What would happen if you were furloughed, terminated or if your job shut down? Do you have a back up income stream?
In this video I share why it is important to have a Plan B Income Stream and a viable option.
Making Money Matters Manageable,
Tarra Jackson
Tips Finance by Joshstites
Jumat, 18 Oktober 2013
The Governance of Sport - My Spring 2014 Syllabus
I have just finished up a ready-for-viewing version of my syllabus for my brand-new Spring 2014 course -- University of Colorado-Boulder: ETHN 3104, The Governance of Sport.
Here is the course description:
The syllabus can be found here in PDF.
Your comments/suggestions most welcomed!
Here is the course description:
Overview and Purpose of the CourseThe course is an experiment of sorts as part of an emerging certificate program here at the University of Colorado-Boulder in "Critical Sports Studies." The syllabus is very much (but not completely) US focused and leaves more on the cutting-room floor than on the syllabus, yet at the same time, it asks a lot of the students.
The goal of this course is to introduce students to issues of governance in various societal settings as viewed through the lens of sport. As Jens Sejer Andersen has noted, “Sport is an expression of civilization.” Through readings, discussions and individual and group projects students will engage a wide range of scholarly and popular literature, film and guest speakers to critically engage important issues that arise in the governance of sport. In this year’s course case studies that we will engage include the role of technological augmentation in sport, policies delineating participation eligibility in the Olympics according to gender, societal and policy responses to concussions in the NFL, equity in journalism related to sports reporting, genetics and athletic performance, doping in sport, sport as a laboratory for understanding prediction and decision making, and gender equity in sport and beyond. The student should emerge from this class with tools of critical thinking and analysis, along with greater substantive knowledge of various interesting and important cases in the governance of sport. This course is designed to be intellectually challenging but also rewarding.
The syllabus can be found here in PDF.
Your comments/suggestions most welcomed!
Selasa, 15 Oktober 2013
A Deeper Look at FIFA Reform
The second installment of my analysis of FIFA reform is now up at Play the Game.
Some key findings and conclusions:
At Play the Game 2013 in a few weeks I will complete the analysis by suggesting several recommendations for next steps in FIFA reform for those who are outside the organization yet would like to see the organization improve its governance practices.
Some key findings and conclusions:
- 1. Overall FIFA adopted 7 of 59 recommendations (from TI, Pieth and the FIFA IGC) and partially adopted 10 others, leaving 42 unimplemented.
- 2. In a nutshell, the common characteristics of the proposed reforms not adopted are that they involved (a) sharing authority and control for FIFA decision making with FIFA outsiders, (b) the imposition of external standards of governance on the organization or (c) the opening up of the organization to greater transparency in areas outside the disbursement of FIFA funding to member organizations.
- I provide a list of nine topics which covers almost all of the 42 recommendations which went unimplemented. (see link below for this list)
- Assuming full and successful implementation of the proposed reforms in these nine areas would have raised FIFA’s score under the Chappelet-Mrkonjic framework to a level almost exactly equal to their score for the governance IOC -- up to a C level, still far from an A grade.
- Even with complete implementation of the recommendations by Transparency International, Mark Pieth and the IGC, FIFA would still have a considerable challenge remaining in raising FIFA governance to widely accepted best practices
- Despite the obviosu shortfall, it is also fair to conclude that several of the reforms which FIFA did implement may indeed be important achievements, such as the establishment of new ethics and audit & compliance committees, with the introduction of (at least partially) independent chairs.
At Play the Game 2013 in a few weeks I will complete the analysis by suggesting several recommendations for next steps in FIFA reform for those who are outside the organization yet would like to see the organization improve its governance practices.
Kamis, 10 Oktober 2013
Eligibility and National Teams
Jack Wilshire, the Arsenal and England footballer, opened up a flood of commentary when he commented, apparently of Adnan Januzaj (who introduced himself to England and the world with 2 great goals for Manchester United last week), that,
Nationality designation is a rule, like any other constitutive decision process in sports governance -- like rules of play, or rules governing doping or rules governing World Cup site selection. As such the rules are perceived to be better or worse, and are open to re-negotiation.
The rule that Wilshire apparently dislikes comes from FIFA, and covers the conditions under which a player can change eligibility, which was actually not possible (in the modern era at least) before 2004 (source Omar Ongaro: PDF). That language evolved up to 2008, since which time is has been unchanged:
Showing how sensitive Wilshire's comments were, British cricket player Kevin Pietersen -- born in South Africa, has an English mother and lived in England for 4 years before playing for England -- tweeted the following:
While Wilshire's sentiment may be romantic, I'd guess that Dyke's pragmatism will ultimately win out. On this note Pietersen had the last laugh:
"The only people who should play for England are English people. If you've lived in England for five years, for me, it doesn't make you English. You shouldn't play. It doesn't mean you can play for that country. If I went to Spain and lived there for five years, I'm not going to play for Spain. For me an English player should play for England really."Wilshire's comments come on the heels of revelations that England would look favorably on Januzaj attaining eligibility to play for England, presumably via securing British citizenship:
Football Association chairman Greg Dyke has revealed discussions have started regarding eligibility boundaries as the debate over Manchester United teenager Adnan Januzaj representing England rages on.The general question here is who should be eligible to play for which national team, a question make slightly more complicated because some "national" teams don't even represent nations -- England being a prime example. There are actually 10 members of FIFA whose citizens hold British nationality and 5 members who hold US citizenship.
