AA Review Final Report(presentation)

  • Published on
    13-Jul-2015

  • View
    205

  • Download
    0

Transcript

TEXT_PICReport of the Review into the Glasgow 2014 Campaignengaging, uniting, inspiring and motivating all Australians.1November 2014Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewContentsSlide NoIntroduction4Executive Summary5Scope of Review18Review Terms of Reference 19Process Undertaken23Terms of Reference Issues24Public Domain Incidents31Findings36Key Themes41Key theme Leadership42Key theme Culture46Key theme Stakeholder Engagement49Key theme Governance51Key theme Coaching56Key theme Benchmarking Performance & Accountability60Key Theme A shared model for high performance69Recommendations732Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewAppendicesSlide NoAppendix 1 Stakeholder Engagement79Appendix 2 Benchmarking BMEs82Appendix 3 Input into the Review83Appendix 4 Possible Head Coach Role84Appendix 5 Review Panel Members85Appendix 6 Glossary8631. Title slide quote from Australias Winning EdgeGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThis report was commissioned by the Board of Athletics Australia as a result of matters arising out of the Glasgow Commonwealth Games campaign. Specifically these matters included that athletics did not meet its ACGA medal targets, the public domain issues of camp compliance and the suspension of the Head Coach. During the review process broader issues arose and for the sake of completeness these are taken into account in the report. The purpose of the review was to assess Athletics Australia's performance against the terms of reference and to recommend on future team preparation, governance structure, support structure, organisational culture and risk mitigation.Athletics Australia established a review panel consisting of independent chair Chris Wardlaw and board members, Jan Swinhoe, Peter Bromley and Anne Lord to conduct the review.The review process included face to face and phone interviews, specific online surveys directed to athletes, personal coaches, team staff and MAs and also accepted direct submissions, both by invitation and from other interested parties. Over 100 people contributed, including athletes, coaches, AA staff, team staff, Board members, MAs, media and the wider athletic community.The key themes of the report are Leadership, Culture, Stakeholder Engagement, Governance, Coaching, Benchmarking Performance and Accountability and a shared approach to High Performance. The review presents recommendations to continue to work on and improve AA's performance in these areas.The process resulted in the emergence of consistent findings centered aroundcommunication, stakeholder engagement, coaching, roles and responsibilities and leadership. The panel found that by improving two way communication, developing and implementing more robust stakeholder engagement and by clarifying distinct roles and responsibilities throughout the organisation, AA and its stakeholders can work together to improve outcomes for the sport.The Panel would like to thank all contributors to the Review for their candour and positive intent. Ultimately, the ideal of athletics as the purest of sports remains. We sincerely believe there is a great opportunity to be tapped in both achievement and participation and that Athletics Australia canleadin these areas.Chris WardlawJan SwinhoePeter BromleyAnne LordNovember 2014Introduction4Glasgow 2014 Campaign Review5Report of the Review into the Glasgow 2014 CampaignExecutive SummaryGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe Review was established to critically examine all aspects of the Australian Athletic teams participation in the Glasgow Commonwealth Games.The Review Panel conducted interviews and on line surveys and received direct submissions from over 100 athletes, coaches and AA staff and Board membersExecutive Summary6Intent and ProcessGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewGlasgow PerformanceThe Panel found thatthe 2014 Glasgow Campaign did not meet all of the ACGA medal targetsthere were quality medal performances with a large number of qualified/selected athletes providing a good presence across disciplines to inspire young and emerging athletes watching from homesixteen athletes (18.6%) achieved PBs at the Games and a few athletes delivered world class performances at their first BMEthe inclusion of para athletes in the championship athletics team has been successful and provides leadership to other sports many athletes and coaches found the Glasgow a valuable experience it provided a supportive environment that contributed to their athletic careerExecutive Summary7Key Themes and FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewHead CoachThe Panel found that the removal from Glasgow of the Head Coach was appropriate. The impact of this incident within the team and on team performance was marginal.Camp ComplianceThe Panel believes there should be a high expectation, for performance reasons, that all athletes assemble in camp within an agreed window. However camp attendance should not be rules bound and compulsory. Discretion for exemption should be part of the ongoing policy.Executive Summary8Key Themes and FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewLeadershipThe Panel found that leadership failures, at a range of organisational levels, contributed to the disappointing outcomes and incidents of the Glasgow campaign.CultureThe Review Panel found that the Glasgow Games was a missed opportunity to build a vibrant and inclusive culture both organisationally (at AA) and athletically (lead up, camps and Games village)Stakeholder engagementThe Panel found that AA could significantly improve its stakeholder engagement and communication to meet the needs and harness the potential contributions of the broader athletics family member organisations, personal coaches, parents and volunteersGovernanceThe Panel found issues of governance at both Board and management levels including lack of clarity around roles and responsibilities and perceived and actual conflicts of duty for AA staff.Executive Summary9Key Themes and FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewCoachingThe Panel found that coaching emerged as a central theme including:the need to strengthen the systematic approach to supporting coaches (both experienced coaches and the development of new coaches)the lack of engagement with coaches from AA particularly personal coachesthe role and skill set needed to carry out the head coach role the selection and clarity of role of team coaches and the relationship between team coaches and personal coaches Benchmarking performance/accountabilityThe Panel found that Australian athletics campaigns would benefit from regular and consistent benchmarking of outcomes across a range of performance measures.A shared model for High PerformanceThe Panel found that AA should consider its current work against a first principles approach where support is wrapped around athlete and coach and that it should seek to further assess its current approach against world leading evidenced based approaches.Executive Summary10Key Themes and FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewLeadership (refer pages 42-45)That AA invest in the leadership and management capabilities of its staff including additional media training That AA establish a clear set of KPIs for staff which covers key athletic outcomes as well as stakeholder management and internal staff engagement and development.That AA consider the number and roles of professional staff on overseas teams, particularly championship teams, to ensure transparency and maintenance of productivity and future planning for AA.Culture (refer pages 46-48)That AA organise and promote the sport of athletics around the theme of it being the pure sport the banner sport of the Olympics and the Commonwealth Games and the foundation of all other sports.That AA strengthen the induction program for athletes and coaches, and that a parents and supporters of athletes group be a part of AA planning for each major campaign11RecommendationsExecutive SummaryGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewCulture (cont.)That as a matter of priority AA initiate processes to establish a productive and inclusive organisational culture focused on achieving the goals and targets determined by the Board.That AA