While the Badminton Korea Association is causing a stir due to the “National Team Coach-Coach’s Resistance to Unemployment,” suspicions of unfairness were found to be true during the re-employment evaluation process. According to the “Answer to Objection” obtained by Sports Chosun on the 19th, the association actually admitted the unfair evaluation, such as entrusting the selection of external evaluation members to Chairman Kim Taek-kyu and distorting the recommendation of the Korea Sports Council’s leader evaluation method.
The response to the objection was a response from the association to the objection filed by Kim Hak-kyun, the head coach of the national team, and two coaches. Coach Kim and others recently went head-to-head, protesting against the association’s decision to not be re-appointed through performance evaluation, citing violations of guidelines and unfairness.
The association said in its response that three of the five evaluation committee members, excluding two internal members of the performance improvement committee, were appointed to Chairman Kim. The three outsiders appointed by the chairman had competed with coach Kim in the past in open recruitment of national team leaders, or were people who usually feud with him and his aides.
Chairman Kim has been shifting the blame to the coaching staff of the national team since the “Ahn Se-young’s decision-making speech scandal.” In particular, he was asked to dismiss him after being criticized for poor administration, breach of trust, and embezzlement by the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Sports, and is being investigated by the police. Rather, it is enough to cause suspicions of unfairness in that the chairman, who is supposed to be evaluated, exercised his full power to select members who evaluate others. 먹튀검증
The association also disclosed the evaluation guidelines, saying, “In September and November, it is unfair to pass the official document of the guidelines for re-employment of leaders of the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism-Korea Sports Council to “consider the results of major international competitions” and to include an unscheduled qualitative evaluation based on the example of the re-employment evaluation table notified by the sports council in 2020,” without responding to Kim’s objection.
The self-modified evaluation guidelines by the association were also full of suspicions. Examples of the evaluation table recommended by the association allocated “30 points for performance + 20 points for performance improvement + 30 points for leadership + 20 points for coaching behavior”. Coaching behavior, which evaluates ethics and communication with players, is a qualitative factor, and the remaining quantitative evaluation is 80 points.
The association, on the other hand, made the guidelines with 25 points for performance + 25 points for performance improvement + 15 points for leadership + 10 points for communication + 10 points for participation in international competitions + 15 points for interview evaluation, transforming “supervision capability” into a subjective evaluation item and setting the system to 50 points for quantitative evaluation + 50 points for qualitative evaluation. In particular, 15 points were allocated by establishing an interview evaluation that was not included in the guidelines of the sports association. Considering that the cut line for reappointment is 80 points, this is a critical score. The interview was conducted by the evaluation committee members appointed by Chairman Kim.
The association said in its response, “There are no related regulations because it is the first time to evaluate a leader’s performance. However, the committee and the chairman decided on an evaluation committee member by referring to the procedures they had done when appointing a leader,” acknowledging that the reappointment evaluation was conducted in a hasty manner.
“All amateur sports have strategic events for each part. However, the association applied the average score of all coaches to the coach in quantitative evaluation, putting him at a disadvantage,” Kim said. “How can we accept the unfair evaluation situation as it is revealed everywhere?”
