Finnish top sport is in transition. On Wednesday, there were news about big changes in the Olympic Committee, when the top sports director Matti Heikkinen and vice president of the elite sports unit Leena Paavolainen leave their positions.
However, these changes are only the tip of the iceberg.
Would it finally be possible in sports to accept the current situation and dare to make corrections and changes based on it. Or is it that you don’t want to do them?
The change process of elite sports started in 2009 and gained speed in 2012. Change and development have been carried out for 15 years, and during that time numerous memos, internal and external evaluations and studies have been produced.
The final result of the Olympic Games in Paris was zero medals.
The Danish researchers reported the essentials
“Generally speaking, there are no working connections in Finland between the setting of goals and the implementation and evaluation of the strategy”, states the Danish Rasmus K. Stormin and by Klaus Nielsen Top sports in Finland: International assessment in the study.
– For us, the biggest problem is not that sports operators don’t know concretely what needs to be reformed. The problem is that there are no reforms, says the leading researcher at Jyväskylä University of Applied Sciences Kati Lehtonen.
– At the same time, such vital time is wasted in top sports. Let’s think about the fact that there is still a debate about the fact that this or that has not been done in the change process of elite sports. It has been 15 years since the start of the change in question, and 15 training and competition seasons have also passed.
After the Paris Olympics, the Olympic Committee announced that Finland will once again start creating a new top sports strategy.
– We don’t need any new report, paper, work or strategy process, Lehtonen continues.
In 2022, in June, a report was published, Finnish top sport needs trust, which was commissioned by the Sports Unit of the Ministry of Education and Culture.
The external evaluation was brought up immediately after the Paris Olympics – that is, two years after publication. In Lehtonen’s opinion, the method of operation is typical for the Olympic Committee.
– It inevitably comes to mind that when all the findings of the evaluation were not very sympathetic towards the committee, then there was a repulsive attitude towards information that is not to one’s liking. Of course, starting the whole process was already strange, because the subject of the evaluation tried to influence the start of the work, says Lehtonen.
Inspector General of the Ministry of Education and Culture Kari Niemi-Nikkola confirms that the process of the external evaluation of elite sports involved stages in which the Olympic Committee tried to influence the implementation of the evaluation.
– The image arose that the Olympic Committee itself would have wanted to appoint a research group and guide its work. The Olympic Committee, one of the subjects of the evaluation, would of course have remained in this task, as would the ministry itself. Finally, the State Sports Council was asked to carry out the evaluation, Niemi-Nikkola says.
Niemi-Nikkola says that the Olympic Committee refused to process the evaluation at the top sports network days 2022, despite the requests of the Ministry of Education and Culture.
The Ministry raised the proposed measures that came up in the external evaluation to the goal steering discussion and also required suggestions from the Olympic Committee regarding recommendations. The ministry finally received them in January 2024, after having requested them four times.
– Those proposed measures largely adapted the actions that the committee would have taken anyway. Nothing new appeared, confirms Niemi-Nikkola.
Unhealthy practices and chair games
Kati Lehtonen states that these unhealthy operating methods should first be removed from the Olympic Committee. Only then is it possible to tackle concrete practical matters, such as developing coaching or redirecting resources.
Lehtonen continues that systemic energy is in the wrong place when it is still in chair games and controlling management. Even now, the corridors are buzzing, not only about the next chairman of the Olympic Committee, but about the possible vacancies in the Ministry of Education and Culture. There is a power game going on all the time.
– Sport must be put before personal goals or motives. Saving face or promoting one’s own career should not be an obstacle to the practical implementation of development presentations, Lehtonen states.
The confused situation of the Olympic Committee is also indicated by the fact that almost the first critics after the Paris Games were the vice-presidents Susanna Rahkamo and Tapio Korjus.
The situation can be considered strange to the extent that they both have long careers as sports influencers, especially in Finnish elite sports. There have been places to influence – even too many, when you look at the results.
