Boardroom leaks cost sport more than it realises
In a recent article, the NZ Herald highlighted the noise surrounding NZ Rugby’s search for a new CEO. Sportify Founder, Michael Redman says beneath the headline sits a deeper issue in sport governance: boardroom leaks compromise leadership recruitment, destabilise organisations, and undermine trust.
Why board leaks harm the organisation
They erode trust
Nothing damages board culture faster than information emerging from the boardroom. Directors stop speaking freely, executives grow wary, and stakeholders question the organisation’s stability. Once trust is breached, it takes years to rebuild.
They scare off top talent
High-profile roles like CEO or Head Coach require absolute confidentiality. The best candidates won’t risk their current job, their reputation, or becoming collateral damage in internal politics. If they believe their candidacy may leak, they simply won’t apply therefore the candidate pool and quality shrinks.
Leaks reflect internal agendas
Leaks don’t happen by accident. They’re strategic. Someone wants to influence the narrative, the candidate pool, or the public perception. Once that behaviour surfaces, the integrity of the entire process gets called into question.
They distract from what really matters
Instead of discussing what is important, energy gets wasted on: Who leaked? Why? What does this mean? Is the board divided? Every hour spent managing noise is an hour not spent leading.
They cause reputational damage
Candidates and staff notice. Sponsors notice. Athletes notice. Fans notice. When a board becomes part of the story, the brand takes a hit and credibility is hard to recover.
I’ve seen this up close and personal
During a recruitment process for a new head coach when I was CEO, we kept the candidate identities tightly confidential to a small panel. A board director rang me demanding the names of applicants.
I declined, reminding them of the agreed process. They pushed again. Eventually, they admitted why they wanted to know. They said my mates know I am on the board and expect me to have inside information. This wasn’t about governance or what’s best for the organisation. It was about personal ego.
Situations like this are exactly why confidentiality must be non-negotiable. Without it, processes become compromised, not necessarily through malice, but through a lack of discipline or for personal gratification.
Regrettable, some directors would rather prioritise their relationship with a friendly journalist ahead of the organisation they are responsible for. Equally the media will, on one hand, cultivate their internal sources while in the same breath criticise the existence of leaks.
When I joined local government, the first thing I told the elected members was simple: if they leaked to the media, it was an admission of failure and a signal that they did not have the skills or respect to navigate a political debate with their colleagues and therefore had to retreat to back-door tactics. The leaks stopped.
The same principle applies in sport. Leaking is not strength. It’s governance weakness dressed up as influence.
The silence paradox
Boards can show remarkable discipline when the organisation or directors are genuinely at risk like during the recent tensions surrounding Netball NZ’s head coach standoff, where very little detail surfaced publicly from the board.
Yet the moment leaking benefits someone’s personal agenda, discipline evaporates.
This inconsistency reveals the true problem. It’s not about individual capability or not understanding responsibilities, it’s a failure of governance culture.
How can boards protect the integrity of a recruitment process?
1. Treat confidentiality as a non-negotiable standard. Not optional. Not flexible. A core responsibility.
2. Tighten access to information. For high-profile roles, fewer people should know more.
3. Communicate the process, not the details. Colleagues and stakeholders can be informed without compromising the integrity of the search.
4. Enforce consequences for directors. A leak is a breach of fiduciary duty. Set clear expectations and follow through.
5. Build a high-trust governance culture. Policies help, but culture prevents the root cause.
Final thoughts
Boards that leak signal instability. Boards that protect confidentiality signal maturity, professionalism, and create confidence in their ability to support high-performance leadership.
In modern sport, where trust, talent, and reputation drive success, confidentiality isn’t just best practice it can be an advantage. Too often directors in sport operate to a double standard compared to what they expect of their senior executives and athletes.
A board that leaks is a board that limits its own potential.