Interview with ITRA’s Janet Ng

German website ‘Trail Running World’ (which up unto this week I hadn’t heard of) has an interesting interview with head of ITRA Janet Ng (quotes are auto-translated, as always). If you don’t have a translation tool it’s still worth clicking through and checking to the screenshot graphics, they are in English.

A few things that stick out:

• ITRA membership is the lowest in North America compared to all other regions. –> Americans really don’t want to be part of larger global organizations.
• Germany has the fifth largest membership, even though their overall runner numbers are nowhere near the top. –> Germans love being part of organizations.

And on the opening question by Egon Theiner if the trail running world actually needs ITRA Janet responds:

In a nutshell: Yes, the scene needs ITRA. At a time when trail running is evolving and becoming more commercialized, it is essential to have an independent authority that protects the core values of the sport and ensures a balanced development. The role of ITRA is to serve and represent the sport as a whole, on behalf of runners and organizers worldwide. As a non-profit organization, we can set priorities that are in the best interests of the sport, and not just what is most commercially attractive.

There is also a fundamental structural difference between ITRA and private actors. ITRA operates through democratic governance: Elections are held every four years, members can run, present their vision and actively shape the future of sport.

Private organizations pursue other goals by definition and are primarily responsible to their shareholders. Thus, in summary: with the growth of sport, transparency and the avoidance of real or perceived conflicts of interest become increasingly important. ITRA plays a key role in ensuring this balance.

In general I agree with the notion that it’s a net positive for our sport that ITRA exists, but the organization still have a massive challenge on their plate to try to justify their existence. Their “brand” needs something that makes them relevant, currently almost every one of their offerings is also covered in some way by another entity.