MMS703 – Sport Governance Trimester 1, 2021 Assessment 2 DUE DATE AND TIME: 30th May 2021, 8pm PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE:60% HURDLE DETAILS: N/A ASSESSMENT LENGTH:4000 words (does not includes...

Sport Governance Assignment


MMS703 – Sport Governance Trimester 1, 2021 Assessment 2 DUE DATE AND TIME:30th May 2021, 8pm PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE:60% HURDLE DETAILS:N/A ASSESSMENT LENGTH:4000 words (does not includes reference list) Learning Outcome Details Unit Learning Outcome (ULO) Graduate Learning Outcome (GLO) ULO 1: Describe the evolution of governance and leadership approaches within the sport industry and their impact. GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities ULO 2: Critically reflect on the governance practices and models in contemporary sport organisations and systems. GLO4: Critical thinking ULO 3: Explain board dynamics including the multiple roles and functions of a board of directors, as they apply to the collective leadership of federated sport systems. GLO5: Problem solving ULO 4: Analyse local and global issues in, and future challenges for, sport governance. GLO8: Global citizenship Assessment Feedback: Students who submit their assessment on time will receive marks and feedback after the final release of grades. Description / Requirements The new nation of Larsutland is highly interested in sport with many different clubs, state associations, and national organisations, but to this point, has been largely run by volunteers. However, Larsutland has provided all sport organisations with enough money to hire all the professional staff they need. With this influx of staff and professionalisation of sport, ‘Sport Larsutland’ (the government’s sport body, similar to Sport Australia or Sport New Zealand) wants to create a new governance code to ensure sport organisations are governed effectively. Unfortunately, Sport Larsutland does not know where to start! Knowing the skills and knowledge of Deakin students, Sport Larsutland has decided to reach out to you for help. More specifically, Sport Larsutland is looking for a report on the critical issues of sport governance from which they will create a sport governance code (like the ‘Sport Governance Principles’ of Sport Australia, or the ‘Code for Sport Governance’ of UK Sport). A sport governance code essentially outlines good governance practices that organisations should adopt. Therefore, your task is to write a policy report on sport governance for Sport Larsutland. In this report, you will advise Sport Larsutland on what governance principles it should include in it is new code. It is important you back up your advice and arguments with evidence. You are not writing the code. Rather, you are preparing the background material and evidence for them to create their own sport governance code. In your report, you will need to have a section where you advise Sport Larsutland on is the means by which it should implement its new code. You could title this section ‘Implementation Strategy’ or similar. The ‘Implementation Strategy’ section will discuss whether the code should be mandatory for NSOs to adopt. Should funding be withheld from NSOs if they do not adopt the code? Should the code only be advisory? What flexibility should Sport Larsutland offer its NSOs? Should Sport Larsutland provide governance training, model policies and document templates to NSOs (similar to what VicSport do)? These are key questions to consider when drafting this section. Some potential governance principles you may wish to recommend to Sport Larsutland include: · Governance Structure (e.g. federal v unitary model) · Board Composition (term limits, independent directors, board size) · Diversity · Accountability · Transparency · Social Responsibility · Control mechanisms (e.g., risk management, board evaluation) You can choose to use these principles or other principles you see as appropriate. Your code should provide a clear argument (i.e. critical analysis) for the importance and relevance of each principle you choose. thin each heading it is expected you will: · Define the principle and key terms · Critically analyse why the principle represents good governance · Provide evidence (e.g., from academic studies and industry reports) to support your arguments The bibliography provides you with an extensive range of academic literature that you can use to support your arguments. The purpose of the assessment is to demonstrate that you can use academic resources to create a convincing practical argument. A rough structure of your report may look like: · A cover page: title, date, student details, word count · An executive summary: a summary of the whole report highlighting key arguments (200 words) · An introduction: a rationale for the report and an outline of its structures (200 words) · A main body: likely including 4-6 sub-sections · Implementation strategy (500 words) · Principle 1 (500 words) · Principle 2 (500 words) · Principle 3 (500 words) · Principle 4 (500 words) · Principle 5 (500 words) · A conclusion: a brief summary of the whole report (200 words) · Reference list: no minimum number, but it would be difficult to complete the assignment effectively without using a range of different sources (e.g. journal articles, industry reports, web articles) · Appendices where appropriate Please note the bibliography posted in the assignment resources section. This list should provide you with all the academic sources you would need to complete the assignment. While you may wish to use some other sources (e.g., textbooks, handbooks, websites), the bibliography provides a detailed summary of much of the sport and non-profit governance literature relevant to this assignment. Submission Instructions Each student should submit their assessment into the appropriate Assignment Folder on CloudDeakin. All submissions will be processed through Turnitin. Notes · Penalties for late submission: The following marking penalties will apply if you submit an assessment task after the due date without an approved extension: 5% will be deducted from available marks for each day up to five days, and work that is submitted more than five days after the due date will not be marked. You will receive 0% for the task. 