United States Tennis Association: Is It Time for a Congressional Investigation?

This article is being written because of my love for the sport and USA Tennis.

The situation with the sport has digressed to the point that a change in thinking and a severe shake-up and attitude adjustment is necessary within the United States Tennis Association. By an act of Congress, the USTA was deemed the governing body of tennis many years ago. The organization is run by officers and a Board of Directors who are all volunteers.

One of the biggest problems with many large corporations is at the upper management level.

These people sit in their large plush offices and devise the plans for the field operations. Many of them have never worked in the trenches of the very operation that they are making plans for.

How can you effectively construct plans for the field operations without consulting with the workers at the grass roots level?

In my view, the USTA is no different. The organization actually consists of three different entities: the USTA Tennis and Education Foundation, the USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center, and the USTA, Inc.

The organization is further broken down into 17 sections. These sections mirror the national structure, and are run by volunteer boards as well. Each section is operated by a small employee staff headed by an Executive Director.

In addition, there are about 22 national committees that are all chaired by volunteers. As a matter of fact, the overwhelming majority of work in the organization is done by an extensive volunteer base (the better than 700,000 members do not vote for officers and board members).

Is there something wrong with this picture?

In many instances, the volunteer’s main qualification is that they have to have a love for the game and pay their dues to be members of the organization.

To my knowledge, there is no performance standards required of the volunteers, nor are there performance reviews to measure their effectiveness.

In 2005, the USTA employed 265 people at its national headquarters, an additional 200 staffers across the 17 sections, and about 2200 national and sectional volunteers.

[i] This is an entity with an annual operating budget of approximately $200 million.

How many non profits do you know with an operating reserve account exceeding $150 million?

With a budget this size and unlimited resources, it is a mystery why the organization can’t devise an effective program to develop the next crop of top flight tennis players.

Where does the money go?

In 1999 the organization's 990 tax filing showed a loss of almost $13 million after projecting a $560,000 surplus on budgeted revenues of $154 million.

[ii] There was a lot of fumbling and scrambling, but I don’t recall a full explanation of the loss.

Let’s take a look at player development.

From my background in corporate America, a starting point would be to gather a “Master Mind” group of proven tennis people to brainstorm the challenges.

For example, in addressing the fall from prominence of U.S. players and to begin to develop the next crop of players, how about Patrick McEnroe, General Manager of Player Development, gathering a panel to include his brother John McEnroe, Billie Jean King, Nick Bollettieri, Rick Macci, Dennis Van Der Meer, Richard Williams, and Bob Davis, to name a few.

Surely this eclectic group of proven winners can lend some expertise and help fashion a program that is far superior to any that the USTA Player Development Program has carried out in the last 15 years.

This kind of out-of-the-box idea thinking and exploration is the catalyst that brings about change.

The blending of their proven successful programs and winning teaching techniques just makes good sense. Whether on purpose or perceived, the USTA’s attitude has always been that their way is the only way.

This was disproved with Venus and Serena Williams, who didn’t play the USTA junior circuit when they were coming along.

Another area is that of diversity.

In browsing the USTA Website recently, under the Diversity section, I noted that African-Americans and other minorities have to be certified by an outside agency (Minority Supplier Development Council) in order to do business with the organization.

Do firms run by non-minorities have to do the same? I don’t think so. The items that I’ve mentioned in this article are just the tip of the iceberg.

I’ve touched on only a couple of areas in this article. Stay tuned, there is more to come.

Bernard A. Chavis, Author

“The Games of Tennis” An African American Journey

All Rights Reserved: No part of the article may be reproduced, used, or quoted without consent of the author.

 

[i] Karlyn Lothery, Chief Diversity Officer USTA (Profiles in Diversity Journal) September/October, 2005

[ii] Tennis Week Magazine Vantage Point article by Eugene L. Scott, Editor/ April 15, 2000