QUICK CLICKS FAST TRACK FOR -------------- Coaches Athletes Administrators PLAYBOOK -------------- Media Image Speech Crisis **Hot Corner** Talent RESOURCES ------------ Bookstore SMC's Links Crisis Report Sponsorship ABOUT SMC ------------ Who Are We? Clients Press Room Employment Contact Us Training & Consulting Coaching Tools SITE MAP

HOT TOPIC April, 1999 By Staff Writer Cordelia Anderson

The 3 Rings of the IOC Circus: Scandal, Corruption, and Reform No doubt, if you've been trying to follow the flood of stories surrounding the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Scandal, you've found yourself stuck in a quagmire of information. What started as a Salt Lake Olympic Committee (SLOC) faux pas has become the most damaging scandal ever to threaten the IOC, dragging the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) - and other committees such as Nagano, Atlanta, and Sydney - into the whirlpool. But the institution that has the most to lose in this scenario is the Olympics itself. Amidst all of the chaos, the question on everyone's mind is: Can the IOC recover, or is the Olympic image tarnished forever? As the crisis unfolds, the critical variable is the IOC's response and its impact on the Olympic "brand." The key to handling a crisis is to respond quickly - "go for the quick bleed, not a slow hemorrhage." Acknowledge fault, take the necessary steps to correct mistakes, and then prevent them from happening again. "The original Olympic vision we had was nothing to do with doing business. It used to be about bringing the city out of its isolation, about doing something better for our kids." -Sydney Foonesbeck, Former Salt Lake City Councilwoman. Unfortunately, the IOC has not taken this approach. Instead, they have dragged their feet, allowing information to leak out slowly while insisting on reform from within. And, regardless of whether they had intended a speedy response, the process has been a slow and painful one. The USOC, on the other hand, has tried to take the high road by assigning a panel led by outsider Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell to investigate the SLOC. In turn, Mitchell's panel praised the USOC for it's decisive action and reform while sharply criticizing the IOC for its lack of appropriate response. There is no clearer indication that the IOC has faltered than the withdrawal of two sponsors: Johnson & Johnson and John Hancock. J&J has passed up a $30 million sponsorship of the 2002 Salt Lake Games, and Hancock will not renew past the 2000 summer games in Sydney unless the IOC makes concessions, including cutting the $55 million price tag. Hancock also canceled negotiations for $20 million in ads from NBC in February, to protest the IOC's failure to adequately deal with the scandal. As usual, the ripple effects of any crisis can be extremely costly. At the root of the crisis is Marc Hodler, member of the IOC Executive Board, former VP, and head of the IOC's coordination commission for 2002. When he spoke out on December 12 of last year, he took a localized scandal and transformed it into an international crisis, alluding to inherent corruption among IOC members. Hodler's approach to the dilemma was this: Salt Lake was the victim of a corrupt system, and the IOC was at fault. He was silenced on December 13, but not before he had acknowledged "There has always, always been a certain part of the vote given to corruption." This March, US Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell agreed, saying that Salt Lake's misconduct was "part of a broader culture of improper gift-giving in which candidate cities provided things of value to IOC members in an effort to buy their votes." "No revolution has been possible without scandal. I'm hoping out of this scandal, something better will grow." - Marc Hodler, Head of the IOC's 2002 Coordination Commission. The IOC's response has been an emphasis on reform from within the organization. The first step was a round of expulsions and resignations; the second was to create an inquiry panel, led by IOC vice president Richard Pound. The panel recommended the expulsion of several additional members and made a preliminary examination of a dozen or so cities that made bids for the 1996-2004 Olympics. Under the leadership of Samaranch, the IOC then incorporated two more reforms: shifts in the selection of Olympic cities, and the establishment of two panels that will rebuild the IOC and oversee the behavior of its members. "We will do whatever is necessary to protect the integrity and ideals of the Olympic games and to restore the people's faith in the Olympic Movement." - Juan Antonio Samaranch, IOC President However, the question remains: Is this enough? Many feel that the scandal is symptomatic of a larger problem, the extreme profitability of the games and the greed and power that goes along with it. One commentator even used the following quote to describe the Committee: "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely." Others have clamored for Samaranch's resignation and a complete overhaul of the Olympic system, but their demands have been largely ignored. The IOC has responded to sponsors this month with a "morals clause" in which sponsors could withdraw funds in the event of another ethics scandal. However, this may be a case of too little, too late. The IOC has lost credibility - and worse, it has tarnished the Olympic image, an image that the corporate community has paid billions to be associated with. Whether or not the Olympic "brand" will remain anywhere near as valuable after the dust has settled could decide the fate of the Games as we know them. -----------------