community sport vop programme - nzrl | nzrl · overall, new zealand rugby league clubs outperform...

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

September 2017

COMMUNITY SPORTVOP PROGRAMMENEW ZEALAND RUGBY LEAGUE

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

2Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

CONTENTSINTRODUCTION 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

KEY METRIC RESULTS 7

MAIN FINDINGS 8

WHAT IS CAUSING THESE RATINGS 19

LENGTH OF MEMBERSHIP & THE JOINING PROCESS 31

INJURY MANAGEMENT 35

COMMUNITY INITIATIVES 39

DEMOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCES 41

REGIONAL DIFFERENCES 47

SAMPLE PROFILE 56

BACKGROUND, OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH 65

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

3Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

INTRODUCTIONThis report looks at the results for New Zealand Rugby League to understand the club experience of their members in 2017. For more information about the background and objectives of the VOP Programme and this research please refer to the ‘Background, Objectives and Approach’ section.

More than 10,590 affiliated New Zealand Rugby League club members had the opportunity to participate, with adults aged 16+ completing the questionnaire themselves (‘players’) and parents/guardians (‘parents’) completing the questionnaire for children under the age of 16, on behalf of their child.

When level of satisfaction is referenced in the report (i.e. the percentage who are ‘more than satisfied’), the top two results (‘very satisfied’ or ‘extremely satisfied’) of a positively skewed satisfaction scale are used (shown below).

Positively skewed scales are used because the neutral ratings are divided between dissatisfaction and satisfaction (as opposed to a neutral mid point in a balanced scale). This gives the opportunity for some of the ‘very satisfied’ to be ‘delighted’, allowing for more variation/ greater discrimination compared with a balanced scale. In addition, a neutral option offers people an option not to think. If this is really true, then they have the ‘don’t know/ can't say’ option to select.

Finally, in a competitive world today, is good…good enough? Good (or just satisfied) does not necessarily build strong relationships. We want members to rate their experience more than just satisfied, so they are real advocates and positively endorse their club and sport.

EXTREMELY DISSATISFIED DISSATISFIED SATISFIED VERY

SATISFIEDEXTREMELY SATISFIED

‘MORE THAN SATISFIED’

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

4Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYKEY METRICSOverall, New Zealand rugby league clubs outperform all sports in 2016/17 in many areas of club experience. Two-thirds (65%) of rugby league respondents are more than satisfied with the overall experience of their club, which is significantly higher than the average for all sports in 2016/17 (61%). Similarly, the likelihood of respondents to recommend their club (NPS score of +51) is significantly higher compared with the average (+40). This number measures the proportion of respondents who are likely to recommend (rated 9 or 10, with 10 being extremely likely to recommend) minus those not likely to recommend (0 to 6, with 0 being not at all likely to recommend).

Member retention is significantly lower than all sports, with three-quarters (78%) indicating they are more than likely to rejoin next season compared with four in five (82%) for all sports in 2016/17. However, three in five new members (less than a year) indicate they are more than satisfied with the process they went through when they joined (59%).

When comparing the player results with 2016 (as parents were not included in 2016), the only significant difference in key metrics is the proportion of those dissatisfied with their club, which has significantly reduced (6% cf. 11%).

DRIVERS OF THE CLUB EXPERIENCEThe top three drivers of recommendation for rugby league respondents are value for money, fostering a sense of pride in our club, and the social environment at the club. Rugby league is in a strong position as there are high levels of satisfaction for its top nine drivers of experience. Of these, focusing on improvements to the social environment of clubs and being professional and well managed will make the most difference to driving recommendation, as they are the lower performing drivers.

Being responsive to my needs is a priority for improvement as it has a relatively high impact on whether a member would recommend their club, but only half of respondents (54%) are more than satisfied with their club’s responsiveness.

While levels of satisfaction are higher or similar when compared with the average for all sports for most of the primary and secondary drivers of experience, rugby league respondents are significantly less likely to be satisfied with the maintenance of the fields (55% cf. 65%), the cleanliness and maintenance of the facilities (51% cf. 58%) and the ease of accessing the club’s fields for training or casual playing (55% cf. 63%).

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

5Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYFOCUS FOR IMPROVEMENTRespondents who were dissatisfied (or extremely dissatisfied) with any of the key factors were asked to select one aspect they were least satisfied with. The top three aspects respondents indicated they are least satisfied with include having clean and well maintained facilities e.g. clubrooms, changing rooms (15%), having qualified/ experienced officials available (14%) and having well maintained playing/training venues/ fields (11%).

As a follow up, respondents were asked where they would like their club to focus investment if fees were to increase. Overall, one-quarter (27%) indicate player development programmes, although a third of parents of players (32%) indicate this is the area for improvement compared with 20% of players. Conversely, around three in ten players (28%) indicate facilities (e.g. clubrooms) compared with two in five parents (21%). Fewer than one in ten (7%) indicate they would not want anything improved if it meant their fees increased.

CLUB MEMBERSHIP CHARACTERISTICSOne-third (33%) of respondents indicate the main reason for belonging to a rugby league club is to learn/improve skills, followed by a quarter (25%) who belong to have fun and one in five (18%) who belong to play competitively. However, this varies between players and parents of players, with players’ top reason being to play competitively (24%), significantly higher than parents (13%). Parents are significantly more likely to indicate the reasons their child belongs to a club are to learn/improve skills (40% cf. 22% players) and to have fun (27% cf. 22% players).

In terms of tenure, those who have been a rugby league club member for three to five years are significantly less than satisfied(58% cf. 65%), have a lower NPS (44 cf. 51) and are less likely to think their club offers value for money (69% cf. 74%) compared with those who have been members for shorter or longer periods.

More than a quarter of members (28%) have been injured while playing or training in the last 12 months. This is significantly higher than the average for all sports in 2016/17 (28% cf. 21%). Members who responded as players are significantly more likely to indicate they have been injured than those members whose parents answered on their behalf (34% cf. 11%).

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

6Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYCOMMUNITY INITIATIVESSeven in ten (68%) rugby league respondents are unsure whether their club runs community engagement initiatives or not. Around one-quarter (23%) indicate that their club does run community initiatives, with most activities very family-orientated. Activities vary from involvement in local ANZAC and Christmas parades to offering day care, holiday programmes and homework clubs to hosting open days and gala days for the general public. Some also mentioned their clubs getting involved in programmes such as anti-bullying and the ‘Family Violence - It’s Not OK’ campaign.

DEMOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCESRetention is lowest among secondary aged members (13-19), with those members significantly less likely to rejoin their club compared with the rugby league average (72% cf. 78%). Some members commented about the need for rugby league clubs to prevent younger players switching to rugby union.

Respondents of Pasifika ethnicity score significantly lower on all key metrics measured and are significantly less likely to be satisfied with any of the key drivers of experience. They are more likely than other groups to be new members (less than one year) (37% cf. 32%).

Pasifika respondents are also more likely to be living in Auckland (71% cf. 50%), contributing to the low performance of experience for the region. Auckland club, both Akarana and Counties Manukau, members score lower or significantly lower in all of the key metrics and they are less likely to be satisfied with all of the primary and secondary drivers of club experience.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

7Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

KEY METRIC RESULTSHOW ARE RUGBY LEAGUE CLUBS PERFORMING?

SATISFACTION(Q6: % more than satisfied)

Two-thirds (65%) of respondents are

more than satisfied with the overall experience of

playing rugby league at their club.

NPS(Q7: % promoters less %

detractors)

Respondents are likely to recommend their current club to someone interested

in playing rugby league, illustrated by

a Net Promoter Score (NPS) of 51.

VALUE FOR MONEY

(Q11: % agree or strongly agree)

Three-quarters (74%) of

respondents perceive value for money from their

rugby league club.

LIKELIHOOD TO REJOIN

(Q9: % quite likely or very likely)

Four in five (78%) indicate they are

likely to rejoin their current club next

season.

JOINING PROCESS

(Q20: % more than satisfied –average of 4 attributes)

For new members (less than a year), three in five (59%)

are more than satisfied with the

process they went through when they joined their club.

65 65 61 51 53

40

74 70 7478

76

82

5964

53

Base: Q6/Q7/Q11 All Respondents (Excluding Don't know/ Can't say), Q9 Members Excluding Don’t know/Can’t say), Q20 New Members (Excluding Don't know/ Can't say)Q6 (n=1180) / Q7 (n=1185) / Q11 (n=1171) / Q9 (n=1156) / Q20 (n=359-376) (Average of four attributes) Significantly higher/lower than All Sports 2016/17/

TOTAL RUGBY LEAGUE

ALL SPORTS 2016/17

TOTAL RUGBY LEAGUE 2016*

* Total Rugby League 2016 excludes parents of players (i.e. players under the age of 16), therefore year-on-year comparisons are not made at a total level.

Copyright © 2017 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.

MAIN FINDINGS

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

9

MEMBER TYPEALMOST ALL ARE MEMBERS

76%

9% 1% 4% 6% <1% 3%

Currently playing Member andseason has just

finished

Member andseason hasn't

started

Member but notplaying due to

injury

Member but notplaying for another

reason

Casual player Other

96%Are affiliated members of a

Rugby League club

Base: Q2.

All respondents (n=1243)Which of the following best describes your/ your child's current relationship with rugby league?

Almost all (96%) of respondents are affiliated members of a rugby league club, with three-quarters (76%) currently participating in the sport and a further one in ten (9%) who had just finished for the season.

Significantly higher/lower than Total Rugby League

Significantly higher/lower than All Sports 2016/17/

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

10

REASON FOR BELONGING TO A CLUBONE-THIRD BELONG TO A CLUB TO LEARN/IMPROVE THEIR SKILLS

33%

25%

18%

9%

5%

0%

9%

40%

27%

13%

7%

4%

0%

8%

22%

22%

24%

14%

6%

1%

12%

To learn/ improve skills*

To have fun*

To play competitively

To get fit and healthy

To socialise

To have access to facilitiesand playing fields/ venues/

courts

Other

Base: Q4.

All respondents who are members What is the main reason you/ your child belong/ belongs to a rugby league club?

* New statements for rugby league in 2017

One-third (33%) indicate the main reason for belonging to a rugby league club is to learn/improve skills (parents of players (40%) are significantly more so than players (22%) to say this), followed by a quarter (25%) who belong to have fun and one in five (18%) who belong to play competitively. Players main reason for belonging is to play competitively (24%), significantly higher than parents of players (13%).

