Ideas for a productive USARFU

Everyone wants to be proud of American rugby, and so should want USARFU to succeed. But the governing body is unloved.

For Boulder to become productive and even admirable, what kind of organization should it aspire to be? Three things come to mind: strategy, entrepreneurship, and transparency.

Strategy
USARFU’s 2013-15 plan assembles blue-sky objectives, best practices, and organizational to-dos. Seemingly at the behest of World Rugby and US Olympic Committee, it mimics every other rugby union or sports governing body. So it is unlikely to create competitive advantage.

Even if follow the leader is the right organizational approach, the plan lacks focus and fails to specify how objectives are converted to action. As UCLA professor Dick Rumelt points out: 'The core of strategy work is always the same: discovering the critical factors in a situation and designing a way of coordinating and focusing actions to deal with those factors.'

For example, USARFU’s chairman recently observed the national team will improve if more Americans compete professionally, and the Eagles play more games. That’s a start — but it’s been the same for a decade, and for whatever reason the union hasn’t been able to execute. What has changed since 2006, and how has the leadership adjusted its thinking?

Entrepreneurship
USARFU holds that professional competition and management are indispensible to accelerated progress. The evidence suggests achievement is explained by personal energy more than economic arrangements.

Since 2006, the union's board has comprised corporate types, lacking real experience of the domestic game. Its national office has steadily grown in size and cost.

More and more, initiative and innovation in American rugby come from outside Boulder, from organizations that are better aligned with the community. United World Sports embeds recreational tournaments at the USA 7s while midwifing the game’s TV presence on NBC. NIRSA NSCRO created and manages diverse, vibrant division 3 collegiate play. And so on.

The disconnect can’t be laid at the feet of congress. After supplanting the territories in 2013 in hopes of seeding geographic unions run by paid staff, USARFU remains in a drawn-out transition. About one-third of US states including Colorado, Illinois, Ohio, and western Pennsylvania presently lack representation.

Transparency
Americans believe the country’s greatness is enshrined in its constitution, which begins ‘We the people’. Power inheres in individuals, who delegate it to government in order ’to promote the common welfare’.

USARFU behaves as if it's just the opposite. Although it is a non-profit run for the benefit of its members, the organization’s decision making and finances are secretive. Athletes can’t play rugby unless they pay taxes (i.e., CIPP) and fees (medical insurance).

Once, the union published its budgets, status reports, and board minutes. In the past five years, Boulder has created fundraising and commercial arms which members can’t access.

Maybe that’s acceptable in the Commonwealth, but not here. To establish trust and to situate itself in the American mainstream, USARFU has to behave as if it’s an organ of players and referees.

Most Americans enjoy rugby on a part-time, recreational basis, on terms of their choosing. Those who volunteer as administrators don’t like sending dollars to Boulder. They believe the money could be better spent at home.

Many, if not most, of the problems we see in American rugby point to shortcomings in these areas. Values aren’t the best guideline for management effectiveness, because they are difficult to measure. But a culture that’s friendlier to and better serves its members ought to help the union reach its performance goals.

Comments

[Grant]

NIRSA? The National Intramural and Recreational Sports Association?

I think you mean NSCRO - the National Small College Rugby Organization.

NIRSA has done nothing but set back and hold back college rugby. NIRSA should be vilified not lauded for it's treatment of rugby.

NSCRO has done more for the college club level of rugby in America than any other organization. (I specify college club, b/c I think that Varsity Cup and CRC are focused on varsity or other-than-club college rugby teams).

[Kurt Oeler]

Right you are: I certainly meant NSCRO. Thanks Grant.

[rj47]

Kurt,

Your article brings out a lot of issues, but really, these are the same issues we have spoken about for years. Until the geographical unions become drastic, band together, and have our rep congress demand change, nothing will happen.

As long as we keep paying they can keep the status quo.
Kind of like our government.