The Belgium-born winger has risen to prominence after his two goals at Sunderland and is available to play for the country of his birth, Albania, Kosovo, Serbia and Turkey.
Januzaj could also represent the England team in 2018 on residency grounds if he remains in the country for the next five years, with manager Roy Hodgson confirming he would be interested in selecting the winger if he became eligible.
Nationality designation is a rule, like any other constitutive decision process in sports governance -- like rules of play, or rules governing doping or rules governing World Cup site selection. As such the rules are perceived to be better or worse, and are open to re-negotiation.
The rule that Wilshire apparently dislikes comes from FIFA, and covers the conditions under which a player can change eligibility, which was actually not possible (in the modern era at least) before 2004 (source Omar Ongaro: PDF). That language evolved up to 2008, since which time is has been unchanged:
a) He was born on the territory of the relevant Association;The five year residency period used byFIFA conveniently is one year longer than the World Cup cycle, ensuring that a star player in one World Cup cannot show up playing for another team in the next. The five year period is also the same time period required under British law for acquiring British citizenship.
b) His biological mother or biological father was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
c) His grandmother or grandfather was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
d) He has lived continuously for at least five years after reaching the age of 18 on the territory of the relevant Association.
Showing how sensitive Wilshire's comments were, British cricket player Kevin Pietersen -- born in South Africa, has an English mother and lived in England for 4 years before playing for England -- tweeted the following:
.@JackWilshere -interested to know how you define foreigner...? Would that include me, Strauss, Trott, Prior, Justin Rose, Froome, Mo Farah?Football obviously has meanings to people that evoke deep (and sometimes even unhealthy) feelings of nationalism and even ethnic pride. These issues get wrapped up in what it means to play for England -- or any team for that matter -- in a way that takes the issue far beyond the bloodless texts of constitutive decision making.
— Kevin Pietersen (@KP24) October 9, 2013
While Wilshire's sentiment may be romantic, I'd guess that Dyke's pragmatism will ultimately win out. On this note Pietersen had the last laugh:
.@JackWilshere I reckon the FA are just wanting to try out what's worked for Cricket, Golf & Athletics. They all win trophies & medals! Ha
— Kevin Pietersen (@KP24) October 10, 2013
Selasa, 08 Oktober 2013
Kamis, 03 Oktober 2013
The Proposed Reforms from FIFA's IGC 2012 Report Unimplemented by FIFA
Below you can find the recommendations made by the FIFA IGC in its first report (here in PDF) which I have identified as having not been adopted by FIFA in its reform process. These recommendations comprise part of the reform evaluation which I recent discussed at Play the Game back in June and to which FIFA responded to here.
Overall, I identified 20 recommendations in the IGC report. Of those 20, FIFA failed to even partially implement 9 of them (with 5 implemented and 6 partially implemented). Those 9 unimplemented recommendations are listed below, to aid in discussion and (ideally) debate.
Overall, I identified 20 recommendations in the IGC report. Of those 20, FIFA failed to even partially implement 9 of them (with 5 implemented and 6 partially implemented). Those 9 unimplemented recommendations are listed below, to aid in discussion and (ideally) debate.
Questions worth thinking about include: Which ones are most important? Which ones are secondary? Which may be off the mark? Comments welcomed either here or via email.
I've blogged on the unimplemented recommendations from the Transparency International report Safe Hands: Building Transparency and Integrity at FIFA and the unimplemented recommendations of Mark Pieth's 2011 paper Governing FIFA. This post completes the series. Next week I will discuss them together.
I've blogged on the unimplemented recommendations from the Transparency International report Safe Hands: Building Transparency and Integrity at FIFA and the unimplemented recommendations of Mark Pieth's 2011 paper Governing FIFA. This post completes the series. Next week I will discuss them together.
Here are the 9 unimplemented recommendations:
1. First and foremost it is fundamental that nominees for senior FIFA positions are vetted by an independent Nominations Committee, to be put in place as soon as possible, in order to ensure that candidates for the next elections fulfill the necessary substantive criteria and ethical requirements and that the selection process is fair and transparent.
