National Council meeting notes

September  2024

 

The meeting was held on Zoom on 28th Septembe 2024.

 

When I looked for the documents to prepare for this meeting, I was surprised not to find them in the usual place on the Table Tennis England website on the National Council page. Fortunately, I was guided to the new site. https://national-council-tte.co.uk/  I do not remember this being mentioned as being required.  I was not the only one caught out. It would have been helpful if this had been communicated more clearly.  The site was generally accepted as being a good step towards autonomy of the National Council. Although, it is still within TTE, being a TTLeagues site.

Eventually, the papers appeared there on Thursday. I thought that papers should be submitted in advance of meetings to allow NCs sufficient time to read and digest in preparation for the meeting. There was a paper that only became available on the morning of the meeting and was going to be posted on the site after the meeting. Not much use to us for the meeting and will be forgotten by the next meeting.

Action plans should normally involve actual actions. Any actions completed should be advised in advance of the meeting rather than being ear-marked to be discussed at the meeting. Not only that they have been completed, any outcomes and further actions plans – next steps – can be seen.

Spreadsheets or a similar document should be set up to show progress on each of the actions. If this were on the site, NCs could check progress and possibly chase up matters that are not progressing at a rate that would be expected. Identifying problems and obstacles early. Reverting to subject matter experts as necessary. At the meeting, I suggested that the action plans be put on a “work in progress” document. So that people can see how far they have progressed at any time. This will save a lot of time in a congested agenda schedule.  It may well be that I will be given a duty in this respect.

Effective meetings are what we all want and some time in the agenda was devoted to considering how the National Council should be run and various issues have already been ear-marked for the rest of the season.  There was also the mention of job descriptions, which have not been produced previously. I would start with the Chair being like the Speaker of the House in Parliament. Ensuring the smooth running of the meeting and not making comments and getting in the first question on various topics or giving his opinions about every subject. The meeting overran by an hour and this was largely attributable to the Chair not handling it very effectively.  The Chair also said that he was “comfortable” with things. His comfort about any matter is of no concern to anybody else.  When I was Chair, I would have somebody else from Sussex to make any points that came from the county. As I had expressed no views in the meeting, I was allowed to put together my notes from the meeting (the thoughts of Chairman Meow!) and have them circulated whilst the minutes were being signed-off. This is where these reports originate.

Luckily, the few people who contribute to proceedings tended to be succinct in making their points. The contributions of the Chair and CEO tend to be the highlights of the meeting and the meetings become less effective after they leave. The opportunity to get their thoughts on current issues and to challenge on issues is the main reason why National Council is useful.  To the extent, for me, the meetings become a navel gazing session after they leave because people can only give opinions that may not be accurate. This meeting was interesting because some of the discussions were quite illuminating.

What makes a good chair?

A good chair helps the meeting to run smoothly and efficiently. The person who chairs a meeting can sometimes be referred to as the ‘facilitator’.

They will make sure that:

  • all the business is discussed
  • everyone’s views are heard
  • clear decisions are reached
  • the meeting starts and finishes on time.

A good chair will also:

  • always be thinking about the meeting overall, not just the topic under discussion. This can make it more difficult for you to participate in the discussions.
  • always aim to draw a balance between hearing everyone’s views and getting through the business.
  • never use their position as chair as an opportunity to put forward their views to the exclusion of others, or to dominate the meeting.

https://www.resourcecentre.org.uk/information/chairing-a-meeting/integrity

Good leadership requires you to surround yourself with people of diverse perspectives who can disagree with you without fear of retaliation.

Nick Donald’s address to the meeting was a positive indication that he is looking for a change in culture within TTE. Nick inherited a sport NGB full of toxicity, both within and outside the organisation. That change of culture will involve a mind shift for some people and/or recruitment of competent people to take TTE forward. We all need to look at the most effective routes of communication. We all lead busy lives and want the best for the game of table tennis.

The idea of “Task & Finish” groups is the way forward for advice to be given to enable informed and effective decision-making for the future of the game.

We can change culture if we change behaviour.

It may well be that National Council will not fit into the ongoing communication pathways and we need to find the way to make National Council effective for TTE, not the other way around.

“Will it make the boat go faster? Then do it!”

Ben Hunt-Davis

Succession planning is very important. Looking around the participants of the National Council, there is very little diversity of age, gender or ethnicity. Many people have attended for many years. The Code for Sports Governance suggests that people should only serve a limited tenure.  Whilst the National Council can point to thousands of years of experience within the sport, we need to be mentally agile to enable necessary change to be implemented.

Perhaps, we should consider whether some of our entrenched views are impeding the progress that needs to be made.

