SUCCESS OF SPORTS ORGANIZATIONS AND CORRELATION WITH EFFICIENCY AND LEADERSHIP STYLE

ÉXITO DE LAS ORGANIZACIONES DEPORTIVAS Y CORRELACIÓN CON EFICIENCIA Y ESTILO DE LIDERAZGO

ABSTRACT

Objective:

The objective of this research is to determine how managers evaluate the success of sports organizations.

Methods:

A system of a total of 119 variables (9 variables of the structure of sports organizations, 7 variables of the management structure of sports organizations, 3 variables of the performance of sports organizations, 45 variables of leadership styles and 55 variables of organizational effectiveness) was applied to a sample of 175 respondents aged 19-66. In the research, we used multiple regression analysis.

Results:

It was found that there is a statistically significant influence of the management of sports organizations on predicting the success of sports organizations, while organizational effectiveness and leadership styles do not have a significant impact.

Conclusion:

The success of sports organizations can be predicted based on the characteristics of the management of sports organizations. Level of Evidence II; Therapeutic Studies - Examination of Results.

Keywords:
Leadership; Knowledge Management; Sports; Organizational Objectives

Resumen

Objetivo:

El objetivo de esta investigación es determinar cómo los directivos evalúan el éxito de las organizaciones deportivas.

Métodos:

Sistema de un total de 119 variables (9 variables de estructura de organizaciones deportivas, 7 variables de estructura de gestión de organizaciones deportivas, 3 variables de desempeño de organizaciones deportivas, 45 variables de estilos de liderazgo y 55 variables de eficacia organizacional) se aplicó a una muestra de 175 encuestados de entre 19 y 66 años. En la investigación, utilizamos análisis de regresión múltiple.

Resultados:

Se encontró que existe una influencia estadísticamente significativa de la gestión de las organizaciones deportivas en la predicción del éxito de las organizaciones deportivas, mientras que la eficacia organizacional y los estilos de liderazgo no tienen una influencia significativa.

Conclusiõn:

El éxito de las organizaciones deportivas se puede predecir en base a las características de la gestión de las Organizaciones deportivas. Nivel de Evidencia II; Estudios Terapéuticos - Examen de los Resultados.

Descriptores:
Liderazgo; Gestión del Conocimiento; Deportes; Objetivos Organizacionales

RESUMO

Objetivo:

O objetivo desta pesquisa é determinar como os gerentes avaliam o sucesso das organizações esportivas.

Métodos:

Um sistema com um total de 119 variáveis (9 variáveis da estrutura das organizações desportivas, 7 variáveis da estrutura de gestão das organizações desportivas, 3 variáveis do desempenho das organizações desportivas, 45 variáveis dos estilos de liderança e 55 variáveis da eficácia organizacional) foi aplicado a uma amostra de 175 entrevistados com idades entre 19 e 66 anos. Na pesquisa, utilizamos a análise de regressão múltipla.

Resultados:

Verificou-se que existe uma influência estatisticamente significativa da gestão das organizações desportivas na previsão do sucesso das organizações desportivas, enquanto a eficácia organizacional e os estilos de liderança não têm influência significativa.

Conclusão:

O sucesso das organizações esportivas pode ser previsto com base nas características da gestão das organizações esportivas. Nível de Evidencia II; Estudios Terapêuticos – Investigação dos Resultados.

Descritores:
Liderança; Gestão do Conhecimento; Esportes; Objetivos Organizacionais

INTRODUCTION

Management in sport is one of the most significant¹ and at the same time the most complex activities,² which ensures that sports training, business management, as well as organizational and structural technologies are implemented in the most rational, economical and efficient way.³ Without a sports organization, management cannot provide its functional content, and vice versa, without management, a sports organization does not have the integral, i.e. optimal power for its operation and development.⁴

Sports management improves sports development,⁵ plans general activities in the area of sport,⁶ organizes resources, processes and functions, and implements human resources development policy.⁷

Management of sports organizations and its national impact are significant issues facing sports organizations internationally.⁸ Sports organizations are increasingly shifting away from the use of volunteer-based models and structures; more formal, sophisticated structures are being adopted that have proven to be more effective.⁹ The effect of management on leadership in sports organizations has become increasingly evident over time,¹⁰ highlighting advantages of engaging paid managers in the decision-making process as opposed to volunteer work.¹¹,¹² This remains a topic of research that prevails in sports management, as the complexity of shared leadership continues to evolve.