take immediate steps to strengthen and support formal mentoring arrangements covering athlete to athlete, coach to coach and professional staff to professional staffThat AA establish processes to elicit and respond to regular feedback and input from athletes and coaches including a strengthened Athletes Commission. This will also be an outcome of stronger stakeholder engagement as recommended. In the short term there could be a role for:an Honorary Ombudsman to receive feedback and progress the resolution of issues through the CEO as an initial mechanism to build trust.consideration of a constituted Track and Field chapter in the Australian Athletes Alliance if appropriate12RecommendationsExecutive SummaryGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewStakeholder Engagement (refer pages 49-50)That AA establish and implement a detailed stakeholder relations plan that is inclusive of the its major stakeholders and that provides a three year engagement plan for each major stakeholder group.Governance (refer pages 51-55)That AA reconstitute the High Performance Advisory Committee (HPC) to incorporate a broader pool of high performance expertise in the provision of advice to the CEO and the High Performance Department (HPDept.) on AA High Performance policies. That the AA Board give consideration to appointing to the HPC members with high performance and coaching expertise to complement those from the ASC and the AIS.That AA review its current organisational structure and processes, particularly as they relate to high performance, against good governance principles and establish and publish detailed role and accountability statements for AA staff and structures including the role of the AA Board.13Executive SummaryRecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewCoaching (refer pages 56-59)That AA take into account the findings of this report and determine the role and capabilities of the Head Coach and authorise the filling of that role. That AA adopt arrangements for the appointment of Team Coaches for major campaigns that:has a transparent and open process for appointmentprioritises early appointments where possibleallows for performance based appointments over successive campaignsregularises remuneration for Team Coaches along the lines of other team membersThat AA ensure that Personal Coaches are embraced as part of AAs approach to high performance including consideration of:Personal Coaches of podium athletes automatically have the highest accreditation available if they are not on the teamappointment of a Personal Coach voluntary liaison personimproving communication between Personal and Team Coaches14RecommendationsExecutive SummaryGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewBenchmarking Performance (refer pages 60-68)That AA establish an organisation wide business intelligence process using athletes and coaches as the basic unit of measurement to establish relevant team benchmarks, track progress over time and build the evidence base to identify where support can be most effective.That AA establish initial targets for the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games based on the 2006 Melbourne Commonwealth Games across a range of measures.High Performance (refer pages 69-72)That AA assess its High Performance Strategy (policy and operational guidelines) against evidence based frameworks such as Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success (SPLISS) with particular reference to relevant critical success factors and AAs KPIs to maximise the benefits of its support from the Winning Edge strategy.15Executive SummaryRecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewHigh Performance (cont.)That AA continue its 6-8 year high performance planning and development cycle with rigorous evaluation after each major campaign. This includes competition, coaching support and athlete development programs noting that the Australian team for the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games is likely to be large.That there should be a high expectation, for performance reasons, that all athletes assemble in camp within an agreed window. The Camp policy should have a basis for discretion, exercised by the team head coach, to allow for athlete/event groups performance circumstancesThat AA through its High Performance Strategy review its current risk mitigation approach against best practice to ensure AA teams deliver optimal performance. A focus of this review should be to further develop stakeholder communication protocolsPanel ReportThat the Panels report should be published together with the Boards response. Prior to publication briefings should be undertaken with ACGA, MAs, the ASC review panel and athletic journalists.16Executive SummaryRecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign Review17Report of the Review into the Glasgow 2014 CampaignGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewScope of ReviewThe Reviews Terms of Reference largely focused on the Glasgow Campaign and any process and policy lessons that should be considered for future campaigns.During the Panel's process a range of related matters have been identified.The learnings obtained through this process apply more broadly than the specific campaignIn the interests of full transparency these matters are included in the report to the AA Board for their consideration18Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewTerms of Reference (ToR) Part 1Assessment of the efficacy of the High Performance Department Policies (including team, coach and management selection, preparation, funding and pre-Games attendance) concerning the Glasgow Commonwealth Games Team including their:implementation;suitability; consistency;shortcomings; successAssessment of the level, standard and success of the communications amongst athletes, coaches, high performance department personnel and team management both prior (from time of selection) to and during the Games.Assessment of the role of the AA High Performance Committee in formulating policies and procedures for and in relation to the team and the governance structure of that committee including an assessment of the alignment of the Committees role and processes with that of the CEO and High Performance Director and other personnel within AA.19Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewTerms of Reference (ToR) Part 2Assessment of the performance of the team at the Games as against the High Performance targets set pre-Games and assessment of team culture around the pre-Games camp and at the Games.Assessment of the best method of establishing a risk register and measures to mitigate risks.Assessment of the media policy including the crisis management policy established for the Games, the implementation of those policies at the Games and the awareness of the contents of these policies by key personnel including key stakeholders.An assessment of the extent to which the campaign met the goals and targets of AAs strategic plan and the High Performance Departments strategic plan.Assessment of any other aspects of the Glasgow campaign that the Review Panel considers relevant.Recommendations:for the future preparation of the teams based upon the Glasgow campaign experience;for the future governance structure and role of the High Performance Committee;flowing from the assessment undertaken pursuant to the above Terms of Reference.20Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewTerms of Reference Headlines21Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewConceptual groupings of the Terms of Reference22OperationStrategyPolicyToR 1ToR 7ToR 3HPDAA BoardHPCCommunication/MediaToR 2Tor 6Performance/RiskToR 4ToR 5Other matters/ RecommendationsToR 8ToR 9Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewProcess23The Review process has canvassed a broad cross section of interests including:AA BoardAA and team managementStakeholders with wide experience and engagement in athleticsAthletes both experienced and those at the beginning of their elite careersTeam and personal coaches covering a wide range of experienceThe Panel is confident that the process provides a solid ground on which to base its findings and recommendations.Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewTerms of Reference IssuesUneven clarity and understanding of high performance policies and the evidence base for them Inconsistent or inappropriate application of policies e.g. timing of selection, team roles and appointments, camp attendance Lack of engagement with stakeholders in development of policyLimited leadership and genuine engagement from some AA senior staff with the athletes and coaches at Glasgow. A need for much clearer and explicit roles, responsibilities, accountabilities & expectations for AA team members, personal coaches, volunteers and athletesSelection policy was seen as positive and transparent overall however the timing of selection and entry to village for some athletes was an issue.Some difficulties confirming lead up competitions1. Policy High Performance Department24Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewInstances of poor communication between AA/team officials and personal coachesAdministratively access to venues (acknowledging expected difficulties), training times and locationsProfessionally structures to facilitate training and performance information and building a sense of belongingLimited guidance and templates to support focused and regular communication other than email, pre, during and post GamesCommunication generally impersonal and largely one wayDifferences were apparent in communication across groups e.g. NASS/non NASS; experienced vs non experiencedEvent group and support team meetings were often rushed and not productive more time needed. Opportunities to use and support event groups were not always identified or taken up.Insufficient collaboration between AA and ACGA in recognition of the athletics team being part of the wider Australian Commonwealth Games team2. Communications stakeholdersTerms of Reference Issues25Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewLack of transparency in team (management and coaching) appointments, funding decisions - NASSRoles and responsibilities unclear when documented not well communicated or understood.Input from Tours Commission not actively sought or utilised.Internally focused (HPC/HPD) - in house planning; lack of engagement with athletes/coachesConflict of duty professional staff undertaking all of policy, regulation, funding, delivery and evaluation3. Governance High Performance Committee policies and proceduresTerms of Reference Issues26Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewTeam achieved Gold Medal target but did not achieve targets in terms of overall (No 1 in the Commonwealth) and medal performance Strong contribution from para athlete performance including gold medalsStrong feedback that there was very good team spirit and morale in the Glasgow teamHowever significant culture issues were identified which if better facilitated, would lead to greater positive culture in our championship teams:Relationships between AA officials and personal coachesLack of trust among too many at management, coach and athlete levelPerception of lack of care for some athletes/coaches particularly for those less experienced and those whose performance was disappointingHead coach and camp compliance issuePotential conflict of roles coach/manager, team coach/personal coachCaptaincy appointments - process and decision criteriaUnderstanding of the needs of different event groups and the amount of time spent in those groups at Games and in the lead up4. Team Performance against targets and of team cultureTerms of Reference Issues27Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewA risk register was developed. Who was involved and who monitored?Did the Risk Register have a team performance (e.g. injury, impact of culture) or organisational focus?Well established medical monitoring processes, proactive remediation (e.g. athletes visits to AIS for sustained treatment)Feedback post event was not systematic for all athletes5. Risk assessment and mitigationTerms of Reference Issues28Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewMedia Issues Management Plan had not anticipated a scenario similar to the camp funding reduction and Head Coach issuesProactive monitoring and use of social media can assist athletes and other stakeholders; mixed views on how AA is harnessing social media; team member social media policy is well understoodRole of media staff and levels of accreditation in the team lacks clarity.The Media Management Plan included the designation of an AA Board member to address media issues back in Australia. However the advice given significantly underestimated the impact in Australia as media issues escalated. (Glasgow slept while Australia was awake)6. Media Policy including crisis managementTerms of Reference Issues29Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewLargest offshore team selectedTeam did not achieve targets in terms of overall (No1 in the Commonwealth) and medal performanceTeam performance needs to be assessed against a broader set of measures and benchmarksThe line of sight between AAs Strategic Plans, AA policies and the implementation of those policies is not sufficiently transparent to enable simple assessments of alignment and performance7. Campaign performance against AA and High Performance Department Strategic PlansTerms of Reference Issues30Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewPublic domain incidentsLeadership and head coachDebate was virulent in the public domain leading to potential brand damage in Australia and negative impacts on stakeholders. However impact was marginal within team with nearly all feedback indicating it had little or no impact on team or individual performance; indeed there was a sense of relief among some athletes. The team just got on with the job at handThe Panel found that the removal from Glasgow of the Head Coach was appropriate.Camp complianceNeed to balance extremely diverse views on camp compliance issue compulsory, expectation, voluntaryConsequences of non compliance should be transparent and administratively simpleThe Panel found that the handling of the issue did not pass the test of common sense31Public domain incidentsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe Panel found that it was generally acknowledged that some difficult relationships had developed over time between AAs ex head coach and a number of athletes and coaches.Historically the incident at the games was not a one-off. As the major Olympic sport, track and field will always be in the spotlight. Incidents can be identified over successive campaigns where Track and Field issues have progressed rapidly to the front page and the front of news bulletinsPlanning should presume that this will be the case. The AA Risk Management Plan should be strengthened by establishing a crisis management protocol and by monitoring its enactment. The Risk Management Plan should:have a proactive focusidentify who is responsible and in what circumstances provide a clear decision tree to respond swiftly to emerging issues and ensuring it is followedprivilege key stakeholders with immediate and on-going information32Head CoachPublic domain incidentsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewMedia and public debate was virulent. Member Associations (MAs)thought AA judgment that the incident had little impact back home was a serious miscalculation and diminished the sport in the publics eyesImpact was generally minimal within the teamGeneral view that team management covered the absence smoothly and there was little disruption at the event group levelIt is great credit to the organisation and the resilience and focus of the athletes and coaches that there was very little disruption to performance. There was a sense of relief amongst those who have had a difficult relationship with former head coach33Head CoachPublic domain incidentsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe Panel found that there were diverse views on the camp compliance issue. Focus was on the rules driven approach to assembly rather than education around the value of camps.Why do we have camps?There is an evidence base supporting a camp effect in achieving high performance athletes have a common goal, and are pursuing the same end point. The camp helps to deal with and diminish daily stresses of life, provides a 100% focus on the task at handThere are acclimation benefits climate, time zoneIt allows concentration of medical, psychology and sports science servicesIt provides for smooth transition of athletes into a village environmentButCamps are for the benefit of