STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SPORT ORGANIZATIONS: …

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Working Paper
WP-704
September, 2007

STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SPORT ORGANIZATIONS:
MAIN TRENDS IN THE ACADEMIC DISCUSSION

Sandalio Gómez

Magdalena Opazo

Carlos Martí

IESE Business School – University of Navarra
Av. Pearson, 21 – 08034 Barcelona, Spain. Phone: (+34) 93 253 42 00 Fax: (+34) 93 253 43 43
Camino del Cerro del Águila, 3 (Ctra. de Castilla, km 5,180) – 28023 Madrid, Spain. Phone: (+34) 91 357 08 09 Fax: (+34) 91 357 29 13

Copyright © 2008 IESE Business School.

IESE Business School-University of Navarra – 1

STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SPORT ORGANIZATIONS:
MAIN TRENDS IN THE ACADEMIC DISCUSSION

Sandalio Gómez1

Magdalena Opazo2

Carlos Martí2

Abstract

The relation between organizational theory and sports has usually presented sports as an
interesting field in which to illustrate organizational phenomenon. This literature review aims
to examine academic papers and research which explore the particular nature of organizational
phenomenon in sports, specifically in relation to sport organizations structure. The topic has
been commonly discussed in the context of wider organizational studies, mainly related to
organizational change, organizational performance and
structural configuration of
organizations. This means those changes that have transformed the world of sports have
affected not only the structure of sport organizations, but also the environment in which they
operate and the traditional measures to evaluate their effectiveness. By exploring the literature
we may identify future interesting niches for research on sport organizations structure as well
as the essential elements to be considered when studying organizational phenomenon in the
sport sector.

Keywords: sport organizations, structure, literature review.

1 Professor, Managing People in Organizations, IESE
2 Assistant Research, IESE

IESE Business School-University of Navarra

STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SPORT ORGANIZATIONS:
MAIN TRENDS IN THE ACADEMIC DISCUSSION1

Introduction

There exists an abundant literature on organizational structure from 1950 onwards. There is
Mintzberg’s work on typologies of organization based on different structural designs
(Mintzberg, 1979), Burns and Stalker’s types of organizational structure according to different
environmental conditions (Burns and Stalker, 1961), Child’s structuring of activities inside the
organization (Child, 1972) and Miles’s and Snow’s conception of structure based on the strategy
of the organization (Miles and Snow, 1978), among many others. The interest in studying
organizational structure resides in the relationship between organizational design and other
organizational phenomena, like performance, distribution of power, or control systems. While
there is plenty of literature on organizational structure studying different types of
organizations, little is written in books and journals on the specific field of sport organizations.

Some authors have used sports as a context for illustrating organizational phenomenon such as
organizational loyalty, performance, compensation system, escalating commitment, executive
succession, sustainable competitive advantage, and human resources, among others. Although
research on the particular nature of sport organizations and their structural characteristics is
still scarce, the article “Sport and Organizational Studies: Exploring synergies” (Wolfe et al.,
2005) presents a literature review in which they cover a broad spectrum of research studying
organizational phenomena in the context of sports.

A growing base of knowledge built on experienced-based research is expanding and validating
a research field particularly dedicated to sport phenomena. The increasing academic interest in
the world of sports can be noted in the proliferation of publications and journals looking into
sports from a diversity of disciplines (e.g., history, medicine, psychology, economics, sociology,
management), all of which are expanding the knowledge as well as the future opportunities for
research and publications on sport related topics. Today, sports present an interesting research
field for academics, especially because of the increasing relevance that sports have gained in
social life, the various changes experienced by the sport sector, and the still relatively easy data
collection opportunities in this field.

1 This paper was presented at the 14th EASM Congress organized by the European Association of Sport Management
in Nicosia, Cyprus at Intercollege on September 2006.

