From values to standards: FIS puts sports integrity at the heart of education

When FIS talks about education, it is not only talking about courses, certificates or career pathways. It is talking about culture. 

That is what stands out most clearly in the way Cornelia Blank, FIS Senior Manager for Education, describes the organisation’s new Comprehensive Education Strategy and the ongoing reorganisation of key learning pathways across snow sports. For her and her team, sports integrity is not a separate chapter or an additional requirement layered on afterwards. It sits at the centre of the whole project.

Inside FIS caught up with Cornelia on the back of two connected launches - FIS' first Comprehensive Education Strategy and the new FIS Technical Officials Guidelines - both designed to raise standards across the global snow sports ecosystem, while strengthening key integrity pillars such as clean sport, safeguarding, ethical conduct, accessibility and inclusivity.

Inside FIS: Starting with the new Technical Officials Guidelines, how would you explain to a layperson what technical officials do, and what’s new in these guidelines from a sports integrity point of view?

Cornelia Blank (CB): Technical officials are essentially the sport’s “rule keepers.” Across disciplines, the most common roles are Technical Delegates (who help ensure rules are followed and events are run safely) and judges (for example, scoring in Ski Jumping or Aerials). Some disciplines also use other roles like homologation inspectors, equipment controllers, chiefs of competition, and in Para snow sports, classifiers who place athletes into the correct classification categories.

Until now, each discipline more or less ran its education and licensing pathway in its own way. The big change is that we’ve created a more consistent pathway across disciplines, so the route to becoming a TD or judge is clearer and more aligned - including for Para roles. 

Integrity is now built into this pathway via a dedicated sports integrity module, developed alongside [FIS Integrity Director] Sarah Fussek and her team, covering safe sport and fair sport themes.

Inside FIS: What’s the main change to the pathway - and why was it needed?

CB: Previously, an NSA (National Ski Association) nominated someone, they became a candidate, attended training, and could become licensed - but candidates arrive with very different backgrounds depending on the NSA and its national education system. That meant groups were often mixed: very experienced people and complete beginners in the same room.

That makes it difficult to serve both groups properly - novice candidates can feel overwhelmed, and experienced people can feel held back. We’ve added an e-learning “applicant phase” before people attend in-person seminars. It helps ensure everyone arrives with similar foundations, which makes learning more effective and supports consistency.

Inside FIS: How does the applicant phase support developing nations in practice?

CB: The applicant phase gives people time - around three months - and a structured runway to get up to speed. We’re also using our e-learning platform Moodle more actively, including forums and exchange spaces, so people can ask questions and get help - including from discipline education coordinators.

For well-established systems, someone may complete the phase quickly. For less developed systems, it gives real space to learn the basics and bridge gaps.

Inside FIS: You mentioned a code of conduct - what’s new there, and what changes operationally?

CB: Some disciplines had their own code of conduct, but there was no consistent, overarching technical officials’ code of conduct across FIS. Now there is.

That matters because it creates a clear baseline: if an official behaves in a way that doesn’t align with expectations, FIS has something concrete to refer to — and it creates the ability, if issues persist, to take meaningful action - including the possibility of withdrawing a license, which wasn’t really workable in the same way before.

Inside FIS: So the practical impact is “safer sport”?

CB: Yes - safer, more transparent, and more professional. And it’s not just about extreme cases. It’s also about basic standards of conduct: how people speak to each other, how conflict is handled, and how people represent FIS in public environments.

When you talk about integrity, some people instantly associate it with harassment, but integrity is much broader. It includes physical, verbal and psychological harm, and also the day-to-day behaviours that create - or damage - safe environments. As [international safeguarding expert] Marcella Leonard MBE said recently, most people are not aware of the impact of what they’re doing, the issue is that they lack awareness.

Education isn’t only about technical knowledge; it’s also about behaviour, awareness and culture. And it’s the same principle for everyone in snow sports: coaches, officials, organisers and athletes - everybody needs to be able to work respectfully and communicate on a professional level.

Inside FIS: How do you ensure education content is accessible and usable across languages and cultures?

CB: Accessibility is central - including making content readable and understandable. Language matters a lot, and we need to avoid overly complex text. We also want things to be consistent and fair across stakeholders. There are tools that can help (including AI for readability), but the intent is bigger than a tool: it’s designing education so people can actually use it.

Inside FIS: One last question, do you think sports integrity education lands better when you frame it from a performance rather than a punishment perspective?

CB: Yes! If people start a session expecting a generic anti-abuse message, they might switch off - or assume it doesn’t apply to them. But when you talk about real situations - communication, boundaries, awareness, what respectful behaviour looks like under pressure - it becomes more meaningful and learners are more likely to change practice.

Developments like the “rule of two” being used across many federations - with coaches or officials not being alone with an athlete - are a practical safeguard which protects both athletes and adults in roles of responsibility.