OTHER REASONS TO BELONG TO A CLUB INCLUDE:

“I play to keep the game alive for other players and spectators and to create a safe sporting

environment for the next generation of league

stars.”Player, 30-34 years,

Canterbury

“To build his confidence and socialise with kids his age.”

Parent of player, 5-7 years, Auckland

“He enjoys Rugby league and to play this sport he

has to play for his club as schools in our district don’t have Rugby league in their

curriculum.”Parent of player, 14 years, Bay of Plenty

“To help give <…> a sense of belonging/brotherhood through league while raising awareness around mental illness as has PTSD and MILD AUTISM.”

Parent of player, 5-7 years, Wellington-Wairarapa

“To grow the game as my daughter has just started playing this season as well,

and she has so much love for the sport.”Player, 25-29 years, Canterbury

TOTAL RUGBY LEAGUE (n=1195) PARENT (n=721) PLAYER (n=474)



Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

11

35%65%

MEMBER OF ANOTHER CLUB

MEMBER OF ANOTHER CLUBONE-THIRD HAVE BEEN MEMBERS OF ANOTHER CLUB

37%

8%

7%

7%

5%

5%

2%

1%

1%

1%

21%

Location e.g. I/ we moved/ the club moved

I know or knew someone at the club

The opportunities were better to fulfil potential

To change grades/ levels/ play in a different team

The Rugby League club was more friendly and…

Better Rugby League management

Better access to playing/ training venues/ fields

Better quality playing/ training venues/ fields

Better social environment at the Rugby League club

Lower fees

Other

Base: Q31.Base: Q32. ugby league

All respondents who are members (n=1195)Have/ Has you/ your child ever been a member of another rugby league club?All respondents who are members and used to belong to another club (n=392)

What is the main reason you/ your child changed r clubs? * New question for rugby league in 2017

Of the one-third (35%) of respondents who have been or whose children have been members of another club, 37% indicated that the main reason they changed club was because they moved. Around one in ten (8%) changed club because they knew someone at the club, 7% changed because the opportunities were better to fulfil their potential and 7% moved clubs to change grade or play in a different team.

YesNo



‘‘Other’ reasons for changing clubs:► Club moved from didn’t have specific

age/gender team ► Coach left/ no coach/ followed coach

Rugby League members significantly more likely to have been a member of another club are:

Rugby League members significantly less likely to have been a member of another club are:

► Those who belong to play competitively (47% cf. 35%) and to get fit and healthy (45%)► Those who play/train four or more times a week (44%)► Coach/instructor (70%) or committee member (67%)► Those who played for the top team or higher representation (43%).

► Those who belong to have fun (22% cf. 35%) and to learn/improve skills (28%)► Those who play/train two or three times a week (31%)► Promoters (33%)► Those who live in Canterbury (27%).

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

12

64%15%

10%5%

7%


RETENTIONTHREE-QUARTERS OF MEMBERS ARE LIKELY TO REJOIN THEIR CURRENT CLUB NEXT SEASON

Rugby League members significantly more likely to rejoin are: Rugby League members significantly less likely to rejoin are:

► Those who play/train two or three times a week (80% cf. 78%)► Those who would pay more for improvements to facilities (e.g. clubrooms, changing

rooms etc.) (86%)► Those aged under five (97%)► Those who live in Northland (92%)► Those in the top team or higher representation (82%).

► Those who play/train once a week (70% cf. 78%)► Those who made a complaint (53%)► 16-24 year olds (66%)► Those who identify as Pasifika (74%)► Those who live in Auckland (75%).

Although three-quarters (78%) of rugby league members are likely or very likely to rejoin their current club next season, this is significantly lower than the average for all sports in 2016/17 (82%). However, the result is a slight improvement on rugby league’s 2016 result (76%).

LikelySomewhat Likely Very LikelyUnlikely

Very Unlikely

78% 78% 78% 76%82%

12% 11% 13% 15% 11%TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE(n=1156)

PARENT(n=702)

PLAYER(n=454)

LIKE

LY O

R VE

RY

LIKE

LY T

O R

EJO

INU

NLI

KELY

OR

VERY

U

NLI

KELY

TO

REJ

OIN

Base: Q9.

All respondents who are members (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)How likely are/ is you/ your child to play for or rejoin <insert club from Q2a> next season?

ALL SPORTS2016/17

(n=24171)



TOTAL RUGBY LEAGUE2016*

(n=207)

* Total Rugby League 2016 excludes parents

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

13

65% 65% 66% 65% 61%

7% 8% 6% 11% 10%

38%

28%

28%

5%2%

SATISFACTION WITH CLUB EXPERIENCE

CLUB SATISFACTIONTWO-THIRDS ARE SATISFIED WITH THEIR CLUB EXPERIENCE

Base: Q6. ugby league

All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)To what extent are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the/ your child's overall experience of playing r at your/ their club?

Rugby League respondents significantly more likely to be satisfied are: Rugby League respondents significantly less likely to be satisfied are:

► Those who have been a member less than a year (71% cf. 65%)► Those who identify as Maori (69%)► Those who live in Northland (84%)► Those who have played for the top team (70%) or represented the club at a regional

competition (72%).

► Those who have been a member three to five years (58% cf. 65%)► Those who belong to a club to play competitively (59%)► Those who play/train once a week (54%)► Those aged 11-12 years (58%)► Those who identify as Pasifika (60%)► Those who live in Auckland (59%).

TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE(n=1180)

PARENT(n=716)

PLAYER(n=464)

MO

RE T

HAN

SAT

ISFI

EDDI

SSAT

ISFI

ED

Two-thirds (65%) of respondents are more than satisfied with the overall experience of playing at their club. This is significantly higher than the average for all sports in 2016/17 (61%). The proportion of players who are dissatisfied has significantly reduced from 2016 (6% cf. 11%).

Very satisfiedSatisfied Extremely satisfiedDissatisfied

Extremely dissatisfied

ALL SPORTS2016/17

(n=24784)

Significantly higher/lower than Total Rugby LeagueSignificantly higher/lower than All Sports 2016/17/


(n=224)


Significantly higher/lower than Rugby League 2016/

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

14

67%

18%

16%

NPS: +51

CLUB RECOMMENDATIONTWO-THIRDS OF RESPONDENTS ARE LIKELY TO RECOMMEND THEIR CLUB

Rugby League respondents significantly more likely to recommend their club are: Rugby League respondents significantly less likely to recommend their club are:

► Those who haven’t made a complaint in the last three months (70% cf. 67%)► Those aged 20 or older (73%)► Those who live in Northland (85%)► Those who played for the top team (73%).

► Those who have been a member for three to five years (62% cf. 67%) ► Those who play or train once a week (54%)► Those who made a complaint in the last three months (31%)► Those who live in Auckland (60%).

67% 64%71% 67%

58%

16% 19% 11% 14% 18%

TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE(n=1185)

PARENT(n=713)

PLAYER(n=472)

PRO

MO

TERS

DETR

ACTO

RS

Two-thirds (67%) of respondents are likely to recommend their rugby league club to someone interested in playing rugby league (rated 9 or 10, with 10 being extremely likely). This is significantly higher than the average across all sports in 2016/17 (NPS score of 51 cf. total of 40). Players are significantly more likely to recommend their club than parents of players (NPS 61 cf. 45).

DETRACTORS PROMOTERSPASSIVES

NPS = % PROMOTERS - % DETRACTORS

+51+45

+61

Base: Q7. ugby league.

All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)Imagine someone is interested in playing or participating in r If they asked you, how likely are you to recommend your/

your child's club to them, using a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is not at all likely and 10 is extremely likely?

ALL SPORTS2016/17

(n=24801)

+40



+53


(n=223)


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

15

WHAT THEY LOVE ABOUT THEIR CLUB

Base: All respondents who gave an NPS score of 9 or 10 (n=789)Q8a. What is it that you love about your/ your child's club?

“Small community focused club, run by locals, who encourage participation as

opposed to competitiveness. Liaison and communication with teams and league

players has improved over the years we've been involved with the club. We have a fantastic junior management committee, however, the Board decisions sometimes

seem disconnected from what is best for our junior players and whanau (i.e. last year

sourcing expensive team wear unaffordable for many club members).”


“It's a family club, three generations of my family have been through that club and have

had nothing but great experiences from it. They're an awesome bunch and very family

orientated.”Parent of player, 30-34 years, Canterbury

“The great coaching/managing, fair club, all about fun, neat fundraising and opportunities,

well skilled and promising futures for Tani players.”

Parent of player, 8-10 years, Waikato

“Everyone is treated with respect. There is access to training resources and the

coaches/management are dedicated in supporting our future league stars”

Parent of player, 5-7 years, Waikato

“I love this club because of the warm family environment. My son has been playing since u6s (now u8s) and I love that parents are not forceful of their children like I have seen from

other clubs at competitions. This club is inclusive of all its members and families and

for us, having fun, being healthy, fit and socialising are the main objectives for now.”

Player, 35-39 years, Canterbury

“I have good team players and a good coach who helps all of us boys become better young men both on and off the field.”

Player, 14 years, Bay of Plenty

“His team have a committed & organised management team including team manager & two coaches. The grounds are excellent &

the club house is great.”Parent of player, 5-7 years, Auckland

“Cheap fees, uniforms are provided, monthly prize giving for the Juniors.”


“We have good traditions and values at our club.”

Player, 8-10 years, Northland

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

16

WHAT NEEDS TO IMPROVE

Base: All respondents who gave an NPS score of 0 to 6 (n=185)Q8c. What would need to improve at your/ your child's club to improve your rating?

“Be more organised. Choose a more child friendly environment for example having their own clubroom that’s not joined to a pub. Have

some professional structure. Create job descriptions for the people that volunteer their time so they know what they are signing up for. Brainstorm ideas with members of the club to

see what their visions and expectations of their time invested in the club are. Have signature

fundraising ventures that are set for each year. Having a set routine that entails positive vibes instead of being rushed and stressful e.g. prize

givings. Putting more effort into keeping the kids happy and making them feel like they as

teams are doing a great job together.”Player, 8-10 years, Canterbury

“Game days to be moved to Saturday for Women's league”

Player, 25-29 years, Auckland

“I don’t understand why they over fill the teams at the start of every season. Once a team hits 12 players they should simply tell anyone registering after that, they will take

their details and if they get enough kids they will start another team. It’s not fair on the kids to have 15-16 kids in team and they have to stand down most of the game.”


