Prelims

Book Structure

The aim of this research monograph is to provide a synopsis of contemporary issues affecting the performance of the modern-day sports executive strategic leader. Each chapter contains both a ‘literature review’ and ‘interview’ with an ‘expert’ C-suite sports executive.

The aim of the literature review at the start of each chapter is to provide a holistic understanding of contemporary research context and underpinning theory within the chapter heading. The book has a focus upon providing the audience with research insight that is sourced from a wide range of interdisciplinary sources which helps to frame the expert interviews that follow. The combining of several academic disciplines into one literature review, for example, sociology, anthropology, psychology, economics, etc., allows the reader to challenge their existing knowledge on the subject matter and consider their own academic and professional experiences.

The purpose of the expert ‘interview’ is to provide insight to the ‘real world’ lived experiences of the workplace. Each chapter represents an opportunity for the interviewee to describe in their own words their lived experience as a sports executive and reflect upon their professional knowledge and competences. A dynamic, uncertain industry, whose career is often dependent on the achievements of its athletes. In the face of such volatile circumstances, Roth (1963) has eloquently argued that people make every effort to reduce the uncertainty attached to their positions by psychologically structuring their lives to anticipate potential changes in status and employment. A consideration of this book was therefore to question how executives strategise their careers, contingency plans and anticipate the required personal and professional skills required in any future roles.

The book is not intended to be a ‘one size fits all’ series of generalisations but allow the interviewee to focus upon a specific contemporary issue (of their choice) and contextualise to their specific role and organisational context. Each interview is designed to challenge the ‘expert’ to consider/reconsider their career from a variety of perspectives, for example, sociological, psychological, economics, etc. The use of a series of semi-structured interviews with strategic sports leaders (and their equivalents) is to contextualise and apply the plethora of existing management and executive training research. In other words, what is the ‘lived experience’ of ‘C-suite’ executives and how does it relate to existing research? The ambition of the text is to provide a nuanced appreciation and understanding of the major roles, responsibilities, and challenges faced by senior executives.

Research Approach

A relatively small number of academics have managed to gain ‘face-to-face’ access to elite sports team executives for the purpose of generating objective, meaningful, and insightful research (Lawrence, 2018; Magee & Sugden, 2002; Roderick, 2006). This appears to be due to a pervasive lack of trust and resulting caution towards engaging with ‘outsiders’, who are, by definition, external to the business and therefore represent somewhat of an unknown quantity. Professional industry sensitivity and insecurity appears to be typically born out (a) concerns regarding the confidentiality of ‘trade secrets’, intellectual property, or innovations being revealed to the competition, or (b) professional ‘brand’ reputation issues, that is, misrepresentation and/or exposure of information obtained by the ‘outsider’ – leading to potential ethical/legal challenges. As such, elite sporting organisations often deliberately present themselves as ‘closed’ to external collaboration due to fear of being ‘wronged’ or harmed by the research. This tangible lack of trust of ‘outsiders’ means that it is highly unlikely that any initial request (on the behalf of the researcher) will translate into a meaningful research collaboration. Interviewees who are cautious regarding being quoted ‘for the record’ typically request anonymity, to protect, both their own personal and collective organisational reputation. Indeed, it is commonplace for social scientists to adopt a policy of ‘blanket anonymisation’, whereby all names, places, and other identifying features are disguised across a data set, including from interview transcripts, diaries, and field notes (Clark, 2006). However, for the experienced researcher it is possible to slowly nurture and establish a climate of mutual trust and reassurance of research integrity by integrating the appropriate level of rigour towards research ethics. This process required me, as the interviewer, to be fully transparent with each prospective interviewee regarding my expectations a social scientist and professional ‘obligations’ that relate to conducting work, that is, carried out both responsibly and with respect to the integrity and behaviour, that is, moral, legal, safety, and security of colleagues and participants. Each of the named interviewees within this book consented to be named and ‘waved’ their anonymity, providing written consent to be identified. This assurance was formally underpinned by encouraging each participant to fully interrogate the proposed research collaboration, that is: (i) my professional research background and previous publications; (ii) the research rationale; (iii) primary data collection method, that is, semi-structured interviews; (iv) how and in what form are the intended ‘results’ of the research to be disseminated, that is, research monograph; and (v) participation is voluntary, and consent/participation can be withdrawn at any point. In my previous experiences of producing research monographs, I have strongly encouraged research participants to fully participate in the formative review, that is, ‘drafts’ of interview transcripts (aka ‘primary data’) and provide feedback regarding accuracy of thoughts and ideas conveyed. As a result, the process of nurturing and establishing a trusting relationship and eventual data analysis was time-consuming, but key to being afforded the opportunity to obtain rich and nuanced insight into the ‘what’, ‘where’, ‘when’, ‘how’, ‘which’, and ‘why’ of interviewee thoughts and reflections. In carefully and sensitively considering the methods, procedures, content, and reporting of my research enquiries, the aim was to try to and ensure that I left the interviewee and their respective sports organisation in a manner which allowed future access for prospective researchers.