IESE Business School-University of Navarra

Most of the research on sport organizations structure has been developed by Trevor Slack and
other Canadian academics. In his book on sport organizations, Slack gives the following
definition of sport organizations describing their particular nature: “A sport organization is a
social entity involved in the sport industry; it is goal-directed, with a consciously structured
activity system and a relatively identifiable boundary” (Slack, 1997, p. 5). Though their
peculiarities can be attributed to the context in which they operate, it is still a broad definition,
allowing many different types of organizations involved in the world of sports to be considered
sport organizations: public, private and voluntary organizations; for-profit and non-profit
organizations; organizations producing sporting goods, delivering sport activities, creating
competitive sport opportunities, and broadcasting sport events; as well as many other
organizations connected in one way or another to the sport industry. Therefore, the first
question arising when studying sport organizations refers to which type of sport organization
are we talking about and what different types can be characterized under this broad concept of
sport organizations.

The structural characteristics of an organization are, more often than not, examined in the
context of wider organizational studies. The relationship between the structure of the organization
to its performance, effectiveness, control system, adaptability, and to the motivation of its
members (Hinings et al., 1980) explains the common use of other organizational topics when
discussing organizational structure. Since this relationship characterizes traditional organizational
studies it may also be likely to characterize research on sport organizations. Hence there is a need
to clarify the theoretical background in which the discussion on sport organizations takes place.

The economic transformations, the evolution of telecommunications (Stern, 1979) and the
peculiarities of the political system (Amara et al., 2005) have had an impact on both sports and,
certainly, sport organizations. Changes in the global context within which sports operate affect
the internal functioning of the system, their dependence on external resources, the appearance
of new communication channels and the support given by the public system. These are all
factors that determine the particular characteristics of the context in which sport organizations
are operating. The question arising therefore refers to which are the most important contextual
elements influencing sport organizations’ structure or, in other words, which contextual
elements are being considered the most important within the existing research exploring sport
organizations.

The CSBM – IESE Business School2 is developing a wider research project regarding the
structural characteristics of sport organizations in Spain. In order to correctly address this
project we first need to know what other authors have written about sport organizations
structure, what kind of sport organizations they have studied, within what theoretical
background they have contextualized the discussion on sport organizational structure, and
which variables they have considered relevant when discussing sport organizational structure.
The answering of these questions may lead us to identify the state of scholarly knowledge on
sport organizations’ structure, as well as uncover interesting niches for our research and other
future work in this field.

2 Center for Sport Business Management (CSBM) – IESE Business School, University of Navarra.

2 – IESE Business School-University of Navarra

Literature Reviewed

In a literature review the collection of data refers to the selection of articles that are going to be
analyzed. This literature review considered those articles discussing both structure and sport
organizations at the same time. Slack (1997, p. 6) defines the structure of a sport organization
as “…the manner in which the tasks of a sport organization are broken down and allocated to
employees or volunteers, the reporting relationships among these role holders, and the
coordinating and controlling mechanisms used within the sport organization.” Using this
definition, the structure of an organization refers both to the structural design of the
organization (differentiation) and to the relationship among actors (coordination and control),
which can be associated to the formal structure and the informal structure of an organization.

If sport organizations are to be considered as all those organizations operating in the sport
industry, we can include a wide variety of organizations with different goals and means. For
the purposes of this literature review, we are particularly interested in those sport organizations
dedicated to the promotion and development of sports. This means that we only considered
articles discussing sport organizations oriented towards these final goals and, hence, most
federations, national associations, sport
like
commonly associated
departments, leagues and clubs.

to organizations

The number of articles to be analyzed in a literature review depends on the topic under study
and on the resources of the reviewer. Taken that the literature related to research of sport
organizations is still scarce, it was important to use multiple sources of information. This
review is based on primary and secondary sources (Cooper, 1989), looking not only into
journals directly discussing sport management topics, but also journals from other disciplines
exploring the issue of sport organizations’ structure, as the former journals were established too
recently to cover all relevant discussion on the topic.

Our primary sources of information consist of journals directly associated to sport management
to which we had electronic access, like the Journal of Sport Management and Sport
Management Review. Moreover, we searched through electronic databases of academic articles
looking for all articles discussing sport organizations and structure at the same time. After this
first review we used a secondary source of information, checking the reference lists of those
articles already selected from the primary sources of information. The use of these two sources
of information allowed us to have a sample of articles from a variety of journals and disciplines
(e.g., management, organizational studies, leisure, sociology, and economics).3

The use of the secondary sources of information increases the risk of over-representing the
work of some authors more than others, because the bibliography used by one author is
associated to his primary network of journals (Cooper, 1989). In order to reduce this limitation
we continued the search process until it became circular, which means that we stopped the data
collection process when the reviewing process brought us back to previously revised articles.

