Strategies and reality

Mon, May 12, '08

 

by VANEISA BAKSH

THE West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) put up its Draft Strategic Plan on its website, inviting comments.

Unfortunately, the link to it was so innocuous that it was unlikely many people noticed it. The possibilities of it being widely appraised seem slim.

Why its presence should have been so understated is a little puzzling as one would imagine that this is the most important document on the plate of West Indies cricket.

A strategic plan ought to be a model of clarity. It can only be effective when there is certainty about essential questions. The document asks those questions right at the outset:

* Where are we?

* What do we have to work with?

* Where do we want to be?

* How do we get there?

It offers a reasonable series of answers to those questions, and it seems a measured and thoughtful way forward.

But I would say that another key element of a strategic plan is that it must also be frank because it is only through thorough assessments that proper evaluations can be made.

In a very circumspect manner, it cites facts that the directors are involved in cricket administration at territorial and national levels, and that collectively they are experts in a variety of fields, that they have good relationships with territorial governments, that staff are skilled and professional, and so on.

In other words, it lists what ought to be strengths given these qualities, but in so doing it rises above the reality only to fix its eye on the idyll.

There is little evidence to support that any of those conditions have been used to strengthen the governance of West Indies cricket.

The weaknesses number 15 in relation to the 18 strengths and are true to the heart of the thing:

* Outdated governance structure;

* slow and sometimes ineffectual decision-making process;

* perception of precedence to parochial as opposed to regional interests;

* more directors than staff;

* lack of financial stability, chronic cash flo problems and low reserves;

* poor performance of team because of technical, fitness, educational and attitude-related issues;

* weak domestic game and fan support;

* weak current team management process;

* weak communications between secretariat and territorial boards;

* lack of central contracts;

* gap between Under-15 and Under-19, transition from Under-19 to first class;

* lack of confidentiality and trust;

* board involvement in management to the point of micro-management;

* poor coordination and functional separation within the secretariat, as well as anomalies in practices and procedures;

* lack of a marketing and sales focus with no consistent emphasis on attracting revenue and adequately servicing sponsors.

I understand the WICB has met to discuss the merits of this plan in relation to the governance report it had commissioned, and will soon be making a decision on a way forward.

The plan looks good on paper, but would benefit from wider analysis; and so, for those who are so inclined please have a look at it at the WICB's website www.windiescricket.com.