“It’s not so much the club it’s the organisation of the Bay of Plenty league in general. Everything is so unorganised and draws take so long to be given out to

clubs.”Parent of player, 5-7 years, Bay of

Plenty

“Needs to be more business orientated. Needs to change the perceptions and gain exposure in the

community. Businesses in and around that community could help by way of sponsorship if the direction was there within the club as it is in a high profile location.”


“There is a huge lack of communication from the top. The chair does not want to be the chairperson and therefore is

not as driven to do what is needed to help our club succeed. There needs to be more structure around the club, and a stronger presence from the prems. with the

children as they are the present future. There also needs to be more training and development days for our kids.

Much, much more to add to this but in a nutshell the club is in need of massive amount of support to see them through

for years to come.”Parent of player, 5-7 years, Wellington-Wairarapa

“They need to have more coach and managers meeting as a whole. They need to have a vision that is achievable for the kids in the club. Here in the Waikato all league clubs struggle to keep them when they hit high school. We lose our boys to Rugby. We, at the moment, have no <age group> division in the Waikato. So our <club, age group>

coaches made a choice to place our boys in the Bay of Plenty comp they have outstanding coaches and boys. They have gone out of their way to keep league alive in

these boys. And there are a few coaches in the club that will do so. But at the same time there needs to be some major changes.”

Parent of player, 14 years, Waikato

“The quality of the fields, other training facilities for when it's raining and fields are closed. Need more

coaching clinics for specific areas, such as tackling, running/fitness/endurance....etc.”


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

17

Rugby League respondents significantly more likely to perceive value for money are: Rugby League respondents significantly less likely to perceive value for money are:

► Those who have been members for less than one year (78% cf. 74%)► Those who have played for the top team (79%)► Those who would pay more for better facilities such as club rooms, changing rooms etc.

(86%)► Those aged 45-54 years (91%)► Those who live in Northland (89%) or Waikato (84%).

► Those who have been a member for three to five years (69% cf. 74%)► Those who play/train once a week (66%)► Those who changed clubs because they moved (65%)► Those who complained in the last three months (40%)► Those who identify as Pasifika (68%)► Those who live in Auckland (67%).

43%

31%

18%

6%3%

PERCEIVED VALUE FOR MONEY

VALUE FOR MONEYTHREE-QUARTERS OF RESPONDENTS PERCEIVE VALUE FOR MONEY FROM THEIR CLUB

Base: Q11.

All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)To what extent do you agree or disagree that the opportunities, services and benefits you/ your child receive/ receives from

your/ your child’s club make it well worth the money you/ they pay?

74% 74% 75%70% 74%

8% 9% 8% 12% 10%TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE(n=1171)

PARENT(n=711)

PLAYER(n=460)

AGRE

E O

R ST

RON

GLY

AGRE

EDI

SAGR

EE

Nearly three-quarters (74%) of respondents indicate that the opportunities, services and benefits they receive from their rugby league club make it well worth the money they pay. This is on par with all other sports in 2016/17 and slightly higher than 2016.

AgreeSomewhat agree Strongly agreeDisagree

Strongly disagree

ALL SPORTS2016/17

(n=24466)




(n=216)


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

18

Rugby League respondents significantly more likely to have made a complaint are: Rugby League respondents significantly less likely to have made a complaint are:

► Those who have been a member more than five years (12% cf. 7%)► Those who play/train once a week (12%)► Those who would pay more to improve club management (25%)► Those unlikely to rejoin (16%)► Those aged 35 to 44 years (14%)► A coach or instructor (17%).

► Those who have been a member for less than two years (4% cf. 7%)► Those who are very likely to rejoin (5%).

7%93%

MADE A COMPLAINT IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS

IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS…FEWER THAN ONE IN TEN MADE A COMPLAINT

Base: Q19.

All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)Have you complained to your/ your child's club in the past 3 months?

7% 7%8% 8%

9%

TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE (n=1200)

PARENT(n=722)

PLAYER(n=478)

Fewer than one in ten (7%) have made a complaint to their club in the last three months, slightly lower than the average for all sports in 2016/17 (9%) and unchanged from the previous year.

YesNo

ALL SPORTS2016/17

(n=24848)




(n=227)



WHAT IS CAUSING THESE RATINGS?

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

20Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

DRIVERS OF THE CLUB EXPERIENCEThe qualitative stage, undertaken as part of the development of the VOP questionnaire, identified seven drivers that influence club experience. After the initial pilot of the VOP questionnaire these were expanded to nine core drivers. The question numbers that relate to each driver are shown below.

POSITIVE CLUB

EXPERIENCE

BEING FRIENDLY & WELCOMINGQ10a(R1)

CLEAN & WELL MAINTAINED FACILITIES

Q10a(R2)

HAVING WELL MAINTAINED PLAYING/

TRAINING VENUESQ10a(R3)

PROFESSIONAL & WELL MANAGED

Q10a(R8)

QUALITY OF COACHESQ10a(R4)

FAIR & EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES

Q10a(R7)

PROVIDING INFORMATION WHEN NEEDED

Q10a(R5)

FULFILLING POTENTIALQ10a(R6)

SOCIAL ENVIRONMENTQ10a(R9)

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

21Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

DRIVERS OF THE CLUB EXPERIENCE, CTD.As well as the nine ‘core’ drivers of the club experience, based on the pilot results and in consultation with National Sporting Organisations (NSOs), the VOP survey also covers a number of secondary drivers. These are shown below with the associated question number.

► Value for money (Q11)

► Encourages good sportsmanship and fair play (Q10b-R1)

► The ease of accessing the clubs venues/ fields/ courts for training or casual playing (Q10b-R2)

► Fostering a sense of pride in the club (Q10b-R3)

► Engaging with the local community (Q10b-R4)

► Being responsive to needs and requirements (Q10b-R5)

► Having qualified/ experienced officials available when I compete (Q10b-R6)

► Providing a safe environment for adults and children (Q10b-R7)

► Making aware of development occurring in rugby league across New Zealand in terms of training, equipment, new

programmes, coaching and officiating (Q10b-R8)

► Providing information and opportunities for coach development (Q10b-R9)

► Providing information and opportunities for officials development (Q10b-R10)

► Providing information about junior programmes (Q10b-R11)

In addition, individual NSOs had the opportunity to add other drivers considered important or topical for their sport, if required.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

22Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

EXPLANATION OF REGRESSIONRegression analysis is a statistical process for analysing the relationship between two or more variables. It helps to understand the importance, or impact, of a ‘driver’ (the independent variable) by measuring its contribution to explaining variance in another variable (the dependent variable). Each independent variable is assigned a score ranging from zero to one - the closer to one, the more important/ impact it has on the dependent variable. We have used a regression approach called Modified Kruskal, which addresses any multi-collinearity issues.

Nielsen has created a regression model unique to New Zealand Rugby League (note: previously Nielsen created one overall model that used the data from all sports).

The dependent variable for the regression model is recommendation (the likelihood of a respondent to recommend their club to someone interested in playing their sport). The independent variables are the attributes/ drivers in Q10a, Q10b and Q11, including any optional or additional attributes.

The following chart shows the impact of each attribute/ driver on a respondents’ likelihood to recommend their club. The importance or impact of a driver on recommendation is shown on the vertical axis along with the size of the bubble (from the regression model). How respondents are rating their satisfaction with each of the drivers, is shown on the horizontal axis. This allows us to see what is more important but rated lower - that is where clubs should focus, in order to improve recommendation.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

23Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

PRIORITY FOR IMPROVEMENT

1

2

16

15

78

9

56 4

1214

3

1310

21

11

19/20 18

17

STRENGTHSPRIORITY FOR IMPOVEMENT

SECONDARY PRIORITY MAINTENANCE

IMPO

RTAN

CE O

F DR

IVER

ON

NPS

The top three drivers of recommendation for rugby league respondents are:1. Value for money

2. Fostering a sense of pride in our club

3. The social environment.The top nine drivers of recommendation are all in the strengths quadrant. Improvements to the social environment of clubs and being professional and well managed will make the most difference to driving recommendation as they are the lower performing drivers. Being responsive to my needs is a priority for improvement as it has a relatively high impact on whether a respondent would recommend their club, but only half of respondents (54%) are more than satisfied with their club’s responsiveness. .

DRIVERS OF RECOMMENDATION (NPS)

Mean = 59%

PERFORMANCE (% MORE THAN SATISFIED)35% 85%

High

Low

STRENGTHS SECONDARY PRIORITY

Base: All Respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable) Q7. Imagine someone is interested in playing or participating in rugby league. If they asked you, how likely are you to recommend your/ your child's club to them, using a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is not at all likely and 10 is extremely likely?

1. Value for money2. Being friendly and welcoming3. Fostering a sense of pride 4. The social environment at the

club5. Is fair and provides equal

opportunities for all players6. Being professional and well

managed7. The quality of the coaches8. Providing the information when

needed9. Allowing me to fulfil my potential

10. Being responsive to my needs and requirements

11. Providing a safe environment for adults and children

12. Encouraging good sportsmanship and fair play

13. Engaging with the local community

14. The ease of accessing the clubs venues/ fields

15. Having well maintained playing/training venues/ fields

16. Having clean and well maintained facilities e.g. clubrooms, changing rooms, toilets

17. Providing information about junior programmes or adult coaching

18. Providing information and opportunities for coach development

19. Providing information and opportunities for officials development

20. Making aware of the developments occurring in cricket across New Zealand in terms of training, equipment, new programmes, coaching and officiating, club and event management

21. Having qualified / experienced officials

MAINTENANCE

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

24Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

SATISFACTION: KEY DRIVERSWhen compared with the average for all sports in 2016/17, rugby league respondents are significantly more likely to indicate they are more than satisfied with their club being friendly and welcoming (76% cf. 72%), the quality of coaches or instructors (70% cf. 59%) and that their club is fair and provides equal opportunities for all (64% cf. 61%). However, they are significantly less likely to be satisfied with the maintenance of the fields (55% cf. 65%) and clean and well maintained facilities (51% cf. 58%).

