Gallegos

Organizations and Management in Sport

A sport organization is a social entity involved in the sport industry; it is a goal-directed,
with a consciously structured activity system and a relatively identifiable boundary
(Slack & Parent, 2006). Sports management features an organization or department
that utilizes any one or combination of skills such as: planning, organizing, directing,
controlling, budgeting, leading and evaluating (Slack & Parent, 2006). The purpose of
this research is to pinpoint the utmost strategic planning model within management for
an organization. Having a managing strategy in place for a sports organization is most
important due to factors such as: finance, influence and change. Without the proper
strategy in place, organizations could suffer serious issues leaving the organization in a
non-successful state (Kriemadis & Theakou, 2007).
Review of Literature
Strategic planning is a well-known tool and an integral part of strategy, as a whole, that
has been used for decades by organizations across the globe (Kriemadis & Theakou,
2007). The term strategy actually means, an examination or organizational objectives
and the degree to which the current range of services help achieve these targets
(Smith, 2005). One of the most important, if not the most important, components in
management is the act of planning. In order to determine the path of the organization
(plan), the organization first needs to know its current position (Kriemadis & Theakou,
2007). The biggest question mark that needs to be answered undoubtedly is, what are
the values that will represent us as an organization (Smith, 2005). The organizational
culture (values) needs to be the first stone set because the organization recognizes
that underpinning every strategic effort, service delivery mechanism and structural
design is a strong set of collective beliefs and expectations which bind an organization
to its history and traditional operational practices (Smith, 2005). Kerwin, MacLean and
Bell-Laroche (2014), also commented on values saying, The vision, mission and values
are the backbone of operations and strategy development, as each offers justification
and direction to the organization (p. 646). Understanding where the organization is
starting with its values is a great act, but an organization also needs to make sure that it
is sustaining its values throughout the entirety of the process in being successful. How
do organizations do that? Kerwin, MacLean and Bell-Laroche (2014), offer more
information on the subject by adding, management by valueshighlights the
importance of identifying core values both at the individual and organizational levels, the
centrality of aligning core values with specific objective, and illuminating the leaders
personal interest in wanting to mange by values (p. 646).
Models
Once the organization has the foundation set, selecting a model of strategy becomes
crucial. There are many different models to choose from all of which have their positives
and negatives. The organization (with their values in mind) will need to collectively weed
through the different models to find a strategy model that fits best for their organization.

Gallegos

A few models that an organization can choose from are Basic model, Goal-Based
Model, Alignment Model or Scenario Planning Model.
Basic-Strategy Model. This is a more basic/ elementary model that is typically used for
organizations of smaller size that have little to no planning experience (Kriemadis &
Theakou, 2007). Kriemadis and Theakou (2007), explain in further detail the break
down of the Basic Strategy Model:
1. Identify the purpose (mission statement).
2. Select the goals that the organization must reach in order to accomplish their
mission.
3. Identify specific approaches or strategies that must be implemented to reach
each goal.
4. Identify specific action plans to implement each strategy.
5. Monitor and update the plan (p. 29-30).
Goal-Based Planning Model. This model is more comprehensive and effective than
the basic model, but its processes are not too extensive to newer organizations that are
just getting their feet off of the ground. This is a straightforward style of planning that
allows comfort to the management team, in not having to complete the planning
processes annually (Kriemadis & Theakou, 2007). Kriemadis and Theakou (2007), offer
a step-by-step break down of the Goal-Based Model:
1. External/Internal assessment to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats (SWOT).
2. Strategic analysis to identify and prioritize major issues/ goals.
3. Design major strategies to address issues/ goals.
4. Design/ update vision, mission and values.
5. Establish actions plans.
6. Record issues, goals, strategies update mission and vision and action plans in
Strategic Plan document, and attach SWOT.
7. Develop the yearly Operating Plan Document
8. Develop and authorize budget for year one.
9. Conduct the organizations year-one operations.
10. Monitor/review/evaluate/update Strategic Plan document (p. 30).
Alignment Model. This model is directly intended to have strong ties with the
organizations mission and resources. This model is often used for organizations that
need to re-direct or re-shape strategies or just serve as a informative process that finds
out why their initial strategy plan was not working in the desired capacity. Kriemadis and
Theakou (2007), ordered these steps for the Alignment Model:
1. The management team outlines the organizations mission, programs, resources,
and need of support.
2. Identify whats working well and what needs adjustment.
3. Identify how these adjustments should be made.

Gallegos

4. Include the adjustments as strategies in the strategic plan (p. 31).

Scenario-Planning Model. This style of model is often combined with an additional
model. This model is often paired with an additional strategic plan because it requires
more strategic thinking, which is a great process to go through when in the initial stages
of building a organizations plan. Think of this combination as making the management
team cross their Ts and dotting their Is. Kriemadis and Theakou (2007), explain this
model to include the following steps:
1. Select several external forces and imagine related changes, which might
influence the organization.
2. For each change, discuss three different future organizational scenarios, which
might arise with the organization as a result of each change.
3. Suggest what the organization might do, or potential strategies, in each of the
three scenarios to respond to each change.
4. The management team will soon detect common considerations or strategies that
must be addressed to respond to possible external changes.
5. Select the most likely external changes to effect the organization (p. 31).
Though each model represents its own identity and way of process, some models (like
the Scenario Planning Model) offer to be combined with other additional models. In fact,
some organizations have been known to combine multiple models into one strategic
plan that they deemed more conditioned for their desired plan strategy (Kriemadis and
Theakou, 2007).
Budget
A budget is another planning tool that aids a managing team in many ways such as:
planning, decision making, and control functions (Pineno & Tyree, 2006). A budget
should be implemented within the planning model procedure. According to Pineno and
Tyree (2006), the budget should be prepared way before it is actually put in place in the
activation stage. The budget is a very important factor that cannot afford to be taken
lightly. This tool should be planned, presented to management for checking, presented
to the board of administration for checking (waiting approval); while waiting the planning
team should trouble shoot any issues and reset the entire process of checking over
again, just to make sure that the budget is in proper condition for activation process
(Pineno & Tyree, 2006). Once the budget is actually put into action, the results should
be compared to the mock budget terms and the organizations goals to see where the
organization stands with their budget.
Influence
Influence can be a great component for an organizations success, but in the same
sense it can be a devastating factor as well. It is said that influence can be the most
powerful component within the structure of an organization (Coates, Wicker, Feiler &
Breuer, 2014). Within an organization there are different cultures that are present (either