the athletesIt is difficult to find a holding camp that matches all events needs particularly when managing training loads and environments. On previous occasions event groups exemptions have been given e.g. walkers, marathonParticular performance needs of podium athletes may be relevant34Camp compliancePublic domain incidentsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe Panel notes that the penalty for non attendance was not a fine but a non payment of a camp per diem allowance. Because of the rules driven approach the general perception was that three star athletes were fined and the public explanation was at best clumsyThere is a need for a clear, expert and sensitive approach to this issue. With the benefit of hindsight approval for exemption could or should have been given by the Head Coach.Future CampsThe Panel believes there should be a high expectation that all athletes assemble in camp within an agreed window allowing for the possibility of early and late arrivals as appropriate to the length of the Track and Field programHowever camp attendance should not be rules bound and compulsory. Discretion can be and should be expertly givenIf athletes do not attend parts of the camp they should not be paid the preparation allowance for the relevant days unless agreed by the Head CoachPreparation funding does take account of the opportunities some athletes have where meet promoters pay expenses. Historically AA have paid 80% in advance and then made adjustments as needed for the remainder after returning home. There is general support for the continuation of Cologne as a European base. However there are some views that there should be more active coordination when a critical mass of athletes are there.Camp compliancePublic domain incidents35Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewStrategy, Policy and OperationTerms of Reference 1,3 and 7 The Panel found that:the 2014 Glasgow Campaign did not meet all of the ACGA medal targetswith the exception of the selection policy and funding, the policies governing the operation of the team including statements of roles, responsibilities and expectations of team members lacked clarity and were not communicated, or well understood by many team membersthe structure and operation of AAs High Performance approach (High Performance Committee, High Performance Department) was too internally focused and led to perceived and actual conflicts of duty for AA staff.Integration of SIS support for AAs NASS athletes is well grounded and effective 36Terms of Reference FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewStrategy, Policy and OperationTerms of Reference 1,3 and 7 The Panel found that:There was a lack of transparency, consistency and engagement of stakeholders in the development and application of team policiesThere is a perceived lack of clarity regarding the roles within AA including the Board, the High Performance Department and the High Performance CommitteeGames specific roles were generally not advertised, accountabilities not clear and selection for these roles perceived to be highly subjective. Further, because of the lack of transparency, roles which were indeed unpaid were seen as financially lucrative when this was not the case. Nearly all team management positions were filled by professional staff of AA. Three issues emerge as a result:The transparency of appointments to the positions along with other team membersThe potential loss of productivity with so many professional staff off site for a significant period of the year interruptions to forward planning etc.A missed opportunity to harness the skills and enthusiasm of competent volunteer members of the athletics community37Terms of Reference FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewCommunication and MediaTerms of Reference 2 and 6 The Panel found that:internal team communications was largely administrative, impersonal and one way in nature. It did not effectively build engagement and team spirit over the campaign period: the Australian season, pre, during and post the Games.external communications arrangements did not sufficiently take into account the needs of stakeholders especially those in Australia during the lead up and conduct of the Glasgow Gamesit needed to be acknowledged that once in the village the team is an ACGA team and the only spokesperson is the Chef de Commissionmedia policy and practice was generally effective with two major caveats:the handling of the two unexpected issues relating to the camp compliance and the head coach removal on sitepotential brand damage to Athletic Australia as a result of the lack of an effective media and communications presence in Australia38Terms of Reference FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewPerformance and RiskTerms of Reference 4 and 5 The Panel found that:the 2014 Glasgow Campaign did not meet all of the ACGA medal targetsjudgment of team success needs to be based on medium term perspective and a wider view of performance indicators and benchmarksthe risk assessment undertaken for the Glasgow games considered a range of performance and culture issues. There is wide recognition that a positive environment and mitigation of injury risk is of paramount importance as the championships approach.for most athletes the Camp and the Games were a positive experience both individually and as part of the Australian teamthe inclusion of para athletes in the championship athletics team has been successful and provides leadership to other sports the creation of a vibrant team (athletes and staff) culture was not a focus of team management and that opportunities were missed or not created to develop a team culture that fostered a sense of belongingathletes and coaches experience of the team culture depended largely on the strength of pre-existing personal relationships 39Terms of Reference FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewOther mattersTerms of Reference 8The Panel found that:the place of coaches and coaching within AAs approach emerged as a critical matter to addressmore consideration should be given to the meeting the needs and harnessing the potential contributions of the broader athletics family parents and personal coaches and volunteersthere is an absence of a relationship management focus within AA to support our athletes and coaches performing at their best: administrative focus is privileged over engagement and relationshipsthe High Performance Strategy is not well understood, not built on wide stakeholder engagement and may not harness sufficiently the funding it receives to achieve higher levels of performance 40Terms of Reference FindingsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewKey ThemesA number of themes became apparent during the Panels reviewLeadership CultureStakeholder engagement - communicationGovernanceCoachingBenchmarking performance/ accountabilityA shared model for high performance41Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe Panel found that leadership failures, at a range of organisational levels, contributed to the disappointing outcomes and incidents of the Glasgow campaign. This was not just a failure during the Games period but one for which the foundations had been laid in the years preceding the games. Leadership issues include:Team culture both athletically and organisationallyApproaches to coachingRelationships both internally and with stakeholdersMaximising the benefits and rewards from the athletics volunteer communityGiven the demands of landing a large team in Glasgow administration and logistics was well handled.Key themes leadershipLeadership42Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe significant public profile of high performing athletes can lead to AA spending a disproportionate amount of time on high performance matters ahead of a range of other important areas. On the role and contribution of AA to the sport of athletics there is at best a fragile agreement around high performance matters.Key themes leadershipLeadership43Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewAs part of expectations of leadership AA should address the following aspects:approaches to developing leadership skills and staff capabilities in the medium term.approaches to developing athlete leadership, - attributes, specified roles and expectations of team captains, taking into account the critical need to focus