Organizational efficiency (OE) has been one of the most extensively researched issues since the beginning of the development of organizational theory.¹³ Despite a certain level of agreement, there is still a considerable lack of consensus on the definition and operationalization of this concept.¹⁴,¹⁵ As a more recent area of research, OE relies on these volatile foundations for building performance measurement models. The aim of this paper is to bridge the gap between OE models developed in the field of organizational theory and performance measurement models found in the management literature.¹⁶,¹⁷ This paper contributes to the literature on performance measurement by determining the origin of performance measurement models and aims at sifting light on unexplored fertile areas for future research ¹⁸–²⁰.

The overall goal of this research is to determine whether the structure and management of sports organizations, leadership styles, and organizational effectiveness have a significant impact on predicting success of sports organizations.

METHOD

Sample

The research involved 175 sports organizations, with most of them being sports clubs (78.3%). The youngest respondent was 19 years old while the oldest one was 66 years old. According to education, the highest number of respondents were university graduates (bachelor's degree) (49.1%).

Variable sample

Sport organization structure: type organization, location, municipality, region, municipality inhabitant number, type of sport, sport group, Total number of employees and number of members of the organization.

Sports organization management: gender, year of birth, your education level, active engagement in sport – years total, highest achieved sports status or result, role/position in management of the organization/club and Number of years of your engagement in present organization

Variable of success of sports organizations: competition ranking, financial standing and marketing status of the club

Varijable of Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire²¹ Transformational leadership, Transactional leadership and Laissez-faire leadership or no-leadership style. (For use by Lana Radisic only. Mind Garden, Inc. Permission for Lana Radisic to reproduce 175 copies within three years of February 23, 2022.)

Organizational effectiveness measurement is based on the inventory (menu) by as a means of assessing stakeholders.²² The original OE menu contains 60 effectiveness criteria, classified into seven categories.

The study was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration,²³ and the survey was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Regional Institute of Sport and Sports Medicine (REC-291/2019.) prior to the beginning of the study.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1. Shows descriptivne parameters. Scale reliability has been determined on the basis of Cronbach α coefficient values should be above 0.7; coefficient values above 0.8 indicate good scale reliability, while values above 0.9 indicate excellent scale reliability. (Table 1)

Table 1
Parameter values for the observed variables.

	Min.	Max.	M	SD	Cron. α
Success of sports organizations	1.67	4.00	3.03	0.55	0.325
Leadership styles	2.29	3.44	2.82	0.24	0.848
Transformational leadership	2.30	3.65	2.98	0.31	0.807
Intelectual stimulation	2.00	4.00	2.90	0.39	0.379
Idealized influence (behaviour)	1.75	3.50	2.62	0.37	0.214
Idealized influence (prescrobed)	2.00	4.00	3.13	0.36	0.306
Inspirative motivation	2.50	4.00	3.28	0.36	0.187
Individual consideration	2.00	4.00	2.97	0.42	0.377
Transactional leadership	2.08	3.42	2.74	0.26	0.499
Conditioned prize	2.00	3.75	2.74	0.35	0.026
Management by exception (passive)	2.00	3.25	2.55	0.30	0.066
Management by exception (active)	2.00	4.00	2.94	0.43	0.468
Laissez-faire leadership	1.00	3.00	1.78	0.38	0.473
Extra effort	1.67	3.67	2.68	0.42	0.095
Effectiveness	2.00	4.00	3.22	0.52	0.531
Satisfaction	2.50	4.00	3.16	0.39	0.245
Organizational effectiveness	2.59	4.96	4.04	0.41	0.931
Staff	2.80	5.90	4.85	0.58	0.813
Service	2.25	6.00	4.94	0.66	0.629
Research and development	2.67	6.00	4.94	0.66	0.540
Marketing	3.00	6.00	4.74	0.60	0.510
Finance	2.75	6.00	4.53	0.70	0.649
Organization	3.14	5.86	4.78	0.54	0.657
Society	2.89	6.00	4.39	0.71	0.854
All factors	2.57	5.86	4.89	0.62	0.750

Regression Analysis Results

Hierarchical linear regression was applied to predict success of sports organizations based on leadership styles with the influence of the structure and management of sports organizations (Model 2). The coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.269 predicts 26.9% of the total variance (Table 2). The obtained model (F = 3.008, p <0.0005) is statistically significant, therefore it can be concluded that success of sports organizations can be predicted based on leadership styles and structure and management of sports organizations (Table 3). Coefficient of determination is 0.022 and indicates that leadership styles describe 2.2% of the total variance and are not statistically significant (F = 0.766, p = 0.598). The variables of structure and management of sports organizations are statistically significant (F = 4,079, p <0.0005) and describe 24.8% of the total variance (Table 2). The obtained results indicate that structure and management of sports organizations have a significant impact on predicting success of sports organizations, while the impact of leadership styles is statistically insignificant.