Gallegos

strong or weak) that will flow from the top to bottom or from bottom to top depending on
the structure that the respective organization has in place. With a strong culture present,
organizational members will unconsciously share norms that the organization believes
in and thoroughly understand the organizations foundational structure (Winand, Vos,
Claessens, Thibaut & Scheerder, 2014). On the opposite end of the spectrum, an
organization that has a weak stance culture will have members of the organization that
do not share the same norms that the organization believes in, in fact, they will often
criticize and or question the beliefs of the organization (Winand et al., 2014). As
imagined, having a weak culture present within an organization can prove to be
damaging to the entire organization.
Change
Change is a process that scares the majority of sport organizations due to the
uncalculated unknown. There are many theories in place that try to predict the future
and the change that comes with it, but many companies will ignore change and act like
it is not a part of business (Smith, 2005). The complex theory comprises of three
characteristics: 1) non-additive behavior comes out of networks that are from the
outside of an organization; the whole is more than the sum of its parts. 2) Complex
systems give off non-linear behavior randomly that is directly related to input. 3)
Complex behavior exists between non-random and random, known as the edge of
chaos (Smith, 2005). How do these three characteristics help cope with change within
an organization? As bazaar as it sounds, this theory puts chaos and randomness at its
forefront where the expectation of predictability and regularity are pushed away from
being the norm. However, there is still enough predictability and regularity for steadiness
and for patterns to sustain within an organization (Smith, 2005).
Recommendations
Too often organizations want to choose one specific plan or model of action that does
not necessarily fit their values through and through. The foundation is set through their
values and they should hold true to those values throughout the entirety of the planning
process as well as the activation stage, even if that means taking a little more time in
the planning stages. Taking bits and pieces of each plan is a strategy that would benefit
an organization by plucking items and combining them to fit their desired structure while
keeping their values in tact. This will help the organization in the planning and activation
stages by knowing that their structure is based upon their core values. Organizations
need to loosen up in this department and not be afraid of stepping out of the box to
benefit their strategy.
As noted previously, influence can be the birth or death of an organization. How can an
organization make sure that they are in the birthing stage? The recommendation for this
is that the organization will be as strong or weak as are the board directors for that
respective organization. The culture of an organization can move to the stronger or
weaker side on a daily basis predicated off of the board of directors involvement. The
board of directors need to get their hands dirty within the organization, an organization

Gallegos

is positively linked to the amount of time its board of directors are willing to invest
(Esteve, Lorenzo, Ingles & Puig, 2011). Low levels of time will result in weaker cultures,
high levels of time will produce a higher level of culture. Members of the organization
are what drive organizations, when these members see that the higher authority figures
are sticking to their guns, so to speak, it will be much easier for them to follow the
values of the organization as well.
Conclusion
This research consisted of strategic planning models for organizational success. The
research showed that there are many different models of strategy to choose from, but
choosing one model may not be the best path for an organization to take, but rather
combining multiple models together in order to keep the organizational values in tact
throughout the entirety of the planned processes. However, not having a model to go by
will consist of assured destruction for all parties involved. The research also showed
that influence, finance and change are all important factors of organizational
management that are not necessarily good or bad, but rather these components are
what you make of them. When solid foundational values are set, a plan to put in motion
is made and the constant checking and refinement of that plan is tweaked to perfection,
the organization will have a great chance of being successful.

Gallegos

References
Coates, D., Wicker, P., Feiler, S., & Breuer, C. (2014). A bivariate profit examination of
financial and volunteer problems of non-profit sport clubs. International Journal of
Sport Finance, 9(3), 230-248.
Esteve, M., DI Lorenzo, F., Ingls, E., & Puig, N. (2011). Empirical evidence of
stakeholder management in sports clubs: The impact of the board of directors.
European Sport Management Quarterly, 11(4), 423-440.
Kerwin, S., MacLean, J., & Bell-Laroche, D. (2014). The mediating influence of
management by values in nonprofit sport organizations. Journal of Sport
Management, 28(6), 646-656.
Kriemadis, T., & Theakou, E. (2007). Strategic planning models in public and non-profit
sport organizations. Choregia, 3(2), 27-37.
Pineno, C. J., & Tyree, L. M. (2006). Appropriate budget accounts and activity-based
costing for decision making in non-profit organizations: A comparative study.
Competition Forum, 4(2), 354-370.
Slack, T., & Parent, M. M. (2006). Organization theory and the management of sport
organizations. In M. Schrag (Ed.), Understanding sport organizations: The
application of theory (pp. 3-15). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Smith, A. C., (2005). Complexity theory and change management in sport organizations.
School of Sport, 6(2), 70-79.
Winand, M., Vos, S., Claessens, M., Thibaut, E., & Scheerder, J. (2014). A unified model
of non-profit sport organizations performance: perspectives from the literature.
Managing Leisure, 19(2), 121-150.

Gallegos