Base: All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)Q10a. How would you/ your child rate your/ their overall satisfaction with your/ their rugby league club on each of the following…

% MORE THAN SATISFIEDTOTALRUGBY LEAGUE

PLAYER PARENT

1%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

4%

3%

6%

8%

6%

7%

8%

8%

10%

11%

20%

22%

26%

29%

29%

30%

30%

33%

34%

25%

28%

27%

26%

26%

27%

27%

27%

25%

51%

42%

37%

38%

35%

34%

35%

28%

26%

BEING FRIENDLY AND WELCOMING (n=1189)

THE QUALITY OF THE COACHES OR INSTRUCTORS(n=1181)

IS FAIR AND PROVIDES EQUAL OPPORTUNITIESFOR ALL PLAYERS (n=1179)

THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT AT THE CLUB (n=1158)

BEING PROFESSIONAL AND WELL MANAGED(n=1179)

PROVIDING ME/ THEM THE INFORMATION I/ THEYNEED WHEN I/ THEY NEED IT (n=1184)

ALLOWING ME/ THEM TO FULFIL MY/ THEIRPOTENTIAL (n=1171)

HAVING WELL MAINTAINED PLAYING/ TRAININGVENUES/ FIELDS/ COURTS (n=1174)

HAVING CLEAN AND WELL MAINTAINED FACILITIESE.G. CLUBROOMS, CHANGING ROOMS, TOILETS

(n=1098)

Extremely dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied Extremely Satisfied

51% 53% 50%

55% 57% 54%

61% 62% 61%

61% 61% 61%

62% 61% 62%

76% 82% 72%

70% 68% 72%

64% 65% 63%

63% 69% 60%

ALL SPORTS2016/17

72%

59%

61%

63%

61%

61%

59%

65%

58%



TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE2016*

52%

57%

61%

61%

58%

81%

62%

63%

73%


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

25Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

While rugby league players and parents have similar levels of satisfaction for most of the experience drivers, parents are significantly less than satisfied with their child’s club providing a safe environment for adults and children (66% cf. 71%) and with the ease of accessing the club’s fields for training or casual playing (53% cf. 59%).

Base: All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)Q10b. How would you rate your/ your child's overall satisfaction with your/ their rugby league club on each of the following...^ Not asked in rugby league survey 2016

1%

1%

1%

1%

2%

2%

3%

2%

4%

2%

4%

3%

3%

2%

7%

6%

8%

10%

13%

14%

11%

14%

24%

26%

30%

37%

38%

37%

40%

38%

39%

43%

42%

26%

24%

27%

26%

25%

23%

23%

21%

23%

22%

19%

46%

45%

41%

29%

29%

30%

24%

26%

21%

22%

20%

ENCOURAGING GOOD SPORTSMANSHIP AND FAIRPLAY (n=1190)

FOSTERING A SENSE OF PRIDE IN OUR/ THEIRCLUB (n=1167)

PROVIDING A SAFE ENVIRONMENT FOR ADULTSAND CHILDREN (n=1185)

THE EASE OF ACCESSING THE CLUBS VENUES/FIELDS/ COURTS FOR TRAINING OR CASUAL

PLAYING (n=1133)

BEING RESPONSIVE TO MY/ THEIR NEEDS ANDREQUIREMENTS (n=1152)

ENGAGING WITH THE LOCAL COMMUNITY (n=1070)

PROVIDING INFORMATON AND OPPORTUNITIESFOR COACH DEVELOPMENT (n=927)^

PROVIDING INFORMATION ABOUT JUNIORPROGRAMMES (n=1058)^

MAKING ME/ THEM AWARE OF THE DEVELOPMENTS OCCURRING IN SPORT ACROSS

NEW ZEALAND…(n=994)

PROVIDING INFORMATON AND OPPORTUNITIESFOR OFFICIALS DEVELOPMENT (n=925)^

HAVING QUALIFIED / EXPERIENCED OFFICIALSAVAILABLE WHEN I/ THEY COMPETE (n=1056)


44% 46% 42%

47% 51% 45%

47% 49% 46%

53% 56% 51%

54% 55% 53%

72% 74% 71%

69% 72% 67%

68% 71% 66%

55% 59% 53%

44% 45% 43%

40% 42% 39%

67%

61%

68%

63%

52%

51%

44%

49%

41%

44%

45%



35%

-

41%

-

52%

74%

74%

63%

56%

73%

-

% MORE THAN SATISFIEDTOTALRUGBY LEAGUE

PLAYER PARENT ALL SPORTS2016/17

TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE2016*


SATISFACTION: SECONDARY DRIVERS

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

26Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

15%

14%

11%

7%

7%

7%

5%

5%

Having clean and well maintainedfacilities e.g. clubrooms, changing

rooms, toilets

Having qualified / experiencedofficials available when I/ they

compete

Having well maintained playing/training venues/ fields/ courts

The quality of the coaches orinstructors

Is fair and provides equalopportunities for all players

Providing information about juniorprogrammes

Being professional and wellmanaged

Making me/ them aware of thedevelopments occurring in rugby

league across New Zealand

HOW CAN CLUBS IMPROVE EXPERIENCE?Respondents who were dissatisfied (or extremely dissatisfied) were asked to select the one aspect they are leastsatisfied with. The top three aspects respondents indicate they are least satisfied with include having clean and well maintained facilities e.g. clubrooms, changing rooms (15%), having qualified/ experienced officials available (14%) and having well maintained playing/training venues/ fields (11%).

Base: All respondents who are dissatisfied/extremely dissatisfied or disagree/strongly disagree (n=509)Q12a. Thinking about what you rated lower in previous questions, please select which one aspect of your/ your child's club that you/ they are least satisfied with? Note: Only top eight areas shown

“The fact that the clubrooms are closed and the only toilets available for the players, visiting players and supporters is the

single public toilet in the carpark which is usually disgusting pretty much sums up everyone's dissatisfaction.”Parent of player, 11-12 years, Auckland

“Not really the club but have the council upkeep the fields better. Every year there is something wrong with the fields - too sandy,

patchy grass, muddy etc.”Player, 45-49 years, Auckland

“More readily available referees that know the rules and have the equipment to competently referee. Also having touch judges

rather than relying on whatever parent is the closest. It wouldn't be hard to roster on older members of the club touchie duties

each week. Provide more opportunities for the teen members to gain refereeing qualifications and then again use a roster system to ensure they get enough practice. Possibly a mentor system for some of those younger referees so they don't feel like they're by

themselves against some of the parents on the sideline.”Parent of player, 8-10 years, Taranaki



WHAT WOULD THEY NEED TO BE MORE SATISFIED?

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

27Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

MORE OF WHAT NEEDS TO IMPROVE FOR LOWER RATED ASPECTS

Base: All respondents who were dissatisfied/extremely dissatisfied or disagree/strongly disagree (n=509)Q12b. What would you/ your child need from your/ their club to be more satisfied with <pipe in statement from Q12a>?

“Don’t think it is a club issue, but ARL needs to provide safe playing environment. It

doesn't take a professional to work out a 60kg child playing a 30kg child isn’t safe. The

smaller children will stop playing either because the parents concern of safety or the

child doesn’t enjoy the size difference. Therefore only the larger players, in general, play on as they reach 13 years + and hence the breadth of players Auckland produce is

skewed to only large kids who get by on size/power alone rather than work ethic,

vision, speed, game management.”Parent of player, 11-12 years, Auckland

“Players engaging with junior grades. Showing up to training and

management being firmer with club code of conduct and club image.”Player, 25-29 years, Manawatu

“Pushing/ sending the information out via coaches in the form of emails or notices at training. Currently any information has to be gained by coming into the

club which isn't always practical for solo parent families.”

Parent of player, 14 years, Auckland

“NZRL should be developing a strategic plan with the consultation of those local bodies (outside of Auckland) to construct a plan to entice more volunteers and ways to educate them on the

logistics.”Player, 35-39 years, Manawatu

“The Club needs a detailed plan around player and coaching development. Coaches need detailed policies

showing points around coaching techniques, player development and covering issues that coaches face.”

Player, 40-44 years, Auckland

“The club needs to find a way to attract players. Not so much the club, but the entire sport. The sport is awesome but there is literally no want

by the demography to play the sport. The league reputation is poor, no one is wanting to play, and there is little encouragement to get

people out there and playing. ”Player, 25-29 years, Manawatu

“1) Involvement of all children on field during games. Encouraging each child who are all at different skill levels at trainings, instead of picking out their wrongs and

weaknesses. 2) Coaches and Managers to QUIT having 'pet' players or 'special treatment' to some players and focus more on FAIRNESS, DEVELOPING SKILLS

and FUN at this age level. This way children and parents won't be put off and leave. 3) The Club to arrange a more organised and worthwhile fortnightly prize giving.

Celebrating individual focus as well as acknowledging team focus. Making Mini-Mod prize giving more fun for the kids as well as disciplined so that they learn to sit quietly,

listen and support their peers teams. 4) Communicate with parents as much as possible in regards to club events and fundraisers. This helps new families relate

more to the club and allows participation as well as support from families too.”Parent of player, 5-7 years, Auckland

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

28Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

INVESTMENT AREAS (IF FEES INCREASED)

Base: All respondents (Excluding Don’t Know/ Not applicable) (n=1027)Q14. If your/ your child's rugby league club was going to focus on improving one of the following aspects, and the membership fees increased to reflect this investment, which would be the one thing you/ your child would like them to improve?

27%

24%

10%

9%

6%

5%

5%

4%

3%

3%

5%

32%

21%

9%

10%

7%

4%

5%

4%

3%

1%

5%

20%

28%

11%

7%

5%

5%

5%

5%

4%

5%

6%

Player development programmes

Facilities e.g. club rooms, changingrooms, toilets

Quality of coaching

Playing/ training venues

Management of the club

Social activities

Access to equipments

Number of coaches

Communications

Quality of officiating

Other

TOTAL RUGBY LEAGUE (n=1027) PARENT (n=629) PLAYER (n=398)

7% would not want anything improved if it meant their fees were increased (9% for players and 6% for parents of players).

If membership fees were to increase, one-quarter of respondents (27%) would want this increased investment used to make improvements to player development programmes. Parent of players are significantly more likely than players to indicate this aspect (32% cf. 20%).

This is followed by facilities such as club rooms and changing rooms (24%), which is significantly higher for players (28%) compared with parents (21%) and quality of coaching (10%).

THEY WOULD PAY MORE FOR IMPROVED…



Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

29Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

INVESTMENT AREAS (IF FEES INCREASED)THOSE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE LIKELY TO INDICATE THEY WOULD WANT IMPROVEMENT IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS, IF FEES WERE TO INCREASE:

Base: All respondents (Excluding Don’t Know/ Not applicable) (n=1027)Q14. If your/ your child's rugby league club was going to focus on improving one of the following aspects, and the membership fees increased to reflect this investment, which would be the one thing you/ your child would like them to improve? Note: Top six areas shown

PLAYER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES

► Those who have belonged to their club for less than one year (33%)

► Those who belong to a club to learn/improve their skills (34%)

► Primary/intermediate aged (31%)► Those who live in Manawatu (44%)► Those who didn’t sustain an injury in the last

12 months (29%).