The articles selected cover the period from 1975 to 2006. This is mainly because, until the mid-
1970’s, sport management textbooks were centered on administrative principles in physical
education and athletics, and essentially ignored management analysis and organization theory
(Doherty, 1998; Paton, 1987). Therefore, since we in our study of structural characteristics of

3 We searched and selected only articles in English because it is the language commonly used in academic journals,
as well as being a language in which the authors are fluent.

IESE Business School-University of Navarra – 3

sport organizations are more interested in sport organizations structure in its relation to
management analysis and organizational theory than in administrative principles, we have only
considered as relevant to our sample articles from the mid-1970’s onwards.

The final sample included fifty-five articles published during the last thirty-five years, which
we considered to be an important representation of the relevant articles discussing sport
organizations structure. Once we had all the articles, a matrix was created in order to analyze
and compare the information they contained. The matrix consisted of some dimensions and
variables that we considered interesting and that would allow us to determine the main trends
in the discussion of the structural characteristics of sport organizations. Among the variables
considered were the theoretical perspectives used, methodology employed, and type of analysis,
country, sports studied, type of publications, main results of the research, and type of sport
organizations considered.

Based on these dimensions we organized our results into three main areas that may be useful
for understanding the state of scholarly knowledge on the topic of sport organizations’
structure, and that may also be interesting for future research on the field. The three areas were:
1) type of sport organizations studied; 2) the theoretical perspectives from organizational theory
most commonly used to discuss sport organizations’ structure, and 3) the most relevant
contextual elements considered when discussing sport organizations’ structure.

Academic Discussion on Sport Organizations’ Structure

Types of Sport Organizations

The discussion around the structural characteristics of sport organizations has considered various
kinds of organizations among those existing in the world of sports; however most of them can be
classified as dedicated to the promotion and development of sports, e.g., federations, national
associations, leagues, clubs or local departments of sporting bodies. All these sport organizations
are associated to sport activity and, though differing in their goals and means, they all respond to
the superior mission of promoting and developing sports in society. The differences we identify
between them suggest a possible classification into three types: sport governing bodies, sport
event organizations and sport providing entities. The first one refers to those sport organizations
administering and regulating sports, focusing on its development at all levels, and guaranteeing
the rules both of the game and of the competition; the second one refers to those sport
organizations responsible for the production of a competition system aimed to satisfy and
articulate the needs of professional sports; and the third type includes those organizations
producing and delivering recreational or competitive sport programs at a local or community
level. The following table summarizes the main characteristics of these three types of sport
organizations involved in the promotion and development of sports.

The articles reviewed include discussions about these three types of sport organizations, although
the frequency with which each type has been studied differs significantly. Most of the research
discussing sport organizations’ structure refers to sport governing bodies (80%). This type of sport
organization forms part of the international structure of sport governance. This means that their
goals and structure are similar across countries, thus allowing the possibility of generalizing
research findings. In contrast, little research exists on sport providing entities (19%) (sport
organizations delivering sport programs), and almost none on sport event organizations (1%)
(sport organizations producing competition events).

4 – IESE Business School-University of Navarra

Mission

Goal

Table 1
Classification of Sport Organizations related to the Promotion and Development of Sports

Sport governing bodies

Sport providing entities

Sport spectacle organizations

Promote sports at all levels in a
given territory and sport
discipline.

Govern the sport, ensuring its
promotion and development at all
levels, monitor the administration
of sport, guarantee the
organization of regular
competitions as well as the
respect for the rules of fair play.

To satisfy a community’s
motivation to practice
physical activity and
socializing through sport
activities.

Design and offer sport
activities, both at a
recreational and competitive
level, and at individual and
team programs, oriented
towards official competitions
in order to achieve sporting
success and social
integration.

Deliver sport programs.

Clubs, community centres,
fitness centres, university
sport programs.

