New Zealand has taken a giant step towards igniting the biggest leadership upheaval in its rugby history, with provincial unions having told New Zealand Rugby (NZR) they broadly agree with independent reviewers that its current governance structure is not fit for purpose and should be blown up.
And, in asign the unions are pressing hard for change amid fears rugby is losing its battle to engage fans, grow participation and hold its place in the sporting landscape, they have also told NZR that its executive leadership team needs to up its game.
Last week, it is believed that a document signed by all member provincial unions was sent to NZR, stating that they accept governance change is imperative to the game’s survival in this country, with the letter also believed to have made critical remarks about the quality and performance of the national body’s executive leadership team and expectations of improvement made clear.
The Herald has also spoken to several well-connected sources who have said that the mood in many provincial boardrooms is more febrile than indicated in the letter sent to NZR, with some having suggested that they don’t believe the national body’s leaders are “operating with the best interests of all of New Zealand rugby at heart”.
They say that they believe the leadership is too focused on the elite level of the game, while others told the Herald that they were concerned by the damaged relationship between NZR and Rugby Australia and that whatever governance change is agreed, they expect the board to have better processes and ability to monitor and judge the performance of senior staff.
The document serves as an official written response by the unions to the findings of an independent governance review of NZR conducted by a four-person panel that included former Fonterra executive David Pilkington, former All Blacks captain Graham Mourie and experienced directors Anne Urlwin and Whaimutu Dewes.
NZR chair Dame Patsy Reddy told the Herald she was unable to comment on either the correspondence or the likely next steps of the process, other than to say that she will do everything she can to facilitate whatever change the unions believe is right for the game.
The panel recommended scrapping the current system of governance where NZR populates its board by appointing three directors, electing three, with another three nominated, in favour of having nine independent appointments chosen to fulfil a broad and considered matrix of skills.
Such a move would effectively depower the provinces and give them reduced to little influence around the NZR board table, leading many to assume the findings would be rejected.
But sources who have seen the document say that the unions are broadly aligned with the findings but have asked for any new governance structure to ensure they have input and influence over the appointment process of directors.
The unions are wary that the recommended system will inevitably attract “career directors” who will have little knowledge of the sport, no connection to the grassroots and will have no affinity or understanding of rugby’s place in the community.
The Herald has been told by several sources that the unions don’t believe NZR directors need to have come through the traditional pathway of having served on the board of their local club and province, but that they do want to see some people appointed who have strong connections and valid links to the community game.
The provincial unions and NZR are scheduled to meet on December 8 to further discuss the former’s feedback to the review and to plot a path for the next steps.
NZR is not obliged to enact any of the findings of the review but has agreed to consider it in good faith and make changes where feasible.
While the review was commissioned and paid for by NZR, it was effectively instigated by the New Zealand Rugby Players’ Association (NZRPA), which made it a condition of returning to the negotiating table in mid-2021 when discussions about a proposed private equity deal with US fund manager Silver Lake broke down.
NZ Rugby chair Dame Patsy Reddy (from left), new All Blacks coach Scott Robertson and NZR CEO Mark Robinson speak to the media. Photo / Mark Mitchell
The NZRPA did not support NZR’s first attempt to sell a stake in its commercial assets to Silver Lake - partly because it felt the terms would prove to be catastrophic to the New Zealand game, but mostly because it felt the national body had run a secretive process that had failed to observe its legal obligations to work transparently and collaboratively with the players.
The lack of astute financial analysis in regard to that first attempted deal and the botched nature of the process to try to get it over the line triggered widespread concern in the wider rugby community that NZR didn’t have directors with the requisite skillsets and experiences to effectively govern a sport that is almost unrecognisably different to the one it was 30 years ago.
It was felt that it would, therefore, be appropriate to ask whether the national body’s constitution and governance processes remained fit for purpose.