FACILITESE.G. CLUB ROOMS,

CHANGING ROOMS, TOILETS

► Those who are very likely to rejoin (28%)► Females (32%).

LEAGUES OVER / UNDER

▲ Coastline (47%)▲ Counties Manukau

(35%)

▼ Canterbury (21%)


▲ Canterbury (32%)▲ Taranaki (41%)

▼ Counties Manukau (13%)

27% 24%



QUALITY OF COACHING OR INSTRUCTORS

► Those who belong to a club to play competitively (14%)

► Those less than satisfied (19%)► Those unlikely to rejoin (17%).


10%

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

30Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

INVESTMENT AREAS (IF FEES INCREASED)THOSE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE LIKELY TO INDICATE THEY WOULD WANT IMPROVEMENT IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS, IF FEES WERE TO INCREASE:

MANAGEMENT OF THE CLUB

► Those less than satisfied (28%)► Detractors (19%)► Those who complained in the last three

months (19%)► Those who are unlikely to rejoin (18%).


6%

Base: All respondents (Excluding Don’t Know/ Not applicable) (n=1027)Q14. If your/ your child's rugby league club was going to focus on improving one of the following aspects, and the membership fees increased to reflect this investment, which would be the one thing you/ your child would like them to improve? Note: Top six areas shown



PLAYING/ TRAINING VENUES/ FIELDS

► Those who are likely to rejoin (10%)► Those who live in Northland (17%) or

Auckland (11%).


▲ Akarana (12%)

9%

SOCIALACTIVITIES

► Those who have been a member less than one year (7%)

► Those who are members to have fun (8%)► Those who play/train once a week (10%)► Those who have represented New Zealand

(13%).


5%


LENGTH OF MEMBERSHIP & THE JOINING PROCESS

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

32Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

KEY METRICS: LENGTH OF MEMBERSHIPThose who have been members for three to five years are significantly less than satisfied (58% cf. 65%), have lower NPS (44 cf. 51) and are less likely to think their club offers value for money (69% cf. 74%) compared with those who have been members for shorter or longer periods. However, they are about as likely to rejoin as others.

Base: All respondents who are members (Excluding Don't know/not applicable) Q6 / Q7 / Q9 / Q11

OVERALL SATISFACTION

VALUE FOR MONEYLIKELIHOOD TO REJOIN

78% 78% 78% 81% 79%

LESS THAN 1YEAR (n=369)

1-2 YEARS(n=235)

3-5 YEARS(n=344)

6-10 YEARS(n=116)

MORE THAN 10YEARS (n=92)

TOTAL78%

53 49 4455

66


1-2 YEARS(n=242)

3-5 YEARS(n=345)

6-10 YEARS(n=120)


NPS

TOTAL51

71% 64%58%

65%74%


1-2 YEARS(n=240)

3-5 YEARS(n=347)

6-10 YEARS(n=120)


TOTAL65%

TOTAL74%

78% 75% 69% 72% 78%


1-2 YEARS(n=237)

3-5 YEARS(n=341)

6-10 YEARS(n=120)




Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

33Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.


▲ Waikato (34%)▼ Wellington (16%)




▼ Counties Manukau (5%)

DIFFERENCE IN LENGTH OF MEMBERSHIPTHOSE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE LIKELY TO BE IN THE FOLLOWING TENURE GROUPS:

► Those who belong to learn/improve skills (38%)

► Those who play/train once a week (44%)

► Those who would pay more if the club improved social activities (46%)

► Those who are primary/intermediate age (35%) or 16-19 years (46%)

► Those of Pasifika (37%) or Asian/Indian (52%) descent.

Base: All respondents who are members (n=1195)Q3. How long have/ has you/ your child been a member of <insert club from Q2a>?

32%NEW

MEMBERS

20%1-2

YEARS

30%3-5

YEARS

10%6-10

YEARS

8%MORE THAN

10 YEARS

► Those who belong to learn/improve skills (25%)

► Those of primary/intermediate age (23%).

► Those who play/train two to three times a week (31%)

► Those who would pay more for improvements to the playing/training venues (40%)

► Males (31 cf. 20% females)

► Those of primary/intermediate age (35%).

► Those who belong to play competitively (16%)

► Those who play/train four to five times a week (19%)

► Those who made a complaint in the last three months (17%)

► Those aged 13-15 years (29%) or 25-34 years (16%).

► Those who belong to play competitively (12%)

► Those who play/train two or three times a week (6%)

► Females (13% cf. 7%)► Coach/instructor

(48%).


▲ Upper Central (49%)▼ Canterbury (24%)▼ Wellington (20%)



Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

34Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

. 32%68%

NEW MEMBERS

HOW IS THE JOINING PROCESS RATED?One-third (32%) have been members of their current club for less than a year, providing attribute ratings for the joining process ranging from 53% to 67% being more than satisfied. Compared with the average for all sports in 2016/17, rugby league members are significantly more than satisfied with the ease of the joining process (67% cf. 61%) andexplaining protocols etc. (53% cf. 46%). All aspects have dropped slightly compared with rugby league 2016 (though that excluded the views of parents which tend to be lower).

2%

1%

2%

1%

3%

7%

11%

9%

28%

32%

33%

37%

28%

28%

21%

24%

39%

32%

33%

29%

Ease of the joining process(n=376)

Providing information on how tojoin (n=367)

Introducing you/ you or yourchild to key people at the clube.g. coaches, admin staff, etc

(n=367)

Explaining protocols, how toplay, use facilities, location

venues, selection, how it works,etc (n=359)


YesNo

% MORE THAN SATISFIED

TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE

ALL SPORTS2016/17

PLAYER PARENT TOTALRUGBYLEAGUE2016*

81%

63%

56%

57%

67% 72% 65%

60% 64% 59%

54% 59% 53%

53% 58% 51%

61%

55%



Base: All respondents who are members (n=1195)Q3. How long have/ has you/ your child been a member of <insert club from Q2a>?Base: All respondents who have been members for less than one year (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)Q20. Thinking about the process you/ you and your child went through when you/ your child joined your/ their Rugby League club. How satisfied are you with your/ their club on the following…

49%

46%



INJURY MANAGEMENT

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

36Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

INJURY MANAGEMENTA QUARTER HAVE BEEN INJURED IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS

Base: ugby league

Base: Q17a. ugby league

All respondents (n=1200)Q17. Have/ Has you/ your child been injured while playing or training for r in the last 12 months?

All respondents who have been injured in the last 12 months (n=325)Following the injury you/your child sustained while playing or training for r did you/ your child make an ACC claim?

A quarter (28%) of respondents/respondents’ children have been injured while playing or training in the last 12 months. This is significantly higher than the average for all sports in 2016/17 (28% cf. 21%). Players are significantly more likely to indicate they have been injured than parents indicating their children have been injured (34% cf. 11%). Two-thirds (63%) of those who were injured, made an ACC claim following their or their child’s injury.

Rugby League respondents/ respondents’ children significantly more likely to have been injured are:

Rugby League respondents/respondents’ children significantly less likely to have been injured are:

► Those who have been a member more than 10 years (45% cf. 28%)► Those who belong to a club to play competitively (40%)► Those who play/train four to five times a week (40%)► Females 42%.

► Member for less than a year (17% cf. 28%)► Those who belong to a club to learn/improve skills (20%)► Those who play/train once a week (17%)► Those of primary/intermediate age (15%)► Males (26%).

63%

37%

Yes No or can't remember

MADE AN ACC CLAIM, FOLLOWING THE INJURY

28%72%

Yes

INJURED IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS



No or can’t remember

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

37Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

INJURY MANAGEMENTTWO THIRDS ARE MORE THAN SATISFIED WITH HOW THEIR CLUB MANAGED THEIR NJURY

1%

2%

2%

3%

4%

6%

28%

30%

28%

24%

23%

23%

43%

42%

41%

Not pushing you/ them back into playingor training too soon (n=315)

Continuing to involve you/ your child inclub activities while you/ they were injured

(n=310)

Supporting you/ your child while you/ theyrecovered from an injury (n=314)


Of those who were injured in the past 12 months, rugby league respondents are significantly more than satisfied than the average for all sports in 2016/17 with the way the club managed the injury. Results have increased significantly from 2016 for support while recovering from an injury (64% cf. 45%).

% MORE THAN SATISFIED

ALL SPORTS2016/17

PLAYER

51%

59%

62%

PARENTTOTALRUGBYLEAGUE2016*

45%

65%

64%

TOTALRUGBY LEAGUE

64%

65%

68%

61%

67%

69%

68%

60%

65%

Base: Q18. Rugby League

All respondents who have been injured in the last 12 months (Excluding Don't know/can’t remember)How satisfied are you with your/ your child's club, coach, instructor or manager on the following…




/ Significantly higher/lower than Rugby League 2016

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

38Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

TIME MISSED PLAYING DUE TO INJURYONE-QUARTER OF THOSE INJURED MISSED MORE THAN A MONTH

Base:

Base: Q39.

All respondents who have been injured in the last 12 months (n=330)Q38. In the last 12 months, how much time did you/ your child have to take off from playing due to your/ their injury?

All respondents who continued to play even when injured (n=61)Why did you/ they continue to play while you/ they were injured?

A quarter of those who sustained an injury in the last 12 months (23%) have missed more than a month of rugby league. One in five (18%) of those injured continued to play following the injury, with 44% of respondents indicating that they didn’t think the injury was that bad. A third (33%) of those who did not miss any time wanted to continue playing and a quarter (23%) didn’t want to let their team down.

Rugby League respondents/respondents’ children significantly more likely to continue to play while injured are:

Rugby League respondents/respondents’ children significantly less likely to continue to play while injured are:

► Parent of player indicated their child played (26% cf. 14% player)► Detractors (31%)► Those primary/intermediate aged (35%).

► Those who have been a member more than 10 years (5% cf. 18%)► Those who are a member of a club to play competitively (8%)► Those aged 35-44 years (3%)► Coach/instructor (5%)► Played for the top team (13%).