2. it is furthermore fundamental that the Chairs of the Nomination Committee and the Audit & Compliance Committee have a seat in the Executive Committee
3. The initial candidates for [The Chairs and Deputy Chairs of the Investigatory Chamber and the Adjudicatory Chamber] should be selected and proposed by the IGC
4. The Secretariat of the Ethics Committee should directly report to the Chairs of the investigatory chamber and the adjudicatory chamber respectively and should be independent from management;
5. "In the area of Compensation & Benefits, the Audit & Compliance Committee should have the following main responsibilities:6. In order to support their supervisory function, the Chairs of the Audit & Compliance Committee and the Nomination Committee should participate in the meetings of the Executive Committee; they should therefore have a seat in the Executive Committee.
- Define the overall Compensation & Benefits strategy of FIFA;
- Decide on the Compensation & Benefits of the President, the Executive Committee Members, the Secretary General and the Independent Members of Standing Committees;
- Transparency: The Compensation & Benefits (including all elements such as regular & variable compensation components, benefits, pension fund contributions, severance/termination regulation and payments) of the above listed positions should be individually and annually reported to the Congress;
- Regulations should be adopted containing the strategy and criteria for Compensation & Benefits;
7. Slightly differing from the suggestions of the Task Forces, the IGC proposes the introduction of the following terms of office:Contrary to the Task Forces, the IGC is not proposing an age limit; the proposed terms of office, the impeachment procedure and the integrity checks should serve the purpose of ensuring efficient corporate bodies.
- President: 2 terms of 4 years
- Executive Committee: 2 terms of 4 years
- Judicial bodies: 1 term of 6 years
- Chairmen of Standing Committees: 1 term of 8 years
- Retroactive effect: The current terms of affected officials should continue; upon expiration of a second 4-‐year term, only 1 additional 4-‐year term can be added;
- In addition, the Statutes should state the “staggered board” principle and should lay the foundation for an impeachment procedure by the Nomination Committee (to be further regulated on policy level) in case an official proves to be unfit for office during his/her term of office.
8. The Statutes should be amended by the responsibility of the Audit & Compliance Committee to establish and monitor a best practice Compliance Program and to oversee the Compliance function.
During 2012, the relating policies and procedures need to be reviewed by the IGC before enactment by the Executive Committee. The policies need to address – inter alia -- the following topics in a consistent (i.e. the same rule for officials and employees) and detailed way:9. In order to ensure the integrity of FIFA’s officials and key employees in line with FIFA’s values and principles, a Nomination Committee should be established. This includes the following primary steps, which should be implemented as soon as possible:
- Conflicts of interest
- Gifts & hospitality
- Confidential reporting mechanism
- Responsibilities and resources
- The Chair and the Deputy Chair of the Nomination Committee should be independent in accordance with the definition to be included in the FIFA Statutes; in addition they should meet the necessary professional requirements applicable to all members of the Nomination Committee as set out in the proposed Organization Regulations;
- The initial candidates for those positions should be selected and proposed by the IGC;
- The candidates should be elected by the competent FIFA body and start their functions as soon as possible;
- The Nomination Committee should be given the competences and resources to discharge its purpose; it should draw up a budget and decide on the support of external advice at its own discretion. It shall also have access to internal investigatory resources of the Ethics Committee;
- The Nomination Committee should have access to complaints and allegations filed under the confidential reporting mechanism and should receive regular updates on information relevant for their remit;
- The remit of the Nomination Committee should include the following:
- Search, selection and proposal of independent members of Standing Committees
- Checks relating to professional criteria on all officials covered by such requirements
- Integrity Checks on key officials and employees of FIFA
- The cornerstones of the Integrity Check should be regulated in the FIFA Statutes:
- Personal scope: Key officials, including President, Executive Committee Members, Committee Members to be elected by Congress, Finance Committee Members, Key employees
- Temporal scope: Retroactive for all current position holders; upon election/re-‐election
- Detailed regulation of content and process of the Integrity Check should be established by the Nomination Committee during 2012 and a corresponding policy should be adopted. The regulation should be reviewed by the IGC before adoption;
- In order to improve transparency and democracy, all open positions covered by the Nomination Committee procedure should be made public and applications can be submitted to the Nomination Committee.
Mark Pieth Looks Back
In the New York Times, James Montague quotes Mark Pieth on the FIFA reform effort:
At the FIFA Congress in May, he publicly challenged Blatter and FIFA to release details of the salaries and expenses of top officials.Montague also says that Pieth resigned from the IGC. I'm not sure this is correct and have tweeted Montague a question. (UPDATE: Looks like Pieth has said he intends to step down by the end of 2013, which may in fact be a moot point, depending upon FIFA's druthers.)
“I turned around and said, ‘You could stun everyone,’ ” Pieth said. “I was saying: ‘Be bold. Show our critics that.’ ”
Then came the but. “They didn’t take up the challenge; these guys are too stuck in their traditional ways,” he said, adding: “We underestimated that this is a purely self-regulated body. They are a bit like the Vatican. No one can force them to change.”
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)