Discussion: A Committee to Investigate Doing the WOC?

We, as an organization, have been asked by the Danes if we would help them with their WOC in 2017and they will help with ours in 2018. This may or may not be something that we should do. There are people on both sides of this issue and lots of commentary has passed through this website and also the Clubnet. So far, we have lots of opinions but not much that is definitive. As President of O-USA, I feel some responsibility to move our investigation forward, get some hard data like costs, "burn-out" after other countries run a WOC, places where we might be able to run one, etc.

I don't believe that such a committee should be made up of just supporters of the plan but it may be difficult to find a person or people who don't think it is worthwhile to help gather the information. Perhaps, there needs to be a group who finds the information and after that, the community looks at the data.

We need to get working on this so that we have an answer by next summer. We don't want to DO IT and regret it or NOT DO IT and regret it. I would be interested in opinions about moving in this direction and also anyone who would like to help gather the data.

I have been following this discussion both on AP and on BoardNet/ClubNet, and there have been many important points raised. The one thing I have not seen anyone seriously address is who these Danes are, what sort of commitment they are looking for from OUSA in 2017, and what help (in concrete terms) they can offer us in 2018. Peter, do you or someone else have answers to these questions?

I don't have answers to those questions but will be working to get the answers. If we are going to look at this thoroughly, it will take time and energy.

What time and energy? What about the Strategic Plan?

The strategic plan did not know about this issue. It is also a plan that is supposed to be implemented before 2018 so it is not an on-going concern. The question that needs to be answered is whether hosting the WOC 2018 after we help the Danes host their WOC 2017 is possible, good for United States Orienteering and will not leave us in debt. The strategic plan talks about increasing our presence on the international stage and increasing participation in orienteering. We need to look into whether this bid does any or all of those things. Time and energy can be spent in many ways and the end result is never a known quantity. It might be that hosting the WOC transforms our sport into something that is on the national stage (follows from the strategic plan) or it might cause the organization real long term problems. We need to investigate the details to see which might be the case. Anyone who would like to help would be appreciated.

I think a committee is a great idea. I personally would not be in favor of holding the WOC unless OUSA could raise enough money to pay salaries to a core WOC staff. (I'm not sure this is the best solution, but it's the only one I see that addresses the points brought by the 1993 staff.)

Peter's committee recommendation is the way to proceed with this. This will allow the OUSA board to deal with the pressing issues at hand without the distraction of this bid.

You may find if you offer help at 2015, some Scots will chip in to help 2018. Heck, some of us will probably do it anyway like in 1993.

And if no committee steps forward then it won't happen. Genius.

If there's not even enough enthusiasm for a committee, that would be an important indication, I think.

Perhaps some people aren't stepping forward because they think that volunteering to be on a committee equals volunteering to organize the event should it go forward.

One question I have is: how does organizing a WOC compare with organizing another type of major race?

With all of the big 5k/10k, marathons, triathlons, bike races, and Warrior Dashes out there that get several thousand participants, there must be a lot of event organizers who know what they are doing.

How much of hosting a major orienteering event is specifically restricted to those with significant orienteering experience? Seems to me that it's just making maps (which we make already), designing courses (which we design already), and making damn well sure that the flags are in the right spots.

The rest is all logistics, right?

Well, it's not one big race... it's seven races (currently, who knows what'll happen in the future). Plus to be financially viable, you'd probably want to organise spectator races, so another five races (1000-2000 people if it's striking distance from NYC/Boston?), so maybe 12 races in a long week.

Even if you charge $150 pp, $200,000 isn't a whole lot of money... and you won't get more than $100,000 in WOC entries.

The rest is all logistics, but it is a damn lot of logistics and there isn't a huge amount of money for paid staff.

PS I would like to see it happen!

And raising enough (charging enough??) money to pay for it all (including those others handling logistics, publicity, IT, etc, who won't do it for free).

so maybe 12 races in a long week. [...] Even if you charge $150 pp

which is about 1/3 of what a Warrior Dash charges per race... source of immense organizational stress obvious before any Committee is formed.

I'm sure lots of people would like to "see it happen," but who is gonna "make it happen?" The same people who are making the Strategic Plan happen?

@T/D - I don't think you'll be able to go beyond $250 without seeing a serious drop-off in participation. Then there are junior discounts which would take it to maybe a $200 pp average. Counting on more than $250000 in sales of pleb entries would seem optimistic (or what would you guesstimate participation at?).

I think the committee would have to discuss such issues and would come to the conclusion that the entry levels need to be somewhere in the $200-300 ballpark for adults.