18%

39%19%

10%

13%

TIME MISSED DUE TO INJURY

44%

33%

23%

8%

2%

26%

I/They didn’t think my/ their injury was that bad

I/They wanted to continue playing

I/They didn’t want to let the team down

I/They didn’t want to let the coach down

The coach wanted me/them to play

Other

WHY DID THEY CONTINUE TO PLAY WHILE INJURED

NoneMore than 3 months

Less than 2 weeks1 – 3 months

2 – 4 weeks




COMMUNITYINITIATIVES

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

40Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT INITIATIVESSEVEN IN TEN ARE UNSURE WHETHER THEIR CLUB RUNS ANY COMMUNITY INITIATIVES

Base: Q15.

All respondents (n=1156)Does <insert club from Q2a or Q2b> run by any community engagement initiatives?

23%

9%

68%

YesNoDon’t know

INITIATIVES RUN BY RUGBY LEAGUE CLUBSSome of the initiatives mentioned include:► Participating in community events such as Christmas parades, ANZAC parades► Support for anti-bullying and the “Family Violence - It’s Not OK” campaign► Pink breakfast (for breast cancer awareness), partnership with SWPIC (South

Waikato Pacific Island Community) for health promotions► Working with local marae► Working bees to help out with earthquake damage► Open coaching clinics/ fitness groups ► Involvement with local playgroups or play centres► Children’s holiday programmes and providing childcare at games for parents

wanting to watch their other children play► Homework centres► Hubs with other sporting codes to demonstrate rugby league/ annual open days► Various fundraising events such as discos, carwashes, gala days.

Rugby League respondents significantly more likely to indicate that their club runs community initiatives:

► Those who are both parents and players (36 cf. 23%)► Members for more than five years (43%)► Those who play/train four or five times a week (31%)► Those 35 years and older (44%)

► Māori members (26%)► Coach or instructor (42%)► Played for top team at the club (31%).

Seven in ten (68%) rugby league respondents are unsure whether their club runs community engagement initiatives or not. A quarter (23%) indicate their club does run community initiatives and one in ten (9%) indicates that their club doesn’t.

AWARENESS OF CLUB COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

INITIATIVE


DEMOGRAPHICDIFFERENCES

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

42

HOW DOES THE EXPERIENCE DIFFER BY AGE?

Almost all children aged under five years are likely to rejoin their club (97%) whereas those of secondary age (13-19) are less likely to rejoin compared to the rugby league average (72% cf. 78%). Primary/intermediate aged children (mostly their parents) are significantly less likely to recommend their club than others (NPS 47 cf. 51 average rugby league).

7366 63 63

6964

47 45

5768

8174 74

69

81

97

8072 73

84

7059

54 57

70

SATISFACTION(% more than satisfied)

NPS(% promoters less %

detractors)

VALUE FOR MONEY

(% agree or strongly agree)


(% quite likely or very likely)

JOINING PROCESS(% more than satisfied –average of 4 attributes)



THE YOUNGEST RESPONDENTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO REJOIN

Base: Q6/Q7/Q11 All Respondents (Excluding Don't know/ Can't say), Q9 Members Excluding Don’t know/Can’t say), Q20 New Members (Excluding Don't know/ Can't say)Q6 / Q7 / Q11 / Q9 / Q20 (Average of four attributes)

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

43

OLDER ADULTS (35+)SECONDARY (13-19)

KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AGE (COMPARED WITH THE TOTAL)

PRIMARY/ INTERMEDIATE (5-12)

More likely to play or train two or three times a week (82% cf. 75%)

More likely to be members to have fun (30% cf. 25%) and to learn/improve skills (41% cf. 33%)

Investment areas (if fees increased):► Player development programmes (31% cf. 27%)

Other demographic differences:► Less likely to have been injured in last 12 months (15% cf. 28%)► Male (93% cf. 88%)► European/Pakeha (45% cf. 42%) or Māori (55% cf. 52%)► Member of a club in the Auckland region (51% cf. 46%).

More likely to have moved clubs for better quality coaches or instructors (10% cf. 5%) or for better opportunities to fulfil their potential (15% cf. 7%).

More likely to play or train four or more times a week (23% cf. 11%)

More likely to belong to a club to play competitively (32% cf. 18%)

Least satisfied aspect:► Clean and well maintained facilities (26% cf. 15%)

Other demographic differences:► Represented the top team within their club or higher honours (61% cf. 45%)► Member of a club in Upper Central region (18% cf. 11%).

More likely to play/train once a week or less (31% cf. 12%)

More likely to belong to a club to socialise (15% cf. 5%)

Of the key drivers, significantly more likely to be more than satisfied with:► Friendly and welcoming (89% cf. 76%)► Clean and well maintained facilities (61% cf. 51%)► Social environment at the club (75% cf. 63%)► Fair and equal opportunities for all players (73% cf. 64%)

Other demographic differences:► Female (19% cf. 12%)► Member of a club in Canterbury (24% cf. 17%).

YOUNG ADULTS (20-34)

More likely to belong to a club to play competitively (35% cf. 18%)

Least satisfied aspect:► Qualified/experienced officials (25% cf. 14%)

Investment areas (if fees increased):► Quality of officiating (9% cf. 3%)

Other demographic differences:► Represented the top team within their club or higher honours (77% cf.

45%)► Female (30% cf. 12%)► Member of a club in Canterbury (23% cf. 17%), Wellington (11% cf. 6%) or

Rest of the South Island (7% cf. 3%).

Base: All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable)

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

44

HOW DOES THE EXPERIENCE DIFFER BY GENDER?THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MALES AND FEMALES WHEN LOOKING AT THE FIVE KEY METRICS

66 63 51 52

75 7079 77

59 61



detractors)

VALUE FORMONEY


LIKELIHOODTO REJOIN





KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MALE AND FEMALE RUGBY LEAGUE RESPONDENTS

Females are more likely to have been a member of their club for

more than 10 years (13% cf. 7%) but less likely to have been for

three to five years (20% cf. 31%).

Females are more likely to play or train six times a week or

more (4% cf. 1%).

Females are more likely to hold a role at the club including

manager (12% cf. 1%), committee member (7% cf. 2%) or official/referee/ umpire/ judge

(4% cf. 1%).

Females are more likely to have had an injury in the last 12

months (42% cf. 26%).

Female respondents are more likely to have represented their club at a regional event (22% cf. 15%), represented their club/region at a national event (28% cf. 14%) or represented New Zealand (9%

cf. 2%).

Other demographic differences:► 56% of males are primary/intermediate aged, compared to only 29% of females. Two thirds of

females players are over the age of 16 (64%) compared to 29% of males.► Those who identify as New Zealand European are significantly more likely to be male than

female (41% cf. 23%) and those who identify as Pasifika are more likely to be female than male (49% cf. 39).

Females are significantly more likely to indicate they would pay more if the club improved facilities e.g. club rooms, changing rooms (32% cf. 23%).


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

45

HOW DOES THE EXPERIENCE DIFFER BY ETHNICITY?

Respondents of Pasifika ethnicity are significantly less likely than average to be more than satisfied with their rugby league club, recommend their club, agree their club offers value for money or rejoin next season.

67 6960

66

53 53 45

42

77 7568

76 79 8074

67 6658

49

56



detractors)

VALUE FOR MONEY





*Small base



PASIFIKA RESPONDENTS ARE LEAST SATISFIED


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

46

ASIAN & INDIAN*MĀORI

KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ETHNICITIES (COMPARED WITH THE TOTAL)

EUROPEAN/PAKEHA

More likely to belong to a club to have fun (31% cf. 25%) and more likely to play or train two or three times a week (79% cf. 75%)

Areas least satisfied with:► Having well maintained playing/ training fields (14% cf. 11%)

Investment areas (if fees increased):► Management of the club (8% cf. 6%)

Other demographic differences:► Male (93% cf. 88%)► Primary/intermediate age (57% cf. 53%)► Live in Canterbury (23% cf. 16%).

More likely to belong to a club to have fun (28% cf. 25%)

More likely to play or train four or more times a week (13% cf. 11%)

Of the secondary drivers, significantly more likely to be extremely satisfied with their club engaging with the local community (30% cf. 26%)

Other demographic differences:► Played for the top team or higher representation (49% cf. 45%)► Primary/intermediate age (56% cf. 53%)► Female (15% cf. 12%)► Live in Upper North Island (29% cf. 18%) or Lower North Island (17% cf.

13%).

More likely to be new members (less than one year) (52% cf. 32%)

Investment areas (if fees increased):► Access to equipment (8% cf. 3%)

Other demographic differences:► Aged 5-10 (59% cf. 41%).

PASIFIKA

More likely to be new members (less than one year) (37% cf. 32%)

Members main reason for belonging to a club is to learn/improve skills (38% cf. 33%) and to get fit and healthy (14% cf. 9%)

Significantly less satisfied with all key drivers of experience

Other demographic differences:► Aged 13-15 (14% cf. 12%) ► Female (15% cf. 12%)► Living in Auckland (71% cf. 50%).

Base: All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable), * Small base


REGIONAL DIFFERENCES

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

48Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

RESPONDENTS IN NORTHLAND ARE MOST SATISFIEDOVERALL SATISFACTION (% more than satisfied)

CANTERBURY(n=210)

70%

OTAGO(n=11*)

91%

TASMAN(n=6**)50%

NORTHLAND(n=51)

84%

TARANAKI(n=32)72%

BAY OF PLENTY(n=24*)

58%

WELLINGTON(n=73)

67%

SOUTHLAND(n=6**)

67%

Northland outperforms all other regions with significantly higher levels of overall satisfaction (84% cf. 65%). While the sample sizes are too small to be significant, Otago (91%), West Coast (89%) and Manawatu (81%) all indicatively have high levels of satisfaction. Both Akarana and Counties Manukau club respondents are significantly less likely to be more than satisfied compared with total rugby league (58% and 57%, respectively).

Base: Q6.

All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable) To what extent are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the/ your child's overall experience of playing league at your/their club?

Note: Regions are based on the club the respondents selected in the questionnaire at Q2a/Q2b. Only regions that received responses are shown.

MANAWATU(n=26*)

81%


WAIKATO(n=60)

75%

COASTLINE(n=34)76%

HAURAKI(n=12*)

75%

*Low base (less than 30 respondents)** Very low base (less than 10 respondents)

TOTAL RUGBY LEAGUE65%

WEST COAST(n=9**)

89%

AKARANA(n=288)

58% ▼

COUNTIES MANUKAU

(n=268)

57% ▼

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

49Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

AUCKLAND RESPONDENTS ARE LESS LIKELY TO RECOMMEND THEIR CLUB

CANTERBURY(n=207)

63

OTAGO(n=11*)

100

TASMAN(n=6**)

33

NORTHLAND(n=52)

79

TARANAKI(n=33)

70


17

WELLINGTON(n=75)

55

SOUTHLAND(n=6**)

33

Respondents from clubs in Northland, Taranaki and Canterbury are significantly more likely to recommend their club to others compared with other rugby league areas, with NPS scores of 79, 70 and 63 respectively compared with the average rugby league score of 51. Similarly to satisfaction, respondents from Akarana and Counties Manukau clubs are significantly less likely to recommend their club to others (41 and 38, respectively). For those with lower sample sizes, Bay of Plenty, Southland and Tasman are indicatively less likely to recommend their club.

