Clare MacLeod, Principal Consultant at KKP and a recognised club development expert talks about how we can practically support this increasingly important network...

Clubs (along with sport!) are back in fashion! This key part of our sector has, in general, done pretty well to survive largely intact throughout the period when the best we in national, county and local sports development agencies often had on offer was extra layers of administration and bureaucracy. So, what do we want from them?

• Firstly - they are to be available at the beck and call of schools so that the ubiquitous ‘school-club' link (to which ‘5-hour targets are attached) to take on and cater for our little darlings;
• Secondly - they are to underpin the drive to increase levels of participation among the population per se.
• Thirdly, they in some part to enable us to produce the rack of talented performers that are to win competitions and medals over the next two decades.

So what's the problem with this?

Our work for governing bodies (in sports as diverse as football, rugby, boxing, aikido and cycling) spans involvement with clubs of all types. In addition, through managing the Clubmark process, we have had the privilege of working with clubs across over 30 sports.

It is this experience that stimulates our plea to stop treating clubs as a homogenous group.

We must appreciate the dynamics, differences and variable characteristics of clubs. They range from large, established, facility owning, multi-sport, multi-team based organisations, to those reliant on local authorities and schools for the one or two court hours during which their activity takes place, to those centred upon an individual coach who makes part of his/her living from involvement to walking and cycle clubs that operate from the secretary's back bedroom and assemble at bus stops and car parks to take part together.

As an industry we must think hard about the standardised way in which we proscribe what is good for clubs such as accreditation, equity and school-club links. This should be replaced by (or at the very least accompanied with) processes focused upon ‘the type of club that its members want it to be' and aligning our strategic support (which may well include actions from our agenda) to how such aspirations can be supported.

This still allows us the room to give priority to clubs that will assist us to deliver on our objectives but ensures that in amongst the imposition of our tick boxes and pre-determined guidance, time is spent assisting them to address issues that matter - to them. At the same time, we may need to be prepared to go into battle for clubs supporting those that, for example, rely upon indoor sports hall space, to gain access to more programme hours, at peak times, possibly at lower cost - so that they can deliver what they want along with the services we need.

On other sports, such as boxing, judo and aikido, the emphasis may be on professionalising key elements of club operation to ensure survival at a level, and for a period of time, that ultimately allows issues of quality, expansion, improvement (and accreditation) to become realistic possibilities. It is, thus vital, to distinguish between club development (and the factors this encompasses) and club accreditation where the measured outcome while desirable, and often complementary to development is not the same thing.

The club network has, in large part, responded enthusiastically to our calls for it to play a major role in increasing participation, entertaining and coaching young people and linking into schools. It is our turn to ensure that the areas in which it needs input and support are tackled in a systematic and most importantly, responsive manner,

To discuss this further with Clare, contact her, clare.macleod@kkp.co.uk