Governance In Focus: Building Better Governance, Together

Governance probably isn’t why most of us fell in love with ultra and trail. We’re here for long days on our feet, not long nights in policy documents. But if the last nine months have shown me anything, it’s that good governance is the quiet scaffolding that lets everything else work, and that scaffolding is always a work in progress, never “finished”.

Every AUTRA committee stands on the shoulders of the ones that came before it. They wrote policies that made sense for their time and their challenges; our job has been to modernise and tidy, not to pretend we’re starting from scratch. Over the past nine months we’ve updated and consolidated a lot of our framework, trying to bring it closer to contemporary best practice while still keeping it lightweight and practical for a volunteer‑run sport. I’m truly grateful that despite my relative infancy as a member of this association and ultra running at large, everyone has been so welcoming and supportive.

Some of the issues and disagreements I have seen during my time on this committee are examples of where policy, people and pressure have collided. None of them are simple, and in each case people on all “sides” care deeply about the sport and the athletes involved. But they’ve also highlighted the same themes that sport governance experts talk about all the time: clarity, fairness, independence and consistency.

One hard lesson is that even a decent policy can fail if the process isn’t followed tightly enough, or if we try to bend it on the fly to solve a real‑world problem. Another is that policies will never cover every scenario. There will always be grey areas, genuine discretion and human judgement calls. The question isn’t “can we write a policy that prevents all conflict?”, we can’t, but “do we have structures that handle conflict in a way that feels fair and explainable, even when you don’t like the outcome?”.

The other big lesson is about working together. AUTRA is lucky to have an unusually engaged community: athletes, race directors, selectors, coaches, crew and volunteers who all care enough to speak up. That passion is a strength, but it can also generate heat when expectations collide. My hope is that, out of the heat of the past few months, we can co‑design governance that feels more like a safety net than a straightjacket, pain‑free, low‑impact and relevant to how ultra and trail actually work on the ground.​

We’ve done a lot in nine months, and time really has flown. But we’re nowhere near “done”, and we shouldn’t try to be. Good governance in sport is iterative: review, test in the real world, listen, adjust, repeat. That’s where you come in. If you have ideas, concerns or examples; from selections, team management, records, or anything else; that you think could help sharpen our policies or processes, I’d genuinely like to hear them.

In particular, I’m keen to hear more from the trail running community. Trail runners make up the vast majority of AUTRA’s membership, yet much of our historical governance has grown up around traditional ultra and timed‑event formats. If AUTRA is going to remain relevant in the next decade, your views on what the association should be, and what value it should deliver to you as a trail runner, are absolutely central, not an afterthought.

If we get this right, governance won’t be something most runners ever think about. It will just quietly support fair selections, transparent decisions, and stable events, so that the main thing can stay the main thing: a strong, diverse, welcoming ultra and trail community where athletes can test themselves, trust the system, and know they’ll be heard when something isn’t working.

See you on the trails.