Table 2
Hierarchical linear regression analysis for predicting success of sports organizations based on leadership styles.

	R	(R2)	R2	F	(p)
Model 1	0.498	0.248	0.248	4.079	<0.0005*
Model 2	0.519	0.269	0.022	0.766	0.598
Model 3	0.523	0.273	0.026	0.675	0.713

• ^*
  Statistical significance at the level of 0.05.

Table 3
Significance of models obtained.

	F	(p)
Model 1	4.079	<0.0005*
Model 2	3.008	<0.0005*
Model 3	2.742	<0.0005*

• ^*
  Statistical significance at the level of 0.05.

Hierarchical linear regression was applied to predict success of sports organizations based on organizational effectiveness with the influence of the structure and management of sports organizations (Model 3). Multiple linear regression provided a coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.273, based on which we conclude that the obtained model predicts 27.3% of the total variance (Table 2) The obtained model (F = 2.742, p <0.0005) is statistically significant, therefore it can be concluded that the success of sports organizations can be predicted based on organizational effectiveness and structure and management of sports organizations (Table 3). The coefficient of determination is 0.026 describes 2.6% of the total variance and holds no statistical significance (F = 0.675, p = 0.713). The variables of the structure and management of sports organizations are statistically significant (F = 4,079, p <0.0005) and describe 24.8% of the total variance. (Table 2)

The obtained results indicate that structure and management of sports organizations have a significant impact on predicting success of sports organizations,²⁴,²⁵ while the impact of leadership styles statistically insignificant.

Key components to sports organization success are formal systems, such as organization management structure, decision making processes, and individual and group performance management. (Table 3)

Individual contribution of each variable was examined, and as a result it can be seen in (Table 4) that independent variables (leadership styles) have no significant impact on predicting success of sports organizations, while within the variables of structure and management of sports organizations significant contribution to predicting success of sports organizations can be obtained from number of employees in the organization (β=0.548, p=0.001) and role in the organization (β = −0.209, p = 0.006) (Model 2).

Table 4
Evaluation of independent variables of leadership style in predicting success of sports organizations.

Variable	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3
	B	β	P	B	β	P	B	β	p
Constant	3.399	-	<0.0005*	2.674	-	<0.0005*	3.226	-	<0.0005*
Organization type	-0.061	-0.120	0.401	-0.072	-0.141	0.332	-0.046	-0.090	0.543
Region	-0.024	-0.029	0.693	-0.041	-0.049	0.512	-0.031	-0.037	0.625
Municipality residents	-0.000008	-0.041	0.593	-0.000005	-0.026	0.738	-0.0000013	-0.065	0.426
Sport group	-0.008	-0.017	0.808	-0.011	-0.025	0.730	-0.008	-0.017	0.822
Number of employees in the organization	0.024	0.458	0.001*	0.024	0.456	0.001*	0.022	0.424	0.002*
Number of members	0.001	0.033	0.685	0.001	-0.020	0.818	0.001	0.028	0.734
Gender	0.107	0.081	0.274	0.144	0.109	0.162	0.122	0.093	0.220
Age	0.004	0.065	0.495	0.004	0.070	0.466	0004	0.076	0.430
Education level	-0.036	-0.055	0.488	-0.035	-0.053	0.534	-0.050	-0.077	0.349
Active sports engagement	-0.017	-0.093	0.374	-0.017	-0.091	0.389	-0.015	-0.081	0.450
Top sports results	-0.036	-0.040	0.591	-0.021	-0.024	0.757	0.033	-0.037	0.629
Role in the organization	-0.066	-0.198	0.008*	-0.070	-0.209	0.006*	-0.061	-0.183	0.021*
Work experience	0.063	0.107	0.221	0.053	0.091	0.307	0.061	0.105	0.253
Transformational leadership	-	-	-	-0.057	-0.033	0.807	-	-	-
Transactional leadership	-	-	-	-0.020	-0.010	0.938	-	-	-
Laissez-faire leadership	-	-	-	0.200	0.139	0.077	-	-	-
Extra effort	-	-	-	0.127	0.098	0.201	-	-	-
Effectiveness	-	-	-	0.053	0.050	0.581	-	-	-
Satisfaction	-	-	-	0.020	0.014	0.864	-	-	-
Staff	-	-	-	-	-	-	-0.025	-0.026	0.776
Service	-	-	-	-	-	-	-0.029	-0.041	0.663
Research and development	-	-	-	-	-	-	-0.012	-0.014	0.875
Marketing	-	-	-	-	-	-	0.214	0.233	0.065
Finance	-	-	-	-	-	-	-0.042	-0.053	0.650
Organization	-	-	-	-	-	-	-0.151	-0.147	0.287
Society	-	-	-	-	-	-	0.011	0.014	0.898
Factor	-	-	-	-	-	-	0.060	0.069	0.578

• ^*
  Statistical significance at the level of 0.05.