MANAWATU(n=25*)

76

WAIKATO(n=62)

56

COASTLINE(n=35)

60

TOTAL RUGBY LEAGUE51

NPS (% promoters minus % detractors)

Base: Q7. Rugby League

All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable) Imagine someone is interested in playing . If they asked you, how likely are you to recommend your/ your child’s club to them,

using a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is not at all likely and 10 is extremely likely?Note: Regions are based on the club the respondents selected in the questionnaire at Q2a/Q2b. Only regions that received responses are shown.

HAURAKI(n=12*)

67

WEST COAST(n=9**)

78



AKARANA(n=285)

41▼

COUNTIES MANUKAU

(n=274)

38▼

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

50Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

TARANAKI AND NORTHLAND RESPONDENTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO PERCEIVE THEIR CLUB AS VALUE FOR MONEY

CANTERBURY(n=205)

75%

OTAGO(n=10*)

80%

TASMAN(n=6**)67%

NORTHLAND(n=51)

90%

TARANAKI(n=32)94%


71%

WELLINGTON(n=73)

79%

SOUTHLAND(n=6**)

83%

Respondents from Taranaki and Northland are significantly more likely to perceive that opportunities, services and benefits they receive from their rugby league club make it well worth the money they pay compared with the average for rugby league (94% and 90% respectively cf. 74%).Respondents from Akarana and Counties Manukau clubs are significantly less likely to agree that their club offers value for money (69% and 62%).

MANAWATU(n=26*)

85%

WAIKATO(n=61)

82%

COASTLINE(n=35)

80%


VALUE FOR MONEY (% agree or strongly agree)

Base: Q11.

All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable) To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following… The opportunities, services and benefits you/ your child receive/ receives from your/

your child’s club make it well worth the money you/ they pay?Note: Regions are based on the club the respondents selected in the questionnaire at Q2a/Q2b. Only regions that received responses are shown.

HAURAKI(n=11*)

91%

WEST COAST(n=9**)

89%



AKARANA(n=284)

69% ▼

COUNTIES MANUKAU

(n=270)

62%▼

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

51Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

RETENTION IS HIGHEST IN NORTHLAND

CANTERBURY(n=203)

83%

OTAGO*(n=10)

90%

TASMAN(n=4**)50%

NORTHLAND(n=52)

96%

TARANAKI(n=33)85%


63%

WELLINGTON(n=72)

83%

SOUTHLAND (n=6**)

67%

Northland respondents are the most likely to rejoin their club next season (96% cf. 78%).Counties Manukau clubs have a significantly lower proportion who indicated that they are likely to rejoin next season (74%).

MANAWATU*(n=25)

80%

WEST COAST(n=9**)100%

WAIKATO(n=61)

72%

COASTLINE(n=33)85%


LIKELIHOOD TO REJOIN (% likely or very likely)

Base: Q9.

All members (Excluding Don't know/not applicable) How likely are/ is you/ your child to play for or rejoin <insert club from Q2a> next season?

Note: Regions are based on the club the respondents selected in the questionnaire at Q2a/Q2b. Only regions that received responses are shown.

HAURAKI(n=12*)

92%



AKARANA(n=275)

76%

COUNTIES MANUKAU

(n=271)

74%▼

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

52Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

RESPONDENTS FROM AUCKLAND ARE LESS SATISFIED ABOUT THE JOINING PROCESS

CANTERBURY(n=47-49)

64%

OTAGO(n=3**)

67%

NORTHLAND(n=19-21*)

71%

TARANAKI(n=6-7**)

75%


69%

WELLINGTON(n=11-14*)

86%

New members and parents of new members (those who have been a member for less than one year) from Wellington and Waikato are significantly more than satisfied with the joining process compared with the average for rugby league clubs (86% and 83% respectively cf. 59%).Akarana clubs are the least likely to be more than satisfied with the joining process compared with the total for rugby league (44% cf. 59%).

MANAWATU(n=9-10**)

84%

WAIKATO(n=16-17*)

83%

COASTLINE*(n=16-17*)

64%


JOINING PROCESS (% more than satisfied)

Base: All respondents who have been a member for less than one year (Excluding Don't know/not applicable) Q20. rugby league

rugby leagueThinking about the process you/ you and your child went through when you/ your child joined your/ their club.

How satisfied are you with your/ their club on the following…Note: Regions are based on the club the respondents selected in the questionnaire at Q2a/Q2b. Only regions that received responses are shown.

TASMAN(n=1**)

0%

HAURAKI(n=3**)

67%



AKARANA(n=85-91)

44% ▼

COUNTIES MANUKAU

(n=92-95)

48%

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

53Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

TOTAL Rugby League

Northland

Akarana Rugby League

Counties Manukau

Rugby League

Waikato Rugby League

Hauraki District Rugby League

Coastline Rugby League

Bay of Plenty Rugby League

Taranaki Rugby League

Manawatu Rugby League

Wellington Rugby League

Tasman Rugby League

West Coast Rugby League

Canter-bury

Rugby League

Otago Rugby League

Southland Rugby League

Base (n=) 1098-1189 45-52 278-288 258-276 48-62 10-12* 33-35 19-24* 32-33 23-26* 65-75 5-6** 6-9** 201-207 8-11** 5-6**

Being friendly and welcoming 76% 83% 68% 66% 85% 92% 91% 75% 84% 85% 83% 50% 78% 83% 100% 67%

The quality of the coaches 70% 78% 67% 62% 76% 83% 89% 67% 76% 92% 72% 50% 56% 74% 82% 67%

Is fair and provides equal opportunities for all players

64% 73% 61% 49% 68% 75% 91% 63% 78% 77% 68% 50% 78% 68% 82% 67%

The social environment at the club

63% 76% 55% 50% 79% 82% 70% 63% 78% 80% 69% 33% 78% 73% 91% 67%

Being professional and well managed 62% 69% 58% 49% 69% 58% 80% 58% 73% 77% 65% 67% 67% 66% 55% 67%

Providing the information when needed

61% 73% 55% 51% 68% 50% 77% 54% 61% 73% 68% 50% 67% 66% 78% 67%

Allowing to fulfil potential 61% 67% 56% 49% 73% 82% 71% 61% 73% 76% 65% 50% 56% 65% 73% 67%

Well maintained playing/ training venues

55% 47% 49% 46% 61% 67% 77% 43% 79% 81% 63% 50% 67% 57% 45% 67%

Clean and well maintained facilities 51% 58% 47% 43% 52% 80% 68% 36% 61% 83% 55% 20% 50% 56% 50% 40%

Significantly higher/lower than Total Rugby League/

Base: Q10a.

All respondents (Excluding Don't know/not applicable) How would you/ your child rate your/ their overall satisfaction with your/ their rugby league club on each of the following…

Note: Regions are based on the club the respondents selected in the questionnaire at Q2a/Q2b. Only regions that received responses are shown.Note: Greyed numbers are included for completeness, indicative only

SATISFACTION ACROSS REGIONS: MORE THAN SATISFIED WITH KEY DRIVERS


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

54Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

TOTALRugby League

Northland


Counties Manukau

Rugby League








Tasman Rugby League


Canter-bury

Rugby League

Otago Rugby League


Base (n=) 925-1190 40-51 223-287 224-274 46-62 7-12** 20-35* 16-24* 26-33* 18-26* 59-75 6** 5-9** 161-208 9-11** 6**

Encouraging good sportsmanship and fair play

72% 86% 67% 61% 85% 83% 86% 67% 88% 77% 79% 50% 78% 77% 91% 50%

Fostering a sense of pride in our/ their club 69% 78% 63% 58% 82% 75% 82% 61% 82% 81% 74% 50% 67% 74% 100% 67%

Providing a safe environment for adults and children

68% 74% 61% 59% 72% 67% 83% 54% 82% 81% 77% 50% 56% 73% 100% 67%

The ease of accessing the clubs venues/ fields for training or casual playing

55% 46% 50% 47% 62% 55% 73% 38% 81% 67% 60% 33% 56% 61% 45% 50%

Being responsive to my/ their needs and requirements

54% 61% 49% 42% 62% 67% 65% 48% 75% 73% 59% 50% 44% 56% 64% 50%

Engaging with the local community 53% 63% 42% 44% 71% 58% 80% 32% 65% 72% 58% 17% 56% 57% 60% 50%

Base: Q10b.



SATISFACTION ACROSS REGIONS: MORE THAN SATISFIED WITH SECONDARY DRIVERS



Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

55Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

TOTALRugby League

Northland


Counties Manukau

Rugby League








Tasman Rugby League


Canter-bury

Rugby League

Otago Rugby League


Base (n=) 925-1190 40-51 223-287 224-274 46-62 7-12** 20-35* 16-24* 26-33* 18-26* 59-75 6** 5-9** 161-208 9-11** 6**

Providing information and opportunities for coach development

47% 40% 41% 43% 49% 57% 55% 38% 65% 71% 53% 33% 40% 53% 22% 33%

Providing information about junior programmes

47% 53% 38% 40% 52% 33% 52% 43% 61% 83% 55% 40% 29% 53% 29% 33%

Making me/ them aware of the developments occurring in Rugby League across New Zealand

44% 44% 35% 39% 44% 50% 52% 55% 55% 59% 47% 50% 43% 47% 30% 50%

Providing information and opportunities for officials development

44% 33% 37% 41% 48% 38% 59% 29% 58% 67% 46% 33% 80% 47% 22% 33%

Having qualified / experienced officials available when I/ they compete

40% 30% 36% 37% 50% 18% 59% 38% 48% 63% 37% 50% 50% 37% 27% 33%

Base: Q10b.