Adrian Christy brought us up to date with the Table Tennis United strategy. This seemed to be progressing, although the competition structure remains a bugbear.

“And I would rather be anywhere else but here today.”

Elvis Costello – Oliver’s Army

Adrian advised that he got rid of “Good Standing” because he did not understand its use and relevance. Points were made about its importance and I shall try to explain here.  Good Standing was valued by organisations, such as VETTS, BUCS, Armed Forces, Civil Service. It gave their events a certain credibility. Being in Good Standing with the NGB was a badge of honour, a stamp of quality, the event would be run using ETTA rules etc. Good standing has no tangible value and the accounting equivalent would be Goodwill in a balance sheet – an intangible asset. It cost nothing to either the body in good standing or the NGB, but it had value.

I would liken this to the recent activity by TTE to obtain a Royal Patronage. What use is that to our sport?  We might get somebody to present awards if it fits in with their schedule.  But no tangible value. 

This issue of good standing has now hit the competition structure. Good Standing with the current TTE is not desirable or valued and we have people deliberately setting up events to be outside the jurisdiction of TTE.  We now have a total mess of events being set up without any reference to a centralised body and now competing for a finite number of competitors.

“Without data, you’re just another person with an opinion.” – W. Edwards Deming

A knock-on effect from that is that we can look forward to having 3 (three) separate independent ranking lists. With no or very little common data. Anybody with a knowledge of statistics will confirm that data becomes more accurate and reliable with larger samples. Are we supposed to manually add them up to get the accurate result? If we had a responsible adult in the room, this would not be too difficult to negotiate, if there was any residual goodwill in the game between the membership and the NGB.

“In God we trust. All others must bring data.” – W. Edwards Deming

From the meeting, it would seem that a lot of store is being placed in the new CEO coming into office.  Negotiations regarding memoranda of understanding have been put on hold. As I have said previously, the skill set for the incoming CEO is now rather different from the original job specification as the new CEO will inherit some large problems and incompetent and dishonest people in some important posts within the NGB, The new CEO should have experience of disaster recovery and rebuilding a failed business.  I am not sure that I remember those skills being on the original job description.

“It’s better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behaviour is better than yours and you’ll drift in that direction.”

Warren Buffett

Another enlightening discussion revolved around tournament regulations. These have been altered several times recently. Introducing rules that are unnecessarily restrictive and unworkable. These have been originated by the Competitions and Events team. Then drafted by willing volunteers who purport to be skilled in writing those rules. I am puzzled that these experts do not seem to have challenged the wisdom of the rules being proposed. They were simply wordsmiths doing the bidding of their instructors. Then, it seems that the rules were published without being passed by the Board.  So, missed opportunities by the wordsmiths followed by the senior leadership team proceeding to publish ultra vires, not following agreed good governance processes.  

An excuse proffered for the rules being drawn up wrongly, inexecutable and needing to be withdrawn, was lack of resource. This is an incredible excuse. Plenty of passing the buck (who is Buck?) and deflection of blame.  People need to accept their mistakes and be accountable. 

“In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible.”
George Orwell

When explaining bad decisions in a business, it is crucial to be transparent and take responsibility. Here are a few tips:

  •  Acknowledge the Mistake: Admit that a bad decision was made. This builds trust and shows accountability.
  • Explain the Context: Provide the background and reasoning that led to the decision. This helps others understand the situation better.
  • Learn and Adapt: Highlight the lessons learned and the steps being taken to prevent similar mistakes in the future.
  • Focus on Solutions: Emphasise the corrective actions and the positive changes being implemented.

The main worry about this is that we hear that many things have been “signed off by the board”, when, in fact, the board has not even seen them. This has been the case throughout the cursed Competition Review. The board has not received sufficient information to make informed decisions about issues in a timely manner. 

When I was on the Board, the executive wanted to look at updating the website. We were given some information about various providers and we were guided towards one provider in particular. When we asked when the provider would be able to start the project – 6 weeks ago!

“Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is looking.

CS Lewis

On the basis of the success of the select committees on Competitions and the Constitution, it has been decided that a new committee to focus on finance.  There were a few people volunteering to take part and I have been nominated to chair the committee. Due to the wide nature of the subject, we will need to be quite specific in which areas will be beneficial to TTE and the membership. Past experience leads me to believe that actually obtaining any information may be challenging. This will require the co-operation of the Senior Leadership Team. It will be easier if we are doing work that will benefit the organisation.

So, an interesting meeting where some people will have received messages that they do not like, loud and clear.  Various people have been exposed for aiding and abetting in processes that have gone wrong.  The usual continued defence of the indefensible. Action plans being made for future meetings and the topics to be discussed.  

An interesting meeting for those that had the fortitude and respect for all present to stay for the whole meeting.