on performancecreating more opportunities within and beyond the Athlete Career and Education (ACE) program for athletes who are interested in widening their career and post career experiencesstrengthening mentor programs through which senior athletes and coaches can support new and/or inexperienced athletes and coachesskills and processes in relationship management and engagement/re-engagement of stakeholdersKey themes leadershipLeadership Aspects 44Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewAs part of expectations of leadership AA should address the following aspects:building the culture of the athletics team over a 6 - 8 year cycle starting in junior ranksdeveloping a place for a vibrant athletes association to provide feedback and review. The current Athletes Commission has a minimalist role and does not have sufficient separation from AA. The Athletes Commission should be strengthened to provide robust feedback and reviewdevelop a short term role for an Honorary Ombudsman to receive feedback and progress the resolution of issues through the CEO as an initial mechanism to build trust.consideration of a constituted Track and Field chapter in the Australian Athletes Alliance if appropriateKey themes leadershipLeadership Aspects (cont.)45Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewTrack & Field teams are uniquewhilst legitimate comparisons can be made with other sports the differences are more marked than the similarities. athletics is the foundation of all sports. Ithas virtually no gender bias, includes para athletes in competition structuresincludes all body types and sizes, all psychological make upshas a high degree of specificity of events (23)very different demands in preparation but there is a commonality of experience pathways to participation and success, competition events that provides athletics with significant potential to build a strong supportive cultureThe Review Panel found that the Glasgow Games was a missed opportunity to build a vibrant culture both organisationally (at AA) and athletically (lead up, camps and Games village)Key themes team and organisational cultureCulture46Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewKey themes team and organisational cultureCulture47engaging, uniting, inspiring and motivating all Australians.Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewMany athletes and coaches found the Glasgow a valuable experience it provided a supportive environment that contributed to their athletic careerHowever management played a passive rather than active role in relation to cultural and organisational aspects of the team. There was not significant attention given to:developing respect and trust within the team and organisationestablishment of clear and well understood processes that were consistently appliedbuilding effective personal and professional relationships based on clear behavioural expectations, two way communication and accountability for performancedeveloping robust feedback processes and training staff to apply themestablishing service standards and measures of responsivenessThere are varying views of the level of reciprocity throughout the organisation. Athletes, coaches and stakeholders tend to perceive that they are held to account more than the professional staff and professional staff tend to believe that athletes, coaches and stakeholders do not recognise the benefit of the support provided to themKey themes team and organisational cultureCulture48Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewA consistent theme was that AA could improve its stakeholder engagement. The panel suggests using a stakeholder engagement framework to signal a real attempt to engage differentlyWho are AAs stakeholders?AthletesCoaches (personal, team, professional)Institutes of SportMember AssociationsAthletics volunteer communityACGA, AOC and APC (athletics teams are part of a wider team)ASC/GovernmentIAAF and OAASpecialist athletics journalists/mediaBroader communityAppendix 1 outlines model principles for stakeholder engagement, stakeholder engagement tool that AA might consider in assessing its approach to stakeholders and an example of cultural aspiration that AA might aspire to as a result of stakeholder engagement process.Key themes stakeholder engagementWho are AAs stakeholders?49Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewKey findings stakeholder engagementLevels of Stakeholder Interaction - a frameworkInformConsultInvolveCollaborateEmpowerEngagement goalsTo inform and communicateTo obtain feedbackTo work directly with to ensure understandingTo partner with in development and decision makingTo place decision making in sholder handsPromise to stakeholdersWe will keep you informedWe will listenWe will work with youWe will look to you for adviceWe will implement your decisionsMethodsFact sheetsOpen housesNewsletters, bulletins, circularsWebsites, externalPublic commentFocus groups Surveys Public meetingsWorkshopsDeliberative pollingWeb 2.0 tools ForumsWeb 2.0 toolsReference groupsFacilitated consensus building forumsLocal governanceJoint planningProvision of dataShared projectsCapacity building50Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewTransparency of processes and outcomesImpartiality with respect to decision-making and engagement with different communities of interestEfficiency and effectiveness in delivery of services and in providing suitable access for athletes, coaches and other stakeholdersClarity and accountability refers to the way responsibilities are assigned and described, and decision-makers held to accountResponsiveness and reciprocity with respect to engaging stakeholders on policy and funding/deliveryInclusivity with respect to engaging stakeholders.Key themes GovernancePrinciples of good organisational governance51Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewKey themes GovernanceHow did the Glasgow campaign approach fare against these principles?PrincipleAssessmentTransparencyPoor. Apart from selection other processes around campaign lacked transparency or were communicated poorlyImpartialityQuestionable. AAs organisational structure and some decisions do not support a face value assessment of a high level of impartialityEfficiency and effectivenessMixed. Good - most of selection; Fair - organisation of roles and responsibilities of team members. Number of professional staff on teams raises questions of productivity.Clarity and AccountabilityPoor. Accountability lines were not clear, on site, in Australia and within organisation Board, management, team officialsResponsiveness and reciprocityPoor. Communication was largely one way with little attempt to check understanding. Media response underestimated impact back in Australia. Little known or non existent procedures for athletes to express concerns.InclusivityPoor. Stakeholders largely felt excluded from decision making.52Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewKey themes GovernanceHow would this look in an ideal world?PrincipleWhat does it look like for AA?What does it look like to athletes and coaches?TransparencyDecisions are taken in accordance with pre published criteria and processes Athletes and coaches would have access to information early and often and would not ask How did that happenImpartialityOrganisational structure is free of conflict of interest and duty issuesAll information available to all. AA decisions are initially trusted and there is opportunity for review via separate processesEfficiency and effectivenessAA minimises double handling and reduces red tape. Issues are handled by the right people with the right skills. Requests for information well founded and relevant.Requests are reasonable and can be seen to be going to the right place. Athlete and coaches respond in a timely and useful way to interaction with AAClarity and AccountabilityShared understanding of roles and responsibilities within AAAthletes and coaches understand relevant roles within AAResponsiveness and reciprocityEarly engagement with stakeholders in genuine consultationContribution is valuedInclusivityAA thinks broadly about who should be involvedAthletes and coaches feel they have been involved appropriately. 53Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewPotential conflicts of duty54Key themes GovernancePolicyFundingTeam FormationDeliveryConflicts of duty potentially arise when policy and funding roles in an organisation overlap with delivery rolesIn AAs case overlapping membership of the High Performance Committee, NASS funding and review decision makers, the High Performance Department and AA Team staff raises the issue of a conflict of duty when their respective responsibilities are consideredReviewEvaluationGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewPotential Conflicts of Duty an illustrationFunctionWho decides?SelectionSelection committee reports to board. Independent chair and members Selection policies HPD/HPC (approved by Board/ACGA)Funding (NASS)HPD independent member with no voting rightsMonitoringHPDTeam appointments HPC membership HPD plus Board chair as member, chaired by CEOReviewHPD independent member with no voting rights (same as funding)EvaluationHPD report to Board55Key themes GovernanceRemoval of conflicts of duty can assist professional staff to do their job better, free of perceptions of lack of transparency and impartialityGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe question of coachingCoaching emerged as a central theme from the panel's process. Issues raised include:support for coaches (both experienced coaches and the development of new coaches)the role of the head coachteam coach selection and the relationship between team coaches and personal coaches support for coaches and athletes when a change of coach occursthe role of Athlete Performance Advisor vis a vis event/team coach Coaches also took the opportunity to comment on the current split between the AA coaching model and ATFCA approach. AA should consider taking immediate steps to remove this damaging dysfunction and mediate a way forward to improve coach developmentAA should review the balance of its high performance funding between management and administration, coaching, and athletes56Key themes CoachingGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewHead CoachThe Head Coach role is of critical importance and AA should take the time to ensure the right appointment is made including consideration of:the role and accountabilities of a head coach (see below)the capabilities to carry out the rolethe time frame of the appointment. Panels view is that an appointment should be made through to 2020 subject to athletic, organisational, and cultural performancethe appointment should not be rushedAA needs to determine on the role of the head coach and ensure the athletic community understands its reach and place in Australian athletics. Three possible approaches are:A coaching director accountable to the CEO dealing with all coaching matters with a focus on High Performance but separate to a HPDA head coach focused solely on High Performance and head coach of BMEsA head team coach who may be different from a High Performance Coaching Director The role, capabilities and accountabilities for the head coach position need to be carefully considered prior to a transparent process for appointmentAppendix 4 sets out a possible Head Coach role statement for consideration57Key themes CoachingGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewTeam CoachesThe Panel found that there needed to be greater clarity and transparency around the role of team coaches including a role statement and induction process. The role should encompassfacilitation of personal coaches and athletes through a whole campaignensuring that the personal coachs program is implemented if the personal coach cant be presentTeam coaches should:be provided with certainty by appointing as many as possible early where it can be done for core appointments apply 80/20 rule to team appointments. be retained subject to performance over successive campaigns (2-3)where the coach is not employed by AA receive payment of a modest fee consistent with medical payment from the team assembly point onwardsSome personal coaches of podium athletes might be part of the team coach cohort but on the basis of capabilities, sound relationships and a willingness to coach across other athletes within event groups and work with personal coaches. It should not be the default position that coaches of podium athletes are automatically placed on the team58Key themes CoachingGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewPersonal CoachesThe Panel found that Personal Coaches in general feel isolated and there was little apparent concrete support for them. The Panel recognises potential support is limited and access to accreditation is not possible for all.Personal coaches of podium athletes should automatically have the highest accreditation available if not on the team.History shows that significant numbers of Personal Coaches get an athlete to a major meet for the first time. With little experience to help them navigate a complex and difficult situation AA needs to find ways to support these coaches in order for their athletes to perform at their best. Consideration should be given to:Personal Coaches being treated as a segment of the team appointing a Personal Coach liaison officer who is a volunteer outside the teamfacilitating Personal Coaches involvement in team activities (dinners etc) and other issues such as accommodation dealsensuring direct communication between Personal and Team Coaches with Team Coaches having a stronger role during the lead up campaign59Key themes CoachingGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewAssessment of Glasgow PerformanceQuality medal performances Athletics had the stars of the GamesLarge number of qualified/selected athletes with a good presence across disciplines to inspire young and emerging athletes watching from homeSixteen (18.6%) achieved PBs at the Games and a few athletes delivered world class performances at their first BMEStrong contribution from para athlete performance including gold medalsThe Campaign inducted a large number of emerging elite athletes at their first BMEThree National Records in the Campaign periodKey themes Benchmarking Performance60Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewAssessment of Glasgow PerformanceHoweverPerformance at the Delhi and Glasgow Commonwealth Games (taken together) is considerably below the three previous Commonwealth Games (medals and Top 8s)AA had to moderate downwards its already modest Winning Edge targets as the Games approached.The Glasgow teams did not meet its 10-20 (9) medal target but did meet its 5-9 (6) Gold medal target.Consistent with recent Commonwealth Games our World Championship and Olympic Games performances since 2000, whilst maintaining our medal performance (2-4), have seen our our top eight and top sixteen results trending down. Key themes Benchmarking Performance61Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewJunior pathwaysThe Panel notes that a longer term assessment of the status of Australian athletics would need to consider the role and success of junior programs and the pathways athletes take to become part of national teams at events such as GlasgowEarly analysis indicates for instance that members of Under 17 national squads have made little or no contribution to podium points in recent major competitions (one Top 8)However participation in World Junior Championships (Under 20s) has proved to be a pathway to medals at major competitionsWhilst not directly covered by the Terms of Reference of this Review the Panel suggests that AA review its approach to junior programs including:development of an evidence base to support successful junior programsdetermining a primary focus for junior programs and the role of MAs in their implementation i.e. is the focus to build a broader base for fostering elite talent?62Key themes Benchmarking PerformanceGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewBenchmarking PerformanceThe Panel believes that Australian athletics campaigns would benefit from regular and consistent benchmarking of outcomes across a range of performance measures.Benchmarking performance and establishing team targets:promotes a positive climate of high expectations amongst coaches and athletes about our performancehelps buy in and support from key athletics media to promulgate valid expectations about performanceprovides a variety of performance benchmarks over a number of campaigns on which to evaluate performance and base improvement targets and predict team performanceKey themes Benchmarking Performance63Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewBenchmarking Performance key issuesHow good is our data?How do we use it? Who has access to it?Benchmark againstTeam goalsOther teams at the same BMETeam performance at similar BMEsOther teams at similar BMEsEstablish a wider set of performance measures to assess performanceAA should build on its current system to create an organisational data base using the athletes and coaches as the basic unit of measurement aggregating up to BME benchmarks. Key themes Benchmarking Performance64Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewBenchmarking EventsKey themes Benchmarking Performance19982018CG Gold CoastCG Melb2006OG BeijingOG LondonOG RioMETRICS652020OG TokyoGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewUsing benchmarksAll benchmarks need to be contextualised, but there is still great veracity in evaluating performance against other BMEs.66Key themes Benchmarking PerformanceEvent ContextKuala LumpurNo para athletes and W 3,000 STGlasgowNo walksMissing Athlete Context Kuala LumpurFreeman, Gainsford, MarshGlasgowFrayne, Watt, Rowe, SolomonLocation ContextManchester and Glasgow similar zones and timingKL and Delhi similar hemisphereMelbourne and Gold Coast home gamesGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewSample Benchmarks Commonwealth Games67CG 1998CG2002CG2006CG2010CG 2014WJ 2014QualifiersQualifiers (next BME)61 (77%)Team size (event group)7473105548656Performance >=ER (no & %)51 (65%)37 (66.1%)Performance = PB or equiv16( 20%) PB32 (42%) =PB16 (18.6%) PB17 % PBProgression through rounds93%65.1%Medals (percentage of team)34 (45.9%)26 (35.6%)36 (34.3%)15 (27.8%)9 (10.5%)2 (3.6%)Conversion (medals to Gold)38.2%34.6%38.9%53.3%66.7%0%Conversion (top 8 to medals)56.7%46.4%45.6%50.0%22.0%12.5%Top 8 (percentage of team)60 (81.1%)56 (76.7%)79 (75.2%)30 (55.6%)41 (47.7%16 (28.6%)TargetsPathwaysPB/Qualifiers/NR in campaign5 (NRs)3 (NRs)Key themes Benchmarking PerformanceGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewSample Benchmarks World and Olympic Games68OLY 2000WC 2003OLY 2004WC 2007OLY 2008WC 2011OLY 2012QualifiersQualifiers (next BME)Team size (event group)86384445414552Performance >=ER (no & %)64%Performance = PB or equiv38%Progression through rounds45%Medals (percentage of team)3 (3.5%)1 (2.6%)3 (6.8%)3 (6.7%)4 (9.8%)3 (6.7%)3 (5.8%)Conversion (medals to Gold)33.3%100%0%66.7%25%33.3%33.3%Conversion (top 8 to medals)20%16.7%37.5%100%50%27.3%50%Top 8 (percentage of team)15 (17.4%)6 (15.8%)8 (18.2%)3 (6.7%)8 (19.5%)11 (24.4%)6 (11.5%)Top 8 (points score)53243418403427Top 16 (percentage of team)38 (44.2%)16 (42.1%)12 (27.3%)17 (37.8%)18 (43.9%)18 (40.0%)15 (28.8%)TargetsPathwaysPB/Qualifiers/NR in campaignKey themes Benchmarking PerformanceGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewHigh Performance ModelsA number of high performance approaches are visible in the AA world.Winning Edge Priority ActionsAthletics Australia High Performance Strategy (Sept 2013)AA Strategic Plan 2013-16Elliott ReviewHigh Performance Review 2005 Core StrategiesHow can these be integrated together with worlds best practice into an effective means of guiding AAs processes, decision making and programs?Specifically AA needs to consider:The best balance of top down and bottom up to achieve high performance outcomes How can Winning Edge be leveraged to support that approach?The place of NASS what important contribution can it make that is consistent with the approach to high performance: NASS should not be the only key driver but nested within a broad strategy 69Key themes A shared model for high performanceGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewAA should consider its current work against a first principles approach where support is wrapped around athlete and coach70High PerformanceAthlete first, coach driven high performanceKey themes A shared model for high performanceGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewA significant piece of applied research is available to AA which could provide a useful framework for a newly constituted HPC to consider over coming months.The Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success (SPLISS) is an international network of research cooperation that coordinates, develops and shares expertise in innovative high performance sport policy research in cooperation with policy makers, National Olympic Committees (NOCs), international (sport) organisations, and researchers worldwide.This framework has recently been applied to athletics. A next step could be to apply the framework to Australian athletics. Academics from Victoria University are partners in the project and could be engaged to assist.The diagram on the following slide outlines the pillars of this frameworkNote the inclusion of a range of pillars including (inter)national competition, athlete and post career support and coaching. We heard significant feedback of the importance of these pillars in high performance and this could be a focus of detailed work to benchmark our current high performance modelUsing this framework as an assessment tool can allow AA to identify our current strengths and build improvements, as well as strengthen ownership of its current high performance strategy.71A potential approach to high performanceKey themes A shared model for high performanceGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewA potential approach to high performancePillar 1Financial SupportPillar 2Organisation of sport policiesPillar 3Foundation & ParticipationPillar 4Talent identification and development systemPillar 5Athletic & post career supportPillar 6Training FacilitiesPillar 7Coaching provision & coach developmentPillar 8(Inter)national competitionPillar 9Scientific ResearchSPLISS ModelA theoretical model of nine pillars of sports policy factors influencing international success: 72Pillar 10Elite Athletics EnvironmentGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewLeadershipThat AA invest in the leadership and management capabilities of its staff including additional media training That AA establish a clear set of KPIs for staff which covers key athletic outcomes as well as stakeholder management and internal staff engagement and development.That AA consider the number and roles of professional staff on overseas teams, particularly championship teams, to ensure transparency and maintenance of productivity and future planning for AA.CultureThat AA organise and promote the sport of athletics around the theme of it being the pure sport the banner sport of the Olympics and the Commonwealth Games and the foundation of all other sports.That AA strengthen the induction program for athletes and coaches, and that a parents and supporters of athletes group be a part of AA planning for each major campaign73RecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewCulture (cont.)That as a matter of priority AA initiate processes to establish a productive and inclusive organisational culture focused on achieving the goals and targets determined by the Board.That AA take immediate steps to strengthen and support formal mentoring arrangements covering athlete to athlete, coach to coach and professional staff to professional staffThat AA establish processes to elicit and respond to regular feedback and input from athletes and coaches including a strengthened Athletes Commission. This will also be an outcome of stronger stakeholder engagement as recommended. In the short term there could be a role for:an Honorary Ombudsman to receive feedback and progress the resolution of issues through the CEO as an initial mechanism to build trust.consideration of a constituted Track and Field chapter in the Australian Athletes Alliance if appropriate74RecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewStakeholder EngagementThat AA establish and implement a detailed stakeholder relations plan that is inclusive of the its major stakeholders and that provides a three year engagement plan for each major stakeholder group.GovernanceThat AA reconstitute the High Performance Advisory Committee (HPC) to incorporate a broader pool of high performance expertise in the provision of advice to the CEO and the High Performance Department (HPDept.) on AA High Performance policies. That the AA Board give consideration to appointing to the HPC members with high performance and coaching expertise to complement those from the ASC and the AIS.That AA review its