Looking at Table 4. we can see variables organizational effectiveness have no significant impact on predicting success of sports organizations, while from the variables of structure and management of sports organizations those that have a significant contribution to predicting success of sports organizations are number of employees (β = 0.424, p = 0.002) and role in the organization (β = −0.183, p = 0.021) (Model 3).

Based on the obtained results, it can be concluded that success of sports organizations is not affected by leadership styles or organizational effectiveness.²⁶, ²⁷

Following that, we applied hierarchical linear regression to predict success of sports organizations based on leadership styles with the influence of organizational effectiveness. Multiple linear regression provided a coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.060, based on which it is concluded that the obtained model predicts 6% of the total variance (Table 5). The obtained model (F=0.727, p = 0.745) is not statistically significant, based on which we conclude that success of sports organizations cannot be predicted based on leadership styles and organizational effectiveness (Table 6). The change in the coefficient of determination is 0.023 and indicates that leadership styles describe 2.3% of the total variance and are not statistically significant (F=0.644, p = 0.695). Variables of organizational effectiveness are not statistically significant (F=0.799, p = 0.604) and describe 3.7% of the total variance. (Table 5)

Table 5
Hierarchical linear regression analysis for predicting success of sports organizations based on leadership styles with the influence of organizational effectivneness.

	R	(R2)	R2	F	(p)
Model 1	0.193	0.037	0.037	0.799	0.604
Model 2	0.245	0.060	0.023	0.644	0.695

• ^*
  Statistical significance at the level of 0.05.

Table 6
Significance of models obtained.

	F	(p)
Model 1	0.799	0.604
Model 2	0.727	0.745

• ^*
  Statistical significance at the level of 0.05.

The results obtained in the research indicate that the influence of leadership styles and organizational effectiveness is small and statistically insignificant for predicting success of sports organizations.

Examining the individual contribution of each variable, it can be concluded from Table 7. That independent variables as well as organizational effectiveness variables do not have significant impact on predicting success of sports organizations.

Table 7
Evaluation of independent variables for leadership style with influence of organizational effectiveness in predicting success of sports organizations.

Variable	Model 1			Model 2
	B	β	p	B	β	p
Constant	3.026	-	<0.0005*	2.416	-	0.002*
Staff	-0.067	-0.071	0.475	-0.080	-0.085	0.399
Service	-0.035	-0.049	0.617	-0.030	-0.043	0.669
Research and development	-0.003	-0.004	0.965	0.002	0.002	0.983
Marketing	0.222	0.243	0.068	0.236	0.258	0.055
Finance	-0.083	-0.106	0.397	-0.085	0.108	0.397
Organization	-0.170	-0.166	0.265	-0.173	-0.169	0.275
Society	0.037	0.047	0.683	0.050	0.064	0.586
Factor	0.100	0.114	0.372	0.087	0.099	0.446
Transformational leadership	-	-	-	-0.148	-0.084	0.571
Transactional leadership	-	-	-	0.022	0.010	0.938
Laissez-faire leadership	-	-	-	0.186	0.129	0.126
Extra effort	-	-	-	0.094	0.072	0.381
Effectiveness	-	-	-	0.015	0.014	0.884
Satisfaction	-	-	-	0.107	0.076	0.400

• ^*
  Statistical significance at the level of 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

The obtained results of regression analysis indicate that structure and management of sports organizations have a significant impact on predicting the success of sports organizations.

Further work should examine the areas of development of leaders, organizational efficiency and management in various segments of non-profit sports organizations, as most research to date has focused on leadership in professional and college/university sports. To date, most of the leadership research in sports management has been quantitative.

The results of the research contribute to the justification of the use of a measuring instrument for defining the variables of success of sports organizations through the competitive, financial and marketing status of the club. A limitation of this research is that the survey questionnaire relies on a subjective approach to the analyzed topic, and a more complete explanation would be achieved by including an interview.

