If there is one emerging theme among cricketing powerbrokers at the moment, it's improving "corporate governance".

For most cricket supporters, even junkies, it sounds boring. But while it may seem to have little to do with Ricky Ponting's suddenly suspect pull shot or whether fast bowler Mitchell Johnson can lock in his radar, modernising the corporate structure of cricket has an important role to play in the long-term prosperity of the game, at grassroots and elite levels.

Amid recent changes to Australia's domestic one-day tournament this summer, and the countdown to the Ashes, what was lost was Cricket Australia's declaration it could soon change a constitution it has endorsed for more than a century.

This plan was discussed in great detail during this month's week-long cricketing summit in Melbourne, with CA chief executive James Sutherland later confirming a review was under way.

"There's a whole range of reasons why the board has chosen to implement a review of the governance of CA," Sutherland says.

"Certainly one of the things we talked about quite often (at the conference) was the importance of cricket ensuring that we had the interests of the whole Australian community represented throughout cricket, from the board to volunteer level.

"It is something the board wants to get into with some haste, there is some work that needs to be done between now and the next (board) meeting to see how it is to take place. There are numerous moves afoot in various sports for them to be changing their governance model, and one of the considerations for us will be to benchmark world's best practice."

The CA board has run fairly smoothly in recent times, with the "bigger picture" of more concern than state-based interests that dominated discussions for most of last century

But there's now a feeling in some circles it needs to have greater independence from its state-based representatives and become more dynamic and encompass a wider variety of corporate voices, although the current 13-man board does feature a range of astute political, corporate and cricketing backgrounds.

When looking to change, cricket could do worse than follow the AFL. When the then VFL was run by clubs interested only in their own agendas, the sport found itself essentially bankrupt by the mid 1980s. Since the independent commission was introduced, it has become the most dominant competition in the country.

Its ability to lay a path for future prosperity, for instance, was again highlighted with the decision to introduce two new clubs - Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney.

As CA looks to introduce more teams - make that franchises - into the domestic Twenty20 competition from next year, similar foresight, guidance and experience will be needed.

CA could introduce a similar structure to the AFL, although BackPageLead believes there is strong support to allow each state to retain a representative on the board but now add a handful of independent commissioners.

As it stands, there are 13 on the board plus chairman Jack Clarke. Traditional heavyweights Victoria and NSW have three representatives, Western Australia, South Australia and Queensland have two each while Tasmania still has only the one.

Another major move could be the permanent inclusion of a woman - something the board has never featured. With the sport trying to attract more girls and women - Twenty20 is doing just that - a female perspective would almost certainly be beneficial.

The corporate world is littered with female corporate heavyweights. Making a pitch for someone like businesswoman Janet Holmes a Court or South African-born Westpac boss Gail Kelly should be an imperative.  The Coalition's deputy leader Julie Bishop, for instance, sits on the board of the West Coast Eagles.

The England and Wales Cricket Board has led the way by appointing two women, while the cricketing boards of Western Australia, South Australia, Victoria, NSW and Tasmania all have female voices.

"Each state has their own constitution which sets out how they will appoint directors to sit on the CA board," Sutherland says.

"What I'm talking about in terms of a review of the governance of CA, it is ultimately a matter for the six-member state associations to consider in due course."

Improving corporate governance is also the topic of discussion at higher levels, with the International Cricket Council under pressure to reform. New deputy president Alan Isaac, the man who replaced John Howard as Australasia's nomination, is a master in this area.

It's hoped he can somehow change the selfish motives of many of the countries that make up the sport's executive board, although, as players union boss Tim May recently said, that's unlikely to happen until an independent commission is introduced.

"No one likes giving up power," May said.

For the long-term health and security of a sport that has had its traditional support eroded in some countries, it's hoped the game's greater good is the driving force.