current organisational structure and processes, particularly as they relate to high performance, against good governance principles and establish and publish detailed role and accountability statements for AA staff and structures including the role of the AA Board.75RecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewCoachingThat AA take into account the findings of this report and determine the role and capabilities of the Head Coach and authorise the filling of that role. That AA adopt arrangements for the appointment of Team Coaches for major campaigns that:has a transparent and open process for appointmentprioritises early appointments where possibleallows for performance based appointments over successive campaignsregularises remuneration for Team Coaches along the lines of other team membersThat AA ensure that Personal Coaches are embraced as part of AAs approach to high performance including consideration of:Personal Coaches of podium athletes automatically have the highest accreditation available if they are not on the teamappointment of a Personal Coach voluntary liaison personimproving communication between Personal and Team Coaches76RecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewBenchmarking PerformanceThat AA establish an organisation wide business intelligence process using athletes and coaches as the basic unit of measurement to establish relevant team benchmarks, track progress over time and build the evidence base to identify where support can be most effective.That AA establish initial targets for the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games based on the 2006 Melbourne Commonwealth Games across a range of measures.High PerformanceThat AA assess its High Performance Strategy (policy and operational guidelines) against evidence based frameworks such as Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success (SPLISS) with particular reference to relevant critical success factors and AAs KPIs to maximise the benefits of its support from the Winning Edge strategy.77RecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewHigh Performance (cont.)That AA continue its 6-8 year high performance planning and development cycle with rigorous evaluation after each major campaign. This includes competition, coaching support and athlete development programs noting that the Australian team for the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games is likely to be large.That there should be a high expectation, for performance reasons, that all athletes assemble in camp within an agreed window. The Camp policy should have a basis for discretion, exercised by the team head coach, to allow for athlete/event groups performance circumstancesThat AA through its High Performance Strategy review its current risk mitigation approach against best practice to ensure AA teams deliver optimal performance. A focus of this review should be to further develop stakeholder communication protocolsPanel ReportThat the Panels report should be published together with the Boards response. Prior to publication briefings should be undertaken with ACGA, MAs, the ASC review panel and athletic journalists.78RecommendationsGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewResponsive and reciprocalEarly engagementInclusiveImpartial and objectiveOpen, transparent and trustingRespectfulExample of principles of stakeholder engagement179Appendix 1 Stakeholder Engagement1.Drawn from Stakeholder Engagement Framework, Department of Education and Early Childhood, VictoriaGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewWhere do AAs stakeholders fit?HighHighLowLowLevel of interestLevel of influenceInvolve/ConsultCollaborate/EmpowerInformConsult80Stakeholders may be in different quadrants at different times or on different issuesAppendix 1 Stakeholder EngagementGlasgow 2014 Campaign Review81(Our People) we did a great job recognising key-wins and team/individual contributions made to the strategic direction of the sport.(Our People) AA made significant investments in growing and retaining its coaches and athletes they invested in me as an individual and made me a better coach/athlete/manager(Our Culture) AA became the place to work in sport(we work-hard, play-hard, have the most fun and win lots of medals)(Our Processes) we made it much easier for our coaches and athletes to do business with us, we focused on operational efficiencies, communication, transparency & effectiveness and removed non (administrative) activities from our sport(Our People) we were successful in expanding ( community, coaching, competition, junior and whole of sport)(Our Culture) it became evident that all athletes and their support groups became an integral part of our success, allowing us to focus on new opportunitiesAppendix 1 Cultural AspirationsFollowing a stakeholder engagement process our cultural aspirations might look likeGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewCG 1998WC 1999OG 2000CG2002CG2006OG2008CG2010OG 2012WC 2013CG 2014CG2018QualifiersQualifiers (next BME)Team size (event group)Performance >=ER (no & %)Performance = PB or equivProgressionConversionTop 16 (not CG)Top 8MedalsTargetsPathwaysPB/Qualifiers/NR in campaignAppropriate benchmark years82Appendix 2 Benchmarking BMEsGlasgow 2014 Campaign Review83Appendix 3 Input to the ReviewAthletesCoachesTeam StaffMember AssociationsOther293920722The Panel received input from a range of sources including:Face to face and phone interviewsDirect submission to the reviewFour online surveys tailored to key segments of the athletics community. The table below provides an indication of the numbers of people/institutions providing input into the Review.Note: there maybe some double counting as the online surveys were anonymous and some individuals may have completed the survey and participated in an interview.Glasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe Head Coach of Australian Athletics will:Make a major contribution to AA HP Strategy, which is guided by an athlete first, coach driven principle;Lead the HP coaching strategy for AALead through the SIS and the network of event group coaches to create thebest possible daily training environments for all aspiring podium athletes".Lead the coach mentoring, coach development, succession planningand coach support for all HP coaches, paid and voluntary.Lead performance development and management of AA professionalcoachesContribute to the national coach accreditation framework and monitoring its delivery for HP coaches.By negotiation is able to coach a small number of elite and emerging athletesBe the head team coach for some teams as determined by CEO.Contribute as a senior member of the AA leadership team.Be accountable for collaboration with the HPD to assist on other elements of the HP Strategy, including competition, talent identification, funding allocation, preparation arrangements for major teams, performance monitoring etc.Capabilities of the person filling this role should be the demonstration of highly developed interpersonal skills with an ability to manage complex relationships, lead and inspire individuals and groups over whom they may not have any direct responsibility Possible Head Coach Role Statement84Appendix 4 Head Coach RoleGlasgow 2014 Campaign ReviewThe Review Panel consisted of:Chris Wardlaw, ChairAnne Lord, AA BoardJan Swinhoe, AA BoardPeter Bromley, AA BoardReview Panel Members85Appendix 5 Panel MembersGlasgow 2014 Campaign Review86Appendix 6 GlossaryACEAthlete Career and Education programACGAAustralian Commonwealth Games AssociationAPCAustralian Paralympic CommitteeAISAustralian Institute of SportAOCAustralian Olympic CommitteeASCAustralian Sports CommissionATFCAAustralian Track and Field Coaches AssociationBMEBenchmark EventEREntry RankHPCHigh Performance Committee (AA)HPDHigh Performance Department (AA)IAAFInternational Association of Athletic FederationsKPIKey Performance IndicatorMAMember Association (affiliated to Athletics Australia)OAAOceania Athletics AssociationPBPersonal BestNASSNational Athlete Support StructureNOCNational Olympic CommitteeNRNational RecordSISState Institute of SportSPLISSSports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success (SPLISS) Team CoachCoach appointed by AA to support team at major eventToRTerms of ReferenceWinning EdgeThe Australian Sports Commissions High Performance StrategyGlasgow 2014 Campaign Review