'Day' means working day for paper submissions and calendar day for electronic submissions. The Unit Chair may refuse to accept a late submission where it is unreasonable or impracticable to assess the task after the due date. · For more information about academic misconduct, special consideration, extensions, and assessment feedback, please refer to the document Your rights and responsibilities as a student in this Unit in the first folder next to the Unit Guide of the Resources area in the CloudDeakin unit site. · Building evidence of your experiences, skills and knowledge (Portfolio) - Building a portfolio that evidences your skills, knowledge and experience will provide you with a valuable tool to help you prepare for interviews and to showcase to potential employers. There are a number of tools that you can use to build a portfolio. You are provided with cloud space through OneDrive, or through the Portfolio tool in the Cloud Unit Site, but you can use any storage repository system that you like. Remember that a Portfolio is YOUR tool. You should be able to store your assessment work, reflections, achievements and artefacts in YOUR Portfolio. Once you have completed this assessment piece, add it to your personal Portfolio to use and showcase your learning later, when applying for jobs, or further studies. Curate your work by adding meaningful tags to your artefacts that describe what the artefact represents. Deakin's Bachelor of Commerce and MBA are internationally EPAS accredited. Deakin Business School is accredited by AACSB. Page 3 of 3 YET TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD MEETS STANDARD EXCEEDS STANDARD Poor Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Very good Excellent Demonstrated Knowledge of Governance Concepts and Principles (Weight 40 marks) GLO1 (2) Demonstrated knowledge of governance concepts and principles was poor. 0-9.9 (15) Demonstrated knowledge of governance concepts and principles was unsatisfactory and in need of improvement. 10-19.9 (22) Demonstrated knowledge of governance concepts and principles was satisfactory. 20-23.9 (26) Demonstrated knowledge of governance concepts and principles was good. 24-27.9 (30) Demonstrated knowledge of governance concepts and principles was very good. 28-31.9 (40) Demonstrated knowledge of governance concepts and principles was excellent. 32-40 Importance and Justification of Governance Principles (Weight 20 marks) (1) The critical analysis and justification of the importance of the identified governance principles was poor. 0-4.9 (7.5) The critical analysis and justification of the importance of the identified governance principles was unsatisfactory and in need of improvement. 5-9.9 (11) The critical analysis and justification of the importance of the identified governance principles was satisfactory. 10-11.9 (13) The critical analysis and justification of the importance of the identified governance principles was good. 12-13.9 (15) The critical analysis and justification of the importance of the identified governance principles was very good. 14-15.9 (20) The critical analysis and justification of the importance of the identified governance principles was excellent. 16-20 Use of Academic Sources (Weight 10 marks) (1) Peer-reviewed journal references were not included and thus, were not used to support discussion. 0-2.4 (3.5) Few peer-reviewed journal references were included and these were rarely used to support discussion effectively. 2.5-4.9 (5.5) An adequate range of peer-reviewed journal references was included and used to a basic extent to support discussion. 5-5.9 (6.5) An adequate range of peer-reviewed journal references were included and used to support discussion. 6-6.9 (7.5) A broad range of quality peer-reviewed journal references and other sources was included and used effectively to support discussion. 7-7.9 (10) An extensive amount of high-quality evidence from peer-reviewed journal articles and other sources was included and used effectively to support discussion. 8-10 Use of Report Format (Weight 10 marks) GLO2 (1) Very poor overall structure of document, with major deficiencies in elements of the report, including executive summary, introduction, conclusion, attractiveness of document and use of report format 0-2.4 (3.5) Unsatisfactory overall structure of document, with deficiencies in elements of the report, including executive summary, introduction, conclusion, attractiveness of document and use of report format 2.5-4.9 (5.5) Satisfactory overall structure and flow of document, including use of key report components, but inconsistently and not always accurately (including executive summary, introduction, conclusion, attractiveness of document and use of report format) 5-5.9 (6.5) Good overall structure of document, including use of the following but not always accurately: executive summary, introduction, conclusion, attractiveness of document and use of report format, including some features including title page/contents, sub-headings and other appropriate report features. 6-6.9 (7.5) Very good overall structure of document, including use of executive summary, introduction, conclusion, attractiveness of document and use of report format, including some features including title page/contents, sub-headings and other appropriate report features. 7-7.9 (10) Excellent overall structure of document, including use of detailed executive summary, appropriate introduction and conclusion, attractiveness of document and use of report format, including title page/contents, sub-headings and other appropriate report features. 8-10 Referencing (Weight 10 marks) GLO2 (1) References not in accord with Faculty (Harvard) method. In-text citations not utilised. 0-2.4 (3.5) References are mostly not in accord with Faculty (Harvard) method. In-text citations not utilised or inaccurate. 2.5-4.9 (5.5)