Actually, with the exchange rate the way it is, WOC entries may get close to $150,000.

No telling what they'd be in 2018, but with exchange rates the way they are people across the pond may easily pay >$250...

@ Pink Socks, I see several important difference between WOC and a lot of the other types of races you've mentioned and they generally have to do with one being a world champs and the others not.

Things that you see at WOC but not at most of these other events:

• organized team accommodation
  
• nightly coaches meetings
  
• people travelling from further abroad?
  
• a week of events
  
• a banquet with alcohol at the end of the week (though perhaps some do)
  
• qualifiers and finals
  
• individual starts and everything that comes along with that including quarantine
  

That's not to say that organizers of major road races etc. can't help and shouldn't be recruited but be realistic with what you ask of them and how you still need people with experience major orienteering events for areas you might not think you need them.

If they can afford €125 for five races, I don't see any reason to price much differently. If there are two weeks' worth of events, that's optimistically $500k in entry fees (I include what Federations pay for WOC athlete entries). The non-entry-fee revenue must be in about the same ballpark, or greater. There's no way this idea would fly if we are looking at a $200k budget. With say 6× the budget, a lot of things become possible.

*Two* weeks?

Have you any estimates on what different aspects would cost? Any reason for wanting one million rather than two or a half?

Remind me: who are the volunteers for this committee? That is what this thread is about, right?

We need first to start with our own house and start putting decent national championships. After 5 or so years of flawless national championships we may start thinking about hosting a WOC given a precondition that OUSA is already on solid financial basis per the Strategic Plan.

Spending any time or resources to investigate right now is absolutely pointless. Lets get an order into our internal affairs first.

Any reason for wanting one million rather than two or a half

Yes, a ballpark estimate of ~20 years F.T.E. at $15/hour average.

@jj, I imagine volunteers are making themselves known to Peter, and he may return with a request for more in a few days. In the meantime, it's a free-for-all.

It's fun to dream, especially when unable to train, and I'm interested in knowing what would be involved.

@Sergey, you're being reasonable... that said, if a medium-size core of paid staff can recruit a large number of mostly non-orienteering volunteers... if...

Neil is right that it is fun to dream so here are my thoughts.

Put aside the technical side of the WOC for a minute. The US has shown they can do that already and if WOC 2018 was held in Harriman again then one is already a huge step closer there.

What is consuming is what pinks socks eludes to is the overall event management. But this is where many US organizations have huge experience. Management of events that make WOC look small. So perhaps this is a dream but it would seem like an interesting starting point would be to have the OUSA Exec Director send out a request for bids from professional event management companies for the rights to do the event management for WOC?

Would any companies/organizations come forward? Would they pay for these rights? Is the World Orienteering Champs in the US worth $$ to an events management company. Is it a way to create a five year sponsorship agreement for OUSA? What are internet streaming and TV rights worth? The host organization would take a huge portion (all?) of those sponsor dollars in exchange for doing the event management.

We need first to start with our own house and start putting decent national championships. After 5 or so years of flawless national championships we may start

Well, there's a major problem with this approach as stated; the "our own" part. If we concede that our main goal is to put on events for ourselves, however flawless, then we already lost the Strategic Plan and all that may follow.

I sent PG (the prez) a long letter about the WOC and I won't post it, but the summary is, start with the objective and weigh everything (benefits/costs) against that objective. If the objective is worthwhile and we have a good plan to achieve the objective, we should go for it. If no, don't bother. So, why should we do it?

To me it's clear that a WOC is a means of achieving higher-level visibility that we can't get in any other way, and the exposure is the single most important reason why we should do it. If the focus shifts towards showcasing the beautiful terrain that we have, or setting wonderful and fair courses for the elites, or producing a memorable community experience for all who visit, then no. These are all great goals but we can reach them more cheaply in other ways.

Can someone please show me how WOC is a means of achieving higher-level visibility? It could be, but there is no indication that it would be. This is a little more than conjecture. And the data, as sparse as it is, argues for the opposite.

@hammer: re: "The US has shown they can do that already"... as they say in my trade, "Past performance is not a guarantee of future returns."

Yes. Necessary but not sufficient condition. My point is that the goal for which the condition applies, however, cannot be achieved through other means. You can be sending PR releases for the NOD all you want, year after year, but they will never achieve the media effect of a WOC in say Central Park

On NPR this evening, a report on the national fingerboarding champs. I kid you not. You think o can't do better with woc?

