Ask most people to define performance in sport and they’ll start with speed, strength, or technical skill. They might reference medals, rankings, or tournament placements. But in reality – especially at organisational level – performance is something quieter, deeper, and more structural. It is the ability to operate well under pressure, to adapt, and to recover from disruption. In short: performance is resilience. And resilience is business continuity.
This principle, while well-established in other sectors, remains underdeveloped in much of the sporting world. National governing bodies (NGBs), clubs, and performance environments often equate business continuity with IT backups and evacuation plans. But in truth, continuity is broader – it is the assurance that your sport can withstand a shock and carry on with minimal harm or disruption to those involved.
If performance is the outward expression of capability, then resilience is the inward one. Just as athletes train for the unexpected – weather changes, equipment failure, last-minute substitutions – so too must sporting bodies prepare for disruptions that threaten delivery, reputation, and trust.
Continuity planning, when applied properly, is not an administrative obligation. It is a mark of strategic maturity. It recognises that good intentions are not enough when disruption occurs – what matters is having a system that protects the sport, and the people in it, when things go wrong.
Consider how the term ‘performance’ is often used in elite sport. It implies not just success, but sustainability. Peak form is only useful if it can be reproduced, recovered from, and maintained. Organisations are no different. There is little value in delivering a seamless competition calendar one year, only to see it collapse under pressure the next. True high performance, in sport as in business, is about durability – and that is a function of continuity planning.
The risks to sport are increasingly complex. Some are well-known and universal to many businesses: weather events, data breaches, facility closures, financial instability. Others are emerging and much more specific: safeguarding reputation crises, coaching misconduct, equipment chain failures. Many of these are not technical problems – they are cultural and systemic, and while insurance may cover losses, it does not restore trust, rebuild morale, or recover missed developmental milestones for athletes.
Sport, of course, is a peculiar kind of industry. Its product is not physical output but lived experience. It exists in relationships – between players and coaches, between governing bodies and clubs, between sports and their public. Continuity planning in this context cannot be lifted wholesale from other sectors. It needs to be shaped by the character of sport itself – a character defined by interdependence, aspiration, and trust.
One of the defining features of modern sport is its distributed model of delivery. An NGB may have control over the strategic plan, but the actual delivery of sport – the coaching, the events, the club environments – is usually carried out by hundreds of semi-autonomous actors. Continuity threats, then, are rarely isolated. A failure at club level may damage athlete welfare and derail a talent pathway. A safeguarding breach in a regional event may erode the credibility of the entire system. A sudden resignation in a performance setting may leave athletes unprepared for competition.
Performance environments are particularly highly sensitive to change. Training plans are carefully structured; travel is tightly scheduled; athlete routines are managed down to the hour. Disruption here is not just inconvenient – it can be materially harmful to athlete preparation. And in junior or para sport, where additional needs may apply, a failure in continuity may result in exclusion, disadvantage, or even serious harm.
Business Continuity Planning (BCP) is not about removing risk altogether – sport is, by nature, unpredictable. It is about ensuring that disruption does not paralyse. It is about making sure that alternatives are known, responsibilities are shared, and recovery can begin immediately. It is about clarity of response under pressure.
This is where any current continuity plans may fall short. They focus heavily on the organisational centre – what to do if the office floods, or the CRM fails, or the senior team is unavailable. These are important scenarios, but they are not the whole story. What is missing, often, is the continuity of the sport itself. Can athletes continue to train? Can competitions continue to run? Can participants stay engaged, safe, and supported?
A high-functioning continuity plan should address both: organisational survival and sporting continuity. It must include recovery priorities – not just which files need restoring, but which events, communications, or programmes must be sustained at all costs. It must be tested not only as a compliance exercise, but as a realistic rehearsal: who calls whom, what gets cancelled, what gets reshaped, and how do you speak to your membership during that process?
This brings us to an often overlooked facet of performance – communication. During disruption, the ability to lead is directly tied to the ability to communicate. Stakeholders do not expect perfection, but they do expect clarity and credibility. An NGB that has anticipated disruption, rehearsed its response, and communicated transparently will command loyalty. One that is seen to scramble, deny, self-contradict, or disappear will not.
The language of resilience is not just technical – it is relational. When disruption hits, the message members want to hear is not “We have it under control” but “We saw this coming, we planned for it, and we are here with you.” That is the tone of continuity leadership. And it is inseparable from performance.
This applies as much to community sport as it does to elite programmes. When a club loses access to its facility – whether through weather, vandalism, or a lease dispute – the impact is immediate and often stark. Training sessions are cancelled. Members drift away. Coaches lose income. For some communities, particularly those in deprived or marginalised settings, these disruptions may not be recoverable.
NGBs have an important role here. Not to prevent every disruption – that is impossible – but to equip clubs with the tools to recover quickly. A model continuity plan for clubs, tailored to the specifics of the sport, can make the difference between temporary setback and lasting damage. This is especially important where safeguarding, equality, or welfare issues intersect with continuity – for example, in ensuring that access adjustments for disabled athletes are maintained, or that safeguarding procedures are not set-aside or otherwise rendered ineffective.
Performance, viewed this way, is not just an outcome – it is a behaviour. It is the behaviour of organisations that take responsibility for their ecosystems. That think ahead. That act early. That lead visibly and competently during disruption. These are the organisations that retain members, reassure funders, and recover trust.
In time, this mindset becomes part of the culture. It shows up in how staff are trained, how partnerships are managed, and how expectations are set. Continuity planning becomes embedded – not a separate exercise, but a dimension of operational excellence. And in doing so, it reframes what high performance in sport really means.
It is tempting to see continuity planning as defensive – as something done to avoid risk. But the most successful sporting organisations understand it differently. For them, continuity is offensive. It is a competitive advantage. It allows them to maintain momentum, protect progression, and respond to crisis without losing sight of the athlete or the participant.
Resilience is not separate from performance – it is the bedrock of it. In every other domain of sport, we plan for failure: we analyse opponents, rehearse scenarios, prepare contingencies. Business continuity deserves no less attention.
If we want to future-proof sport – not just its institutions, but its human value – we must bring continuity planning into the centre of performance thinking. It is not bureaucracy. It is not overcautiousness. It is, quite simply, leadership.