REFERENCES

• ¹
  Schulenkorf N. Sustainable community development through sport and events: A conceptual framework for sport-for-development projects. Sport Manag Rev. 2012;15(1):1-12.
• ²
  Covell D, Walker S, Hess P, Siciliano J. Managing sports organizations. Abingdon: Routledge; 2012.
• ³
  Masterman G. Strategic sports event management. Abingdon: Routledge; 2014.
• ⁴
  Thiel A, Mayer J. Characteristics of voluntary sports clubs management: A sociological perspective. Eur Sport Manag Q. 2009;9(1):81-98.
• ⁵
  Girginov V, Hills L. The political process of constructing a sustainable London Olympics sports development legacy. Int J Sport Policy Politics. 2009;1(2):161-81.
• ⁶
  Euchner CC. Playing the field: Why sports teams move and cities fight to keep them. Baltimore: JHU Press; 1994.
• ⁷
  Chelladurai P, Kerwin S. Human resource management in sport and recreation. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2018.
• ⁸
  Arnold R, Fletcher D, Molyneux L. Performance leadership and management in elite sport: Recommendations, advice and suggestions from national performance directors. Eur Sport Manag Q. 2012;12(4):317-36.
• ⁹
  Ferkins L, Shilbury D. Good boards are strategic: What does that mean for sport governance?. J Sport Manag. 2012;26(1):67-80.
• ¹⁰
  Ferkins L, Shilbury, D. McDonald G. Board involvement in strategy: Advancing the governance of sport organizations. J Sport Manag. 2009;23(3):245-77.
• ¹¹
  Shilbury D. Examining board member roles, functions and influence: A study of Victorian sporting organizations. Int J Sport Manag. 2001;2:253-81.
• ¹²
  Forster J. Global sports organizations and their governance. Corp Gov. 2006;6(1):72-83.
• ¹³
  Rojas RR. A review of models for measuring organizational effectiveness among for‐profit and nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Manag Leadersh. 2000;11(1):97-104.
• ¹⁴
  Cameron KS. Effectiveness as paradox: Consensus and conflict in conceptions of organizational effectiveness. Manag Sci. 1986;32(5):539-53.
• ¹⁵
  Pennings JM, Goodman PS. New perspectives on organizational effectiveness. Jossey-Bass; 1977.
• ¹⁶
  Scott WR. Effectiveness of organizational effectiveness studies. In: Goodman PS, Pennings JM. New perspectives on organizational effectiveness. EnglewoodCliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1977. p. 63-96.
• ¹⁷
  March JG, Sutton RI. Crossroads—organizational performance as a dependent variable. Organ Sci. 1997;8(6):698-706.
• ¹⁸
  Malacko J, Doder D. Tehnologija sportskog treninga i oporavka. [Sports training and recovery technology]. Department for Sport of Province Vojvodina. 2008.
• ¹⁹
  Malacko J, Doder D. Tehnologija sporta. [Technology of sport]. Department for Sport of Province Vojvodina. 2014.
• ²⁰
  Vojinovic J, Maksimovic N, Kokovic D, Raic A, Matic R, Doder D. Predicting the future of sports organizations. Motriz: Rev Educ Fís. 2015;21(2):107-15.
• ²¹
  Bass BM, Avolio BJ. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Western Journal of employees in sports organizations 2004 [Internet]. Disponível em: https://www.mindgarden.com/16-multifactor-leadership-questionnaire
  » https://www.mindgarden.com/16-multifactor-leadership-questionnaire
• ²²
  Kraft KL, Jauch LR. The organizational effectiveness menu: A device for stakeholder assessment. Am J Bus. 1992;7(1):18-23.
• ²³
  Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. Update – ethical standards in sport and exercise science research. Int J Sports Med. 2011;32(11):819-21.
• ²⁴
  Taylor T, McGraw P. Exploring human resource management practices in nonprofit sport organisations. Sport Manag Rev. 2006;9(3):229-51.
• ²⁵
  Treviño LK, Den Nieuwenboer NA, Kish-Gephart JJ. (Un) Ethical Behavior in Organizations. Annu Rev Psychol. 2014;65(1):635-60.
• ²⁶
  Wicker P, Breuer C. Understanding the importance of organizational resources to explain organizational problems: Evidence from nonprofit sport clubs in Germany. Voluntas. 2013;24(2):461-84.
• ²⁷
  Bourner F, Weese WJ. Executive leadership and organizational effectiveness in the Canadian hockey league. Eur J Sport Manag. 1995;72:88-100.

Edited by

Associate Editor responsible for the review process: Júlia Maria

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  07 July 2023
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  21 May 2022
• Accepted
  16 Feb 2023