– Korjus publicly commented on the actions of Matti Heikkinen, the head of the elite sports unit, which I do not consider very elegant. He has been at least influencing himself, if not choosing Heikki for the job. Matters between operational management and trust personnel are internal discussions within the organization and are not reported in the media, says Kati Lehtonen.
– Now the operation of such a system has been observed for 12 years and the results are visible. Top international sports are moving forward every day and we cannot afford to watch the situation from the sidelines, says Kati Lehtonen.
Systemic trust is lost
In the external evaluation of elite sports, it emerged that there is no broader systemic trust in the sports system. Relationships of trust are personal and this does not increase innovation, risk-taking or new thinking. People involved in sports must be able to trust that things will happen without familiar people taking care of them.
– The credibility of the Olympic Committee is not only the organization’s own business. Before long, there may also be a broader societal reflection on whether this sports team is very capable of managing its affairs, Lehtonen states.
He says that he wonders why, for example, member associations are so inactive.
– It may soon happen that their activities are also questioned. It must be remembered that the parliamentary processing process of public sports funding can swing situations in one direction and the other quickly.
National or international competitive or elite sports
In every walk of life there are people who are better than others. It is equally natural that there are top athletes of a tough international level and competitive athletes of a national level in sports. The differences between these must be recognized, because it guides the allocation of resources and the actions of daily coaching.
The external assessment of elite sports brought out that there seems to be still an ongoing discussion in Finland about what is the level requirement of elite sports in Finland. According to Lehtonen, the question is simple.
– Do we want top Finnish sports to be the best in Finland or the best in the world? It hurts when I hear sports people say that those Olympic medals are not that important. So let’s explain ourselves out of this situation. It’s crazy that the rest of the world counts Olympic medals, but we wouldn’t do that.
The professor who led the latest elite sports evaluation process Karl-Erik Michelsen summarizes the situation.
– In Finland, there is a lack of a precise definition of what top sport is in today’s world. In the absence of a definition, elite sport has become a loose concept that can be used by different groups and actors for different purposes. When there is no definition, it gets tangled up in competitive sports. We compete in elite sporting events and this is the result.
Michelsen continues that in this time it is not possible to define top sports within the borders of a certain kingdom.
– That is past time. Today, elite sports are global. You can watch it on TV every day. You can’t fool people because the performances are visible to everyone. The definition of global top sport is reality. There is no other.
Michelsen says that we should understand and open up what international top sport is.
– The discussion about what this means for athletes, supporters, coaches and background forces, as well as the system, is completely absent in the sports federations. Without this discussion, succeeding in the Games is just a matter of luck. Now the situation has led to the fact that we are already satisfied with the points.
Power and responsibility of managers
Michelsen emphasizes the responsibility of managers. According to him, today’s management means that the leaders, with their leadership speech and other activities, keep the core issue on display so that the athletes always understand what the level of requirements is.
– Now active leadership speech is completely missing. Athletes need to hear and know and understand where they are going. Then it’s not about aiming for a medal. It is the managers’ task to determine the environment in which the athletes will play when they are at a top sporting event. This is missing. None of the leaders have spoken about it.
Kati Lehtonen reminds us who really has the power and responsibility.
– The current vague and loose current situation has been allowed by the member associations of the Olympic Committee and other organizations involved in elite sports. The Ministry of Education and Culture has also watched the matter from the sidelines for 12 years.
Kari Niemi-Nikkola also does not want to outsource responsibility to the ministry.
– If the recommendations of the external evaluation are mirrored, then the ministry can look at itself in the mirror. We have no clear goal setting for elite sports, no clear strategy and no clear definitions. It cannot be the case that funding remains the same regardless of what happens, good or bad, says Niemi-Nikkola.
Lehtonen does not believe that the new future of elite sports will sit in the Olympic Committee.
– Institutions, such as the Olympic Committee, tend to stabilize their operations rather than change them. That’s why I don’t think there will be any changes to the procedures there.
– However, change can ignite if there is a large enough group of athletes, coaches, other actors or organizations who are tired of the current situation and who boldly set out to create something new. I believe that change starts from the field, if it is to start, says Lehtonen.