Sport Management

Sport management as a concept is rather complex and debated. There are still discussions of whether it is just management or is it a separate scientific field within management and leadership studies (see Stewart and Smith, 1999; Smith & Stewart, 2010). Sport management has a long history. It was already needed in the ancient Greece when arranging the Olympics, but as a scientific discipline sport management is rather young. It was defined as a field of research in the mid-1980s (Costa, 2005). However, no extensive research has been done to discover the academic roots, or to find answers on fundamental questions as: how old is the discipline, what is the status of the discipline, what is the direction of the discipline or what is the relation of quality and quantity in research. (Costa, 2005) The young age of the discipline can be perceived as an advancing but also as a hindering actor. On one hand, the base and the future of the field can be actively influenced but on the other hand the field has some typical identity challenges, even on the level of challenging the existence of sport management as a discipline (Chalip, 2006). In general, it is unclear what is the added value sport context gives to leadership studies and how leadership and management studies in sport context increase understanding about leadership and organizations. (Laakso, 2016, 24)

Researchers offer their own, different perceptions of the definition and boundaries of the discipline.

As sport management is a hybrid of sport and management, the impact of these two disciplines is visible in the diverse definitions of researchers. (Chalip, 2006). There are two main scholars defining what sport management is. The other argues that sport management is just managing sports, whereas the other that sport management is management in all of the sport. As sport

management is a young discipline the definition will evolve and change during time as the research deepens and the discipline expands. (Pitts, 2001, 3) Costa (2005, 117-118) argues that the

fundamental questions defining the discipline, and which are also the ones dividing researchers’

opinions are: “What is unique about the field of sport management, what sets it apart from other academic disciplines? and “What justifies the development of sport management as a distinct discipline? Moreover, Pitts (2001) raises two other fundamental questions that have no general agreement within the discipline: How is sport management defined? How is the definition used and applied? Even though sport management has challenges with evolving as a discipline, sport and leisure is one of the fastest growing fields in the world (Gillentine, Crow & Harris, 2009). This has increased and still is increasing the need for wider and deeper sport management research.

Defining the effects of context is central when discussing sport management from leadership and management perspective. Does sport influence the nature of leadership and management, and if so, how? Does sport management differ from other fields of management and leadership? According to researchers (Aalto-Nevalainen, 2018; Nenonen, 2013; Slack, 1998) leadership and management are culture and context related, which argues sport having an effect. However, it is still not empirically proven or defined what the exact effect or effects are sport has on leadership and management (Slack, 1998; Costa, 2005). In this study the fundamental thought is that leadership and

management is dependent on the context (Seeck, 2008, 18, 326). Sport has its own institutional culture, values, norms, practices, and game specific characteristics that are discussed earlier in this paper. These characteristics offer a unique environment for this career & leadership study about women, which justifies research on this field (Laakso, 2016, 12).

The methodological tradition of sport management is mainly based on quantitative research (Edwards & Skinner, 2009, 3-5). This has increased the need for wider use of research methods in order to expand and deepen the knowledge within the discipline. One reason for a rather narrow use of research methods may be institutional pressure that steers researchers towards quantitative methods to gain and maintain academic appreciation (Edwards & Skinner, 2009, 3-5). Many of the central researchers within the discipline demand for variety of approaches in research for the knowledge to grow and expand in sport management (Edwards & Skinner, 2009, 3-5; Amis & Silk, 2005; Olafson, 1990). Slack (1996) and Olafson (1990) argue for more qualitative and empiric research as the discipline is lacking in deeper, qualitative knowledge. This research answers on its part to the need for variation in the methodological approaches and brings new deeper knowledge into the discipline.

3.1.1 Leadership & Management

Definitions of leadership are varied and there are no generally agreed definitions of the concepts in the leadership and management literature. However, many similarities can be found in definitions.

Bass (1990, 20) defines leadership as “interaction among members of a group that initiates and maintains improved expectations and the competence of the group to solve problems or to attain goals”. Honkanen (2006, 185-186) outlines leadership consisting of two main tasks: (1) setting goals and organizing tasks and (2) facilitating people to accomplish the tasks designed to them.

Northouse (2010, 3) argues that no matter how leadership is defined, the following components are always included: (1) leadership is a process, (2) leadership involves influence, (3) leadership emerges when in groups and (4) leadership involves a specific common goal. According to these components Northouse (2010, 3) defines leadership as a “process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal”. As seen in these definitions, leadership has always two actors, the leader and the followers. Thus, leadership is more of a relationship between the leader and the followers than an individual attribute of the leader. Leadership is often described as a service occupation and as a meaning maker (Juuti, 2006). Leadership provides a perspective and guidance that steers the actions of employees (Lämsä & Hautala, 2005, 206). Without leadership the employees would act coincidentally. A leader is needed for the organization to function rationally and controlled.

In literature the concepts of management and leadership are often distinguished. Management is managing and administrating things whereas leadership is related to leading people. The

fundamental difference between the two concepts is that leadership is about diverse interaction process between the leader and followers that focuses on human action, cooperation and processes, whereas management is about controlling and decision making related to functions, action

processes and structures. (Kotter, 1990, 4-5; Mattila, 2007, 222-223; Northouse, 2010, 10; Reynolds

& Warfield, 2010)

Leadership and management are culture- and context-bound. Leadership styles are closely related to the operational environment and culture in which leadership takes place. The effects of this bond are two-way: leaders are affecting their leadership environment but simultaneously they are under the influence of the environment. (Nivala, 2006) As argued earlier, context and culture are central when leading sport. These are given weight in practical actions and in research. In this research the football context and culture are closely bound as the operational environment of the two case organizations. The research shows how the specific characteristics of football influence leaders and leadership in football organizations.