SATISFACTION ACROSS REGIONS: MORE THAN SATISFIED WITH SECONDARY DRIVERS




SAMPLE PROFILE

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

57Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

GENDER

GENDER (Q25) TOTAL(n=1243)

PLAYER(n=506)

PARENT(n=737)

MALE 88% 80% 93%

FEMALE 12% 19% 7%

GENDER DIVERSE <1% <1% <1%

12%

88%

FEMALE

88%

12%

MALE

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

58Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

AGE AGE (Q22) TOTAL(n=1243)

PLAYER (n=506)

PARENT(n=737)

Less than 5 years 3% 1% 4%5-7 years 18% 4% 28%8-10 years 24% 9% 34%11-12 years 11% 5% 16%13 years 4% 2% 6%14 years 4% 3% 4%15 years 4% 3% 4%16 years 2% 2% 2%17 years 3% 5% 1%18 years 1% 2% <1%19 years 1% 2% -20-24 years 4% 10% <1%25-29 years 6% 15% -30-34 years 5% 11% <1%35-39 years 3% 8% -40-44 years 3% 7% 1%45-49 years 2% 6% <1%50-54 years 1% 2% <1%55-59 years 1% 2% -60-64 years <1% 1% -65-69 years <1% 1% -70-74 years <1% <1% <1%75+ years <1% <1% <1%

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

59Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

REGIONREGION (Q23) TOTAL

(n=1243)PLAYER(n=506)

PARENT(n=737)

Northland 6% 6% 5%

Auckland 50% 43% 55%

Waikato 7% 6% 8%

Bay of Plenty 5% 3% 6%

Gisborne <1% <1% <1%

Hawke's Bay <1% 1% -

Taranaki 3% 3% 3%

Manawatu 3% 5% 2%

Whanganui <1% <1% <1%Wellington-Wairarapa 6% 7% 5%

Tasman - - -

Nelson <1% 1% -

Marlborough - - -

West Coast 1% 1% 1%

Canterbury 16% 20% 13%

Otago 1% 2% -

Southland 1% 2% -

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

60Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

ETHNICITY

ETHNICITY (Q34) TOTAL(n=1243)

PLAYER(n=506)

PARENT(n=737)

NET European/Pakeha 42% 39% 44%

Māori 52% 47% 55%

NET Pasifika 40% 38% 42%

Samoan 23% 19% 27%

Cook Island 11% 12% 10%

Tongan 8% 9% 8%

Niuean 4% 3% 5%

Fijian 2% 3% 1%

NET Asian + Indian 3% 2% 3%

Chinese 1% 1% 2%

Note: Respondents can identify with more than one ethnicityNote: Only ethnicities with 1% or greater are shown

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

61Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

ROLE (Q27) TOTAL(n=1243)

PLAYER(n=506)

PARENT(n=737)

Player 94% 89% 98%

Coach 7% 16% 0%

Manager 3% 6% 0%

Committee Member 3% 7% 0%

Official/ referee/ judge 2% 3% 1%

Club President or another office holder 2% 4% 0%

MEMBERSHIP TENURE (Q3) TOTAL(n=1195)

PLAYER(n=474)

PARENT(n=721)

Less than 1 year 32% 23% 38%

1-2 years 20% 19% 21%

3-5 years 30% 28% 30%

6-10 years 10% 11% 9%

More than 10 years 8% 18% 1%

ROLE AT CLUB & MEMBERSHIP TENURE

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

62Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

COMPETITIVE LEVEL & PLAYING FREQUENCYCOMPETITIVE LEVEL (Q28) TOTAL

(n=1195)PLAYER(n=474)

PARENT(n=721)

Played for the top team at my club 33% 39% 29%

Been selected to represent my club at a regional event/ competition 15% 16% 15%

Been selected to represent my region at a national event/ competition 15% 20% 12%

Been selected to represent New Zealand at an international event/ competition 3% 6% 1%

None of these 55% 48% 60%

FREQUENCY OF PLAYING/ TRAINING (Q5)

TOTAL(n=1200)

PLAYER(n=478)

PARENT(n=722)

Less than once a week / month 2% 5% 0%

Once a week / month 10% 9% 10%

Two or three times a week / month 75% 69% 79%

Four or five times a week / month 9% 12% 8%

6 or more times a week / month 2% 2% 1%

Other 2% 4% 1%

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

63Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

RUGBY LEAGUE REGIONNZRL LEAGUE TOTAL

(n=1243)PLAYER(n=506)

PARENT(n=737)

Rugby League Northland 4% 4% 4%

Akarana Rugby League 23% 19% 26%

Counties Manukau Rugby League 22% 20% 24%

Waikato Rugby League 5% 4% 6%

Hauraki District Rugby League 1% 1% 1%

Coastline Rugby League 3% 2% 4%

Bay of Plenty Rugby League 2% 1% 2%

Gisborne Tairawhiti Rugby League - - -

Rugby League Hawkes Bay - - -

Taranaki Rugby League 3% 2% 3%

Manawatu Rugby League 2% 2% 2%

Wellington Rugby League 6% 7% 5%

Tasman Rugby League <1% 1% <1%

West Coast Rugby League 1% 1% 1%

Canterbury Rugby League 17% 22% 14%

Otago Rugby League 1% 2% <1%

Southland Rugby League <1% 1% -

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

64Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

RUGBY LEAGUE ASSOCIATIONASSOCIATION TOTAL

(n=1243)PLAYER(n=506)

PARENT(n=737)

Northland 4% 4% 4%

Auckland 46% 39% 50%

Upper Central 11% 8% 13%

Mid Central 5% 4% 5%

Wellington 6% 7% 5%

Canterbury 17% 22% 14%

Rest South Island 3% 5% 1%


BACKGROUND, OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

66Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

ABOUT THE VOP PROGRAMMEThis research is part of Sport New Zealand’s Voice-of-Participant (VOP) programme to develop and implement a cross-sport and recreation sector approach; capturing, analysing, interpreting, and using customer/ membership survey data.

The objectives of the VOP programme are to:► Empower the sport system to respond to the wants and needs of customers.► Embed processes that continually put the participant at the centre of decision making.► Improve the development and delivery of products and services that meet the needs of participants.► Complement and systematize existing participant information and the processes by which participant information is

gathered and analysed.► ‘Bring’ the voice-of-participant to the centre of the sport system (including Sport NZ).

This part of the VOP programme is for National Sports Organisations (NSOs) to survey their members (i.e. players and parents of players) to understand the participant experience with their club.

In future the programme will also roll out to cover events/ tournaments, RSTs/RSDs, TAs/ Councils, activities and even children doing sport at school.

A customer/ participant experience approach is one that looks at behaviours, attitudes and needs as they relate to specific interaction points across total engagement with a sport/ service. It is valuable to organisations with members, helping them to understand how different interactions are perceived and what is really important to get right in order to retain and grow membership.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

67Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE VOP PROGRAMMEWhile some work had previously been undertaken by Sport NZ and NSOs to create draft ‘welcome’ and ‘mid-season’ surveys, it was felt it was important to incorporate the participant’s point of view on what was most important to them and then test the reviewed surveys.

In 2015, an initial development phase was undertaken to design the survey tools i.e.

The development phase involved both qualitative and quantitative components:► Qualitative research (two online bulletin boards with 28 participants) to understand what makes a good or

bad experience and what players consider their ideal experience.► Based on the qualitative findings, Nielsen designed an online questionnaire. Nielsen then piloted the

questionnaire using three different methods of delivery, with members of four NSOs; New Zealand Football, Tennis New Zealand, Bowls New Zealand and New Zealand Rugby League.

► Subsequently, in consultation with Sport NZ and NSOs, Nielsen reviewed the survey tools and created a Survey Guide.

► VOP for NSOs was launched in winter 2016 (Football, Rugby League and Netball) and summer 2017 (Athletics, Gliding, Bowls, Waka Ama, Cricket, Golf and Touch) – results are reported as All Sports 2016/17.

Results from NSOs surveyed in winter 2017 and summer 2018 will be combined to create results for the 2017/18 year.

Design a survey that captures these elements.

Identify the most important elements of the sport experience from the

member’s perspective.

Pilot (test) the survey and the different ways of delivering

the survey to NSO members.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

68Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

METHODOLOGY OF VOP WINTER 2017

FIELDWORK

Sport NZ VOP Club Experience Survey was conducted between July 12-31, 2017.

A reminder was sent during fieldwork on 24 to 26 July.

RESULT

A total of 1,243 rugby league respondents nationwide completed the survey, consisting of 506 players and 737 parents of players/children under the age of 16. This gave a maximum margin of error of ±2.8%.

SAMPLE

New Zealand Rugby League supplied Nielsen a database, consisting of 10,589 members, along with a full list of rugby league clubs and associated districts and regions.

APPROACH

An email invitation, containing a personalized* online link to the Sport NZ VOP Club Experience Survey, was sent by Nielsen to members to invite them to complete the survey.

An open link was also supplied to New Zealand Rugby League to distribute via their own communication channels e.g. Facebook, newsletters etc.

* A personalised link was used if two or more people were attributed to the one email address. An open link was used if three or more people were attributed to the same email address and the invite encouraged them to share the survey with others.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

69Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

7 Th

e N

iels

en C

ompa

ny. C

onfid

entia

l and

pro

prie

tary

.

NOTES TO THIS REPORTSTATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCEStatistically significant differences are highlighted or commented on in this report. Where no highlighting has been used (or no commentary about a sub-group included), it may safely be assumed that differences are not statistically significant or they are not pertinent.

Statistically significant differences in this report are significant at the 95% confidence level. That is, we are 95% confident results are not just normal expected variances that result from talking to a different sample within the same population (note: the smaller the sample size, the higher the expected variance between samples and less likely that there will be statistically significant differences).

Statistical significance is reported in the following ways:

S

s

TOTALComparison with the total for ‘All Sports 2016/17’ is used. This is the total sample from 2016/17 i.e. an average of the sports that participated in winter 2016 and summer 2017.

RUGBY LEAGUE 2016Comparison with the total for ‘Rugby League 2016’ is used. Rugby League 2016 only includes players, therefore comparisons are made with Rugby League Players 2017, not Total Rugby League 2017.

ROUNDING OF FIGURESDue to rounding, the net figures provided (e.g. % ‘very satisfied’ and % ‘extremely satisfied’) and total results may differ from the numbers shown on the charts.

WEIGHTINGNo weighting was applied to these results. Please refer to the Sample Profile section to understand who responded.

/ The total Rugby League result is significantly higher / lower than the total for All Sports 2016/17

The sub-group is significantly higher / lower than the Total Rugby League 2017 /

/ The total Rugby League result is significantly higher / lower than the total for Rugby League 2016

community sport vop programme - nzrl | nzrl · overall, new zealand rugby league clubs outperform...

Documents