected) - €2.9 million • Commercial revenue - €1,370,000 • Website traffic – 9,220,000 (to end August)

5. Background • 2003-6 – first CEO • Funding model – dominated by public hand-outs • Limited playing success • CEO departs • ICU soul-searching – CEO or not?

6. Background • CWC 2007 – on the map • How to capitalise on success and move forward? • Strategic consultancy – paid for by Sports Council • Best practice principles • How can we be better?

7. Process of Change • Outline proposals – radical • Develop plans in: • Governance • Business/Administration • High Performance

8. Process of Change • Starting point • Identify stakeholders • Internal and external consultation • Key questions: • What is current situation? • Is change necessary? • What is ‘best practice’? • How do we tailor this to Irish Cricket?

9. Process of change • Killer phrase – consultant’s paper: “One of the key issues for a governing body is having the authority and credibility to be able to lead and govern the sport in an increasingly complex environment. The Irish and international sporting landscape has changed considerably in the last 5-10 years. A governing body has many regulatory, commercial, fiduciary, legal and policy obligations compared to other, simpler eras. It is important that the ICU governance is sufficiently robust to deal with these complexities and can maximise the opportunities available to the sport, while maintaining and strengthening existing structures and relationships.”

10. Process of change • Key arguments (the ‘what’): • Best practice • Limit of financial liability • Guarantees expertise on Board • Support from key funding partners • Withstand external scrutiny • Timing – golden opportunity to change

11. Process of change • Selling-in process (the ‘how’) • Avoid alienating existing expertise – volunteer drop-off • Current group – instrumental in getting game tocurrent state • Current group – critical in laying foundations forfuture and leaving legacy • Consultant to deliver – independent expert

12. Process of change • Agents of change (the ‘who’) • New CEO – new blood; no axe to grind • Key volunteers – Chairman/Finance/Hon Sec • Independent, experienced consultant • External funding for process – Govt/ICC imprimatur • Possible new sponsor?

13. Process of change • Timelines (the ‘when’) • April 2007 – idea genesis/internal support • May – ISC agrees to support process/agency engagement • June/July – stakeholder consultation • August – drafting of papers • September – final drafts to ICU management • October – debate/decision by Executive Committee • October/November – drafting of Memo & Articles • November/December – Board composition debate • January 2008 – approval of M&A; Nominations Committee • February – last AGM of ICU/EGM of ICU Ltd • March 2008 – first meeting of new company Board

14. New structure • The Board • 11 people • Chair, plus 6 from cricket constituency and 4 ‘independents’ – local knowledge/external expertise • Majority – experience of leading/managing cricket • Chair – at least 3 years in last 10 lead/manage cricket • ‘Cricket’ nominees – one mandatory; plus one mandatory or desirable • Composition skills-based; also reflects geographical diversity of game • Acting in best interests of the company

15. New structure • Desired skills-experience • Mandatory Requirements • Experience of leading/managing cricket in Ireland (at Board/Executive level in the ICU or a Provincial Union)  • Experience of Irish international cricket (as player, coach, manager or selector)  • Experience of managing a growing business  • Board level accountancy/finance experience  • Access to a wide range of business/sporting/political contacts  • Experience of raising finance for sporting organisations • Desirable Requirements • Media experience  • Legal experience – company and/or sporting  • Experience of representative women’s cricket (as player, coach, manager or selector)  • Experience of leading and developing volunteer networks  • Experience of sports education  • Experience of marketing major sporting events  • Experience of internal audit/risk management

16. New structure • Board-Management engagement • CEO runs the business – Board to provide advice, guidance and support • Board makes strategic decisions based on management recommendations • Two-way communication – constituent views to Board and vice-versa • Regular communication between CEO and Chairman • Regular communication between CEO/Senior Management and sub-committee Chairs (Cricket and Finance) • Independent Directors – advice in legal, commerce, finance, discipline, HR

17. New structure • Legacy of change • Inherently good: • smaller numbers at Board = focused discussions • external expertise valuable for business/legal/financial advice • management empowered • creates environment for on-field performance • Looks good: • perception is reality • stakeholder confidence in model – players; committees; media; staff etc • Public funder confidence • less compliance • more likely to receive additional funding • Commercial opportunities • RSA perception

18. New structure • The virtuous circle: • Reform governance, therefore... • Everyone points in the same direction, therefore... • Board puts team at the centre of policy, therefore... • Resource flows to team, therefore... • Team becomes successful, therefore... • Success attracts profile, therefore... • Profile attracts revenue, therefore.. • More resources to team, therefore... • More success...

19. Conclusion • Governance change isn’t just worth it, it’s necessary • Not rocket science, but takes time • Improves organisation • Improves perception of organisation • Attracts public funding • Attracts private funding • Facilitates team performance • Demonstrates desire to improve

20. Thank You Any Questions?