‘Not an investigation’: So why are Munster Rugby carrying out a root-and-branch review?

Munster Rugby are undergoing a governance and organisational review under the independent chairmanship of Martin Kelleher. He issued a press release on Monday to clarify the nature of the undertaking and provide background. Here’s a brief explainer of a process that is “progressing”. Who called for the review?“The board of Munster Rugby has commissioned the review to assess whether the organisation’s governance, leadership, culture, engagement and communication, organisational and operational arrangements are appropriate and effective,” the release states.What’s the nature of the review?READ MOREThe release says “the review is forward-looking in nature”. But how is that going to identify system failures, flaws or issues that pertained to past governance and necessitated the review?The next part of the release is particularly puzzling. “It is not an investigation, a disciplinary process or a fault-finding exercise, and it does not seek to attribute blame to individuals. Its purpose is to support learning and reform, to strengthen governance, accountability and decision making, and to position Munster Rugby for long-term sustainability.”If its purpose is not to look for historical precedent or to expose or find flaws, then how can previous glitches or shortcomings be investigated, and those findings or lessons unearthed to ensure better governance in future?The tone and content of the release don’t explicitly deal with that scenario, which seems an oversight at face value.Who is driving the review besides Kelleher?“The review is the responsibility of the independent chair, Martin Kelleher, and a board-appointed steering group. It is being conducted by The Governance Company, an independent consultancy specialising in corporate governance, led by David W Duffy. The chair and the steering group report independently to the board. “The chair is independent of Munster Rugby and holds no conflict of interest that could compromise objectivity. The conduct of the review, its methodology, its evidence and its conclusions are matters for the chair, the steering group and the reviewer, and not for the executive or management of Munster Rugby.”Who will participate in the review?“The views of key internal and external stakeholders are being sought. This includes playing and non-playing staff and a broad range of others with a direct interest in how Munster Rugby is governed and run.” A broad church, then. How is it being done? “Engagement is being conducted through structured interviews and confidential surveys, alongside a review of documentation and benchmarking against good practice.” Does it have IRFU approval and support?Yes.Will feedback from individuals remain confidential?Yes. “Confidentiality is a fundamental part of the process. It encourages honest participation, protects the privacy of those taking part and preserves the integrity and fairness of the review. Individual contributions will not be disclosed. The interest of the review is in the themes and the evidence that emerge.”But if the review is forward-looking and not reflective, then what evidence can be gleaned?Not specified.Will there be any updates?“The review will not comment on its emerging findings while its work is ongoing. No further detail on the process will be provided at this stage, in order to protect the confidentiality of participants and the integrity of the work.”What will happen at the end of the stated process?“The reviewer will provide a report setting out findings, conclusions and recommendations, together with an executive summary suitable for wider stakeholder communication. The board [of Munster Rugby] will formally consider the findings and is responsible for determining and implementing the actions arising,” the release stated.Kelleher said: “The review is independent, it is structured and it is under way. We are hearing directly from those who know this organisation best, including staff across the province. And in the coming weeks we will be asking a wider group of stakeholders for their views. We are doing so in a way that allows people to speak freely and in confidence.“While there is understandable interest in this process, a review of this kind is not undertaken in public. It is conducted through evidence, and evidence takes the time it takes. We will not shorten that work to meet a deadline, nor will we let it drift. “When we have concluded, we will report our findings and recommendations to the board. I firmly believe there is an appetite from the board for change and transformational improvements in the short and longer term and this review will be the foundation for that change.”