Ownership Structures

Advantages and Disadvantages of Private Management for Public Sport Facilities

Bringing in a private management company like SMG or Global Spectrum to manage a public sport facility offers several potential advantages and disadvantages:

Advantages:

• Expertise and Experience: Private management companies specialize in operating diverse sports and entertainment venues. They bring a wealth of experience, industry best practices, and established relationships with promoters, event organizers, and vendors that a public entity might lack.
• Efficiency and Cost Savings: These companies often have streamlined operational procedures, economies of scale in purchasing, and a focus on maximizing revenue and controlling costs. They may be able to operate the facility more efficiently than a public entity, potentially leading to cost savings for the municipality in the long run.
• Revenue Generation: Private managers are typically incentivized to increase revenue through booking more events, optimizing pricing strategies for tickets and concessions, and securing sponsorships. Their expertise in marketing and sales can lead to higher utilization and profitability.
• Risk Transfer: The management contract can transfer some operational and financial risks to the private company. For example, they may be responsible for covering certain operating deficits or managing specific liabilities.
• Flexibility and Innovation: Private companies are often more flexible and quicker to adapt to changing market trends and implement innovative strategies for attracting events and improving the fan experience.
• Reduced Burden on Public Administration: Outsourcing management frees up municipal staff and resources to focus on other core public services rather than the day-to-day operations of a specialized facility.

Disadvantages:

• Profit Motive vs. Public Benefit: A private company’s primary goal is profit maximization, which may sometimes conflict with the public service mission of a publicly owned facility. This could lead to decisions that prioritize revenue over community access, affordability, or broader social benefits.
• Potential for Increased Costs for Users: To maximize profits, private managers might increase ticket prices, concession costs, or rental fees for community groups, potentially reducing accessibility for some segments of the population.
• Loss of Public Control and Accountability: The municipality relinquishes direct control over the facility’s operations and decision-making processes. Monitoring the private company’s performance and ensuring they adhere to the terms of the contract can be challenging. There may be less transparency and public input into facility management.
• Potential for Conflicts of Interest: Private management companies might have relationships with other businesses (e.g., food and beverage suppliers, ticketing agencies) that could lead to conflicts of interest and potentially unfavorable terms for the public facility.
• Staffing and Labor Issues: Private managers may implement different staffing models and compensation structures that could impact the morale and quality of service provided by facility staff, especially if there is a transition from public to private management.
• Short-Term Focus: Private companies operating under a contract may prioritize short-term profitability to maximize their returns during the contract period, potentially neglecting long-term maintenance and capital investment needs of the facility.
• “Cream Skimming”: Private companies might focus on the most profitable aspects of the facility operation and neglect less lucrative but still important community-oriented programs or services.

Recommendation as Lead Government Official:

If I were the lead government official in my municipality in Kisumu, Kisumu County, Kenya, my decision on whether to hire a private management company would depend on a thorough assessment of the specific goals for the public sport facility and the capacity of the municipal government to manage it effectively.

Factors Favoring Private Management:

• Lack of In-House Expertise: If the municipality lacks experienced personnel in sports facility management, event booking, marketing, and revenue generation, a private company could bring much-needed expertise.
• Financial Constraints: If the municipality is facing budget limitations and the private company can demonstrate a strong track record of increasing revenue and controlling costs, outsourcing might be a financially prudent option.
• Need for Economic Stimulus: If the goal is to significantly boost tourism and economic activity through the facility, a private company with extensive networks and marketing capabilities might be more effective.

Factors Favoring In-House Control:

• Prioritizing Community Access and Affordability: If the primary goal is to provide affordable recreational opportunities for local residents and community groups, maintaining in-house control allows the municipality to directly set pricing policies and prioritize community needs over profit.
• Desire for Public Accountability and Transparency: Keeping management in-house ensures greater public oversight and accountability for the facility’s operations and finances.
• Building Local Capacity: Managing the facility in-house can provide valuable experience and skill development for municipal staff over time.
• Alignment with Broader Public Goals: The municipality can directly integrate the facility’s operations with other public initiatives related to health, youth development, and community engagement.

My Likely Decision:

Given the context of a public sport facility in Kisumu, Kisumu County, Kenya, and prioritizing the potential for community benefit and long-term sustainability, I would lean towards retaining the facility under in-house control, at least initially.

Reasoning:

While private management offers potential efficiencies and revenue generation, my primary concern as a government official in Kisumu would be ensuring the facility serves the broader public good. This includes affordability for local residents, accessibility for community groups, and alignment with our municipal goals for health and social well-being.

However, I would not rule out collaboration with the private sector entirely. A potential hybrid model could involve:

• In-house management of core operations and community programming.
• Contracting out specific services where private companies have clear expertise and can offer cost-effective solutions (e.g., specialized maintenance, large-scale event marketing, premium concession services).

This approach allows the municipality to retain control over the facility’s mission and accessibility while leveraging private sector expertise where beneficial. To make a final decision, a thorough feasibility study comparing the costs and benefits of both models, including a detailed assessment of the municipality’s current capacity, would be essential.

Evaluating Organizational Effectiveness as General Manager

As the General Manager of this public sport facility, I would evaluate organizational effectiveness using the Balanced Scorecard model.

The Balanced Scorecard Model:

The Balanced Scorecard, developed by Robert Kaplan and David Norton, is a strategic performance management tool that looks beyond traditional financial measures to provide a more holistic view of organizational performance. It evaluates an organization’s success across four key perspectives:

1. Financial Perspective: How do we look to our stakeholders (e.g., taxpayers, municipal government)? This perspective focuses on financial performance, including revenue generation, cost management, and return on investment.
2. Customer Perspective: How do our customers (e.g., facility users, event organizers, community groups) see us? This perspective focuses on customer satisfaction, retention, and market share.
3. Internal Processes Perspective: What must we excel at? This perspective focuses on the efficiency and effectiveness of internal operations, including facility maintenance, event management, and service delivery.
4. Learning and Growth Perspective: How can we continue to improve and create value? This perspective focuses on the organization’s capabilities, including employee skills, innovation, and organizational culture.

Using the Balanced Scorecard for the Public Sport Facility:

To use the Balanced Scorecard, I would:

1. Identify Strategic Objectives: Based on the municipality’s goals for the facility (e.g., promoting community health, generating revenue, attracting tourism), I would define specific strategic objectives for each of the four perspectives. For example:

   • Financial: Increase facility revenue by 10% annually, reduce operating costs by 5%.
   • Customer: Achieve a customer satisfaction rating of 90%, increase repeat bookings by 15%.
   • Internal Processes: Reduce facility downtime due to maintenance by 20%, improve event setup efficiency by 10%.
   • Learning and Growth: Increase employee training hours by 15%, implement a new customer feedback system.

Last Completed Projects