In 1993, Packianathan Chelladurai presented a paper to the
First European Congress on Sports Management titled, “Sports Management:
Defining the Field” (Chelladurai, 1993)[1].
In this seminal work, Chelladurai elucidated the definition, status and
classification of the sports management field in a comprehensive, practical and knowledgeable overview of what constitutes the sports
management industry.
He provided a robust definition of what constitute ‘sports
management’ (“the coordination of resources, technologies, processes,
personnel, and situational contingencies for the efficient production and
exchange of sports services” (Chelladurai, 1993:6) and presented an adequate
classification framework of the various subdivisions of the industry.
Additionally, he identified the nucleus of the sports management architecture
as fundamentally being built around the coordination of ‘production’ and
‘marketing’ of sports related products and services with certain ‘technologies’
and ‘supporting units’ acting as facilitators in this process. Chelladurai’s approach encouraged familiarity
with content and literature of other disciplines and guided others to apply
those as amplifying support for the specific focus on sports and the management
of sports.
Some examples of production technologies include sport
journalism, health sciences, consumer psychology, sports psychology, sports
medicine, and others. Examples of supporting units include, but are not limited to, event management, facility management,
personnel management, sport finance, public relations and brand merchandising.
While most of Chelladurai’s observations still hold true in
today’s sports management landscape, much also has changed since 1993.
The changes have added new and integrative layers of complexities
to the taxonomy presented by Chelladurai.
One of the most striking areas of change has come with the introduction of new technologies
that have enhanced both the production and marketing sides of the sports
management industry. We have since seen the creation of the Internet, mobile
computers, digital television, mobile phones and social media platforms. These media forms have changed the way in how sport is now delivered, often generating
conflicting responses about how best to reach target audiences and respond to
controversies that involve external stakeholders.
This evolution was particularly propelled by the Internet's formative development, Web 2.0 and, more recently,
the connective intelligence possibilities of Web 3.0 applications. In summary,
this has
allowed for new distribution mechanisms via online platforms, video streaming services and content providers as well as effective remote and cheaper access for consumers and viewers. Ticket
availability has increased and ticket purchasing has become easier with the
introduction of digital services like StubHub, Vivid Sports and Main Event Tickets, where fans even can
resell tickets. Additionally, the Internet has given rise to instantaneous
and real-time information and reporting through the introduction of blogs,
social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
Pinterest),
and statistical databases. In referencing Chelladurai’s concept of a “third
place,” the Internet has certainly cemented its place as among the most prominent examples.
On the academic side of the sports management industry,
technology has seen the emergence of online sports courses and complete online
degrees. It has also seen the rise of sports analytics, which has
revolutionized coaching, on-field play and improved scouting through the
application and analysis of empirical performance-related data. Technology
certainly has impacted and enhanced the officiating integrity of sports
through the use of computers; cameras and other technologies that can be used to review plays and make exact determinations that can reverse
faulty decisions made by humans.
On the support side, since 1993, sports management has
witnessed the expansion and proliferation of both practical and academic sports
management programs and literature. Blogs, scholarly journals, textbooks,
conferences, dedicated sports management schools and courses have all seen
dramatic increases in terms of content, breadth and depth
of interdisciplinary perspectives and diversity of students and their respective interests. Similarly, there has
been tremendous growth in the number of sports management practitioners (i.e., those who research, teach, and practice) and the
opportunities available to them.
The past 20 years have also seen the
surge of sports governing bodies and other professional organizations for
sports. These bodies cut across sports disciplines and are also broken down
along many demographics not just limited to
players,
ethnicity and gender.
On the professional side
there also are numerous marketing, communications and sports technology
groups that advocate for their specific fields. Even academia has seen its fair
share of sports management organizations such as the North
American Society for Sport Management. Sports agencies have
also seen astonishing growth over the past 20 years and are involved in almost
all aspects of sports management including sports law, marketing,
endorsements, contract negotiation, crisis and image management of players and
sports firms, financial planning, sponsorship and advertising procurement,
event management and other areas.
Sports philanthropy and social
responsibility is also becoming a prominent feature of the sports management
landscape with many individuals, firms, NGOs, teams, governing organizations
and other sports actors committed to integrating social and
philanthropic initiatives to help develop societies, build brand value and to
improve their competitiveness. Entire divisions and academic programs are being
created to deal specifically with this rapidly growing
branch of the sports management landscape.
With the growth and advancement in technology and the myriad
of support units in sports, there has been a concomitant increase in the intensity
of the commercialization of sports. This commercialization spans merchandising and ranges to amateur sports. It is estimated that sports merchandising
brings in annual revenues of around $19 billion annually and in total the entire global sports industry
generates around $80 billion annually directly
and the multiplier effect would suggest an even more formidable impact. The impact of commercialization has not always been a positive trend, as issues of
corruption,
use of performance enhancing drugs among athletes, school dropouts, long-term medical problems resulting from play on the field,
and the responses to high-profile problems of sociocultural and sociopolitical
significance that often intersect with college and professional athletics.
The sports management field has increased and diversified
ten-fold since Chelladurai’s taxonomy in 1993, especially as the focus has
shifted away from the dominant logic of goods and services to the development
of a values framework in sports management. As some researchers have suggested
(Woratschek, Horbel and Popp, 2014), the nature of the industry and the
technologies today have raised strategic questions for managers who are only
becoming more aware of just how limited their control is in creating value for
their respective sports organizations and teams.[2]
There are so many stakeholders now involved – fans, consumers, civic partners,
media and clubs, just to name a few – that the challenge is to figure out the
most effective collaborative strategies and tactics for enhancing brand value
and equity. But, the cumulative impact of all of these technologies and the
corresponding voices and influences associated with such diverse stakeholders
has yet to be properly assessed and understood. With the introduction of new
technologies and the growth of support units that have propelled the production
and marketing of sports, we can expect even more growth, diversification and
development in the field as we head into the future, especially as we focus on
how these groups individually and collectively enhance or challenge the value
of sporting events and the branded communities associated with creating that
value.
[1] Chelladurai, P. “Sports Management: Defining the Field”.
Paper presented at the First European Congress on Sports Management. Groningen,
Netherlands. September 23-25, 1993.
[2]
Woratschek, H., Horbel, C., & Popp, B. (2014). The sport value framework –
a new fundamental logic for analyses in sport management. European Sport
Management Quarterly, 14(1), 6-24. doi: 10.1080/16184742.2013.865776.
No comments:
Post a Comment