Represent, promote and
safeguard the interests of all
actors participating in the
competitions they produce.

Design a regular competition
system ensuring the contest
among rival teams or
individuals in a given sport
discipline and under the
same ethic codes.

Generate competition
opportunities.

Leagues, associations,
circuits, tours.

Main activity Govern one or more sport
discipline.

Examples

National Associations,
Federations, National
Organizations, Olympic
associations/committees.

Source: Authors.

Sport governing bodies are sport organizations whose primary goal is to promote and develop
sports at all levels in a given territory and sport discipline. This entails control and supervision of
a sport, guaranteeing periodic competition at national and international levels, amateur and
professional, and from grassroots to senior categories. It moreover encompasses the administration
of the sport and definition of the rules of the game, as well as protection of the values of sports
promoted by the Olympic Movement. Research related to this type of sport organization tends to
discuss the challenges faced by the need to professionalize both entities and their outcomes.

Another type of sport organization is the one whose main activity is associated to the
production of sport spectacles (e.g., leagues, circuits, tours). The operations and activities of
these organizations are subordinated to the venue and rules of sport governing bodies, as well
as of professional teams. The main activity of these sport organizations is to design a
competition system articulating the interests of all the actors in order to create an attractive
sport event. Sport events present a major source for developing commercial activity, giving
these sport organizations the opportunity of exploiting the relationship between the sports
sector and the entertainment sector through commercial activities like, for example, ticketing,
broadcasting rights, licensing, merchandising, publicity, and sponsorship. In the articles
reviewed related to this type of sport organization the discussion of the structural
characteristics of sport organizations may refer to the structure of the competition (Cairns,
1987) as well as to the structure of the community of actors involved in the competition (Slack
and Cousens, 2005).

The third type of sport organization in the classification is the one we call the sport providing
entity, whose main activity is to design and deliver sport programs for a given community such
as clubs, local sport programs, fitness centers, and university sport programs. These are private,
non-profit associations, dedicated to the provision of recreational sport activities at a local
level. The research related to organizational structure of this type of sport organization have

IESE Business School-University of Navarra – 5

focused on two dimensions of structure, namely the administrative system (De Knop et al.,
2004; Fahlén, 2005, 2006; Hoye, 2004; Hoye and Cuskelly, 2003; Ørnulf, 2002, 2004;
Papadimitriou, 2002; Westby and Sack, 1976) and the membership system (Hall, 1983).

The discussion on sport organizations’ structure has centered on these three types of sport
organizations which differ not only in their goals, level of operation and main activity, but also
in names and type of entities representing them in each country. Real life entities and
institutions may not have such clear limits as the ones we have outlined in our classification
table. Nevertheless these three ideal types allow us to compare the research under study, by
looking into the different scenarios within which the discussion on sport organizations’
structure has taken place for these three different ways of promoting and developing sports.

Sport governing bodies can refer to a national or an international level, but the fact that both
of these levels are part of the international structure of promotion and development of sports
means that all sport governing bodies are connected to the International Olympic Committee’s
norms and regulations. The bond between sport governing bodies at a national level and the
international structure of promotion and development of sports gives the opportunity to
generalize or replicate results. Whereas sport governing bodies from different countries may
display a large number of similarities, sport providing entities and sport event producers depend
on the basic unit of promotion and development of sports defined at a national level, and hence
differ more radically from country to country.

Figure 1
Relationship between sport governing bodies at national and international level

Organizing Committees for
the Olympic Games

National sport governing
bodies

Media

International Sports
Federations

IOC
(International
Olympic
Committee)

National Olympic
Committees

Athletes, Judges/Referees,
Coaches and other Sports
Technicians

Source: www.olympic.org

TOP Partners, Local
Sponsors and Suppliers

Although there are common patterns between sport governing bodies at a national level, the
particular sport system defined in each country establishes some differences for those sport
organizations providing sport programs and sport spectacles. This means that, while in one
country the sport system promotes and develops sports through the educational system, there are
others using local sport services or private associations for the same purposes, and that, while the
most popular sport in a country has probably achieved a complex structure for its promotion and
development through a variety of institution, other sports in the same country are promoted

6 – IESE Business School-University of Navarra