I disagree that WOC is a necessary condition for higher-level visibility. A World Cup event in Central Park, a well organized US or North American champs in a similarly populated park, etc. would all work well for that higher-level visibility if you work with the media properly. The key to media visibility is relations - you need to build relations with media people regularly and keep them in the loop. A one off WOC won't do that without a lot of prior work with the media. To get proper coverage of WOC you need people that are interested in and that know the sport. From a media perspective I wouldn't bother with WOC if you haven't had media presence at a smaller event first. You need to get someone to come out to a national event first and then event them back. Then bring them out to cover an introductory event to write a piece about how everyone can come out and do orienteering without needing much prior knowledge and then invite them out to you're annual A-meet, etc. You'll have much more luck working with individual reporters that way then by jumping into WOC with a whole bunch of blind press releases and invites to media you don't know.

Not that I'm against WOC but the only thing WOC is necessary for is WOC. There are other ways to achieve things - most of which require less effort.

I have gotten replies from a couple of people interested in helping with this "committee". The idea is that these people are going to research the possibility. They don't have to be on the committee that puts it on if that is the ultimate decision. Now, there is a lot of conjecture but we need to get more facts to work with. My training is science and I like to work with data. We need to have people gather that data to make an appropriate decision. As I have said to some people, it would be great to wave a wand and have it happen but I am very wary of the problems that may occur. Any people who would like to help, even in a small way, would be appreciated.

In what was can o do better than fingerboarding? In getting better exposure in the media than fingerboarding did with NPR? Possibly. Getting more traction out of that media exposure? Why? There are all sorts of world championships in obscure things that happen around the world all the time. Some may contribute to increasing participation but many (most?) do not.

But, I don't want to guess about random world championships when we can look at WOCs proper. Anecdotally or rigorously, what was the impact of WOC in France? (Too early to say, but I will aver that there weren't hordes of people in the arena that didn't participate in the public races--that weren't already part of the 'crowd'.) So, let's go back further. We can look at developed o countries. WOC in Norway? Any impact? In Hungary? In Ukraine? In Japan? In Australia?

I have no idea, but my guess in that this isn't a field of dreams.

I would really like to see the president of this federation extend the effort he seems to be putting towards gathering hard numbers for an out-of-the-blue WOC bid towards the (now 2 year old) Strategic Plan effort which is foundering BADLY for lack of the very same hard-numbers information and real action! Errrrggg, its maddening!! We're spinning our wheels in the mud on all the SP efforts, throwing money away left and right, but in the past month there's been little or nothing said about specifics on that effort in public forums (and scant little by the BOD either), while there have already been at least 2 threads on this WOC thing, plus a discussion session at the convention. And now a committee is being formed too? No one is sure the Danish proposal is even serious. In France we heard that this strawman came from some splinter not even sanctioned by the Danish federation. I think Boris' questions need to be answered before there is any chasing of shadows here. Most of all we need to concentrate on commitments we've already made before making new ones.

Strongly agree with Eddie.

"On NPR this evening, a report on the national fingerboarding champs. I kid you not. You think o can't do better with woc?"

Despite similarly great intentions, we certainly failed the last time, and I have seen no indication that we have learned anything more. We are full of ideas, but we are completely out of the habit DOING anything for marketing/promo/developement. We need to crawl consistently before we think about hitting home runs.

Except for the likes of T/D and PinkSocks and hammer and co. and perhaps one or two others on this continent... plus the ED.

But I do agree. Still, the president has the right (and is right) to ask for a group of people to weigh the proposal and present pros and cons based on serious estimates so that he can give an informed answer. And if that doesn't happen, WOC doesn't either.

Just as he, and eddie and others, have the right to ask for a committee to evaluate the SP and cajole people into working on the SP... and it sounds like progress is being made, even if what happens in KY isn't particularly visible in the NYC area...

France got a lot of media coverage out of WOC, but it helps having Thierry on your team.

Yes--I did a Factiva search by language and geography in the week after WOC to assess that. Of course, a lot of the coverage was outside of France; it seemed more Scandinavian and Swiss, but I don't have the figures anymore.

I can say that Romain Barras seemed to get more coverage, but maybe there is an omitted variable bias there.

On a different note, why is it that the Danish collaboration is thought, prima facie, to be a boon? Not that it might not be. But, I am sure that many people here have experience with pan-geographic collaborations. Probably a lot of pan-cultural ones. And likely some in which there is a large disparity between the resources/experience/gravitas/etc... of the participants. That can all work out, but I will submit each of these dimensions (and many I am ignoring) introduce complexities more likely to cause difficulty than ease.

Not that I am a proponent or avid reader, but in cases like this, I think the HBR may have a lot to add to this debate.

HBR?

I am working with the board members who are working on the various parts of the Strategic Plan. Results, however, are hard to pinpoint. The reason is that if a particular club increases the number of starts that they have, can the reason for that increase be pinpointed? Increasing membership in clubs and the national organization takes time but the improvement in the website may, with time, help increase memberships. (Many people are now renewing through the website and a sizable percentage of them are donating extra money. They seem to enjoy the quick and easy way to do it. However, would they have renewed and donated extra by snail mail? Maybe? Most likely? Probably not? The data is fuzzy.)

A board member is now associated with each of the areas outlined in the strategic plan. Anyone wanting to help a board member in any of the areas would be
appreciated. At this time, I am the only board member diverting energy to the WOC issue. A small group is now interested in working on gathering data on the WOC. Others may join, too.

On the Media and exposure bit - I advise people to re read what Jeff said.
Its the only way you'll get decent coverage.

Click here if too lazy to scroll up

I really have to say I am with Eric and Eddie here.

Eddie insofar as in meting out my enthusiasm for getting behind large scale mobilizations like this, I’d want to assess their chance of success. To do that, I would look to success on proxies—market multiples, if you will.

The Strategic Plan is a chance for OUSA to demonstrate vision and execution of a substantial undertaking, over a multiple year horizon. Yet one with more limited consequences of failure and which is, in many respects, easier to achieve than a WOC.

So, from where I sit, if I were to be in a position to be putting money on things--ex ante--I’d look to a relevant track record for the organization.

And this is to say nothing of my personal feelings for the undertaking. I get smitten much more so than most with grandiose undertakings. But, this is different. Loosely paraphrasing the Godfather—“It’s not personal, it’s business.”

Pinksocks wrote: "making damn well sure that the flags are in the right spots."

How many people would this take? Fifty reliable people, for woc+spectator races?

How many reliable orienteers are there in the northeast? Now remove those on WOC team, and those who will be 70+ in 2018. How many of those left will take a week off work for this?

It looks pretty tight.

It will be a long time before any money is spent on the WOC planning and the start of any real planning will be after the Strategic Plan has been in place for 5 or so years. The request comes form the chairman of the Danish National Committee so it is not just some person on the outside talking about it. They deserve a measured response based on data that can be gathered by people interested in the project. Those who are not do not have to participate in this phase. Volunteers tend to work on projects that they like and avoid others. Some people like course setting but hate meet organization. Others enjoy the meet organization and hate course setting. So it goes......

You'll have much more luck working with individual reporters that way then by jumping into WOC with a whole bunch of blind press releases and invites to media you don't know

Of course a WOC campaign would need a build-up of high-profile races, it's nothing in itself. Thing is, a WOC in the distance is a mobilizer to have all these high-profile races happen; and it's still true that a WOC will give more exposure than any single one of these other races.

How many people would this take? Fifty reliable people, for woc+spectator races?

For WOC93 (four WOC races plus five spectator days, and a couple of model events), I think there were a total of 18 people (mappers, setters, vetters, and controllers) who set foot in the terrain prior to the events. Six of those (three controllers and three mappers) were from other countries.

Eric Bone and Clark Maxfield are some who would remember the manpower needed for VWC 1997 (an event of exactly the same attendance we'd hope for with a WOC + public races; the public offerings for the WOC, as I noted, should take longer than a week so as to maximize revenues). I think it was essentially the same as JJ notes, about two dozen people.

One place that I found that had some easy to see figures for income/expenditure of a WOC was the 2008 event in the Czech Republic. Some highlights below:

"After all the pluses and minuses were counted together, the Organisers of WOC 2008 were happy to announce that the event ended with a balanced budget. Both income and expenditure were around 13.5 million CZK which at the current exchange rate is about 750 thousand USD."

"In the end a workforce of 325 was involved in the WOC organisation"

"The Czech Army contributed 42 people to the WOC organisation"

"TV coverage was carried out by 72 employees of Czech TV, with other companies providing technical support."

The full report is here

The Czech WOC was also perhaps the best-organized one in the past 10 or so years. No significant manmade controversies (only insect-related ones). Buses ran on time and staff were super friendly!

Thank you for the information.

I received a copy of the letter from the perspective Danish organizers. Without going into details, the letter was sufficient to convince me that the project will not be fruitful, and I have recommened to Peter that Orienteering USA abandon the idea. I am still very much in favor of Orienteering USA hosting a WOC, but not in this particular context and most likely not in the proposed timeframe.