Trust in any research setting can be arguably accelerated if the researcher has the status of ‘quasi-insider’ (Wacquant, 1992). As a former semi-professional football player, Roderick (2006) believes that he was afforded the status of ‘insider’ and afforded a level of legitimacy and trust in the eyes of the players he interviewed for his excellent book on the career and working culture of professional football players. This was not a status or legitimacy that this author could claim or use to leverage access to undertake detailed research interviews. An alternative participant recruitment strategy was therefore considered. Speculative requests for interviews, via social media and professional networks, such as LinkedIn, were mostly unsuccessful – unsurprisingly so, given the industry reluctance to engage with outsiders.

The majority of interviewees for this book came from professional contacts via industry ‘gatekeepers’. A gatekeeper in research terms is someone who provides access to his/her professional contacts and by doing so helps to reassure his/her colleagues of the integrity of both the researcher and the outputs of any collaboration. As mentioned above, the author did not have the status of quasi-insider and so referrals from high-profile industry gatekeepers were crucial in facilitating an introduction and potential access to club personnel. Most notable amongst the gatekeepers was Tony Faulkner.

As a former of ‘elite performance manager’ at both Blackburn Rovers FC and Manchester City FC and now co-founder of VSI Tony’s reputation (alongside that of VSIs co-founder, Andy McIntyre) and standing within the sports executive education community was essential in identifying potential contacts and establishing the credibility of the author via a mutual association. In addition, both Tony and Andy were ideally placed to offer a number of recommendations regarding who, in their view, had industry insight, that is, the occupational experience, record of achievement, and qualifications to facilitate the required research insight necessary for the book. These initial recommendations were cross-referenced against a separate, independent ‘purposive’ or ‘purposeful’ sample undertaken by the author. The aim of this exercise was to identify C-suite sports executives (or their equivalents) whose knowledge, skills, and experience had been validated by professional reputation and associated sports industry awards. This form of non-probability sampling required the researcher to exercise a subjective regarding the selection of which individuals were selected for contact. The aim was to find ‘experts’ with credibility and the credentials and the enthusiasm to reflect and provide considered and ‘rich’ information for the audience of the book. The advantage of using expert subjects within any research project is in their ability to provide ‘crystallization points for practical insider knowledge’ (Collins & Evans, 2007). In many cases, the interviewee then suggested additional potential candidates with C-suite expertise that were not necessarily high-profile sports business ‘names’ but had industry credibility and who were highly respected by their peers. Equipped with a formal introduction and personal recommendation, I was then able to contact the next prospective participant much more efficiently and thereby gain access to an extended circle of experts. As a result, the sample of intended interviewees ‘snowballed’ from an initially small pool of contacts to an extensive network of mutual associations (Rubin & Rubin, 1995).

In total, over 50 high-profile ‘C-suite’ global sports executives were interviewed from a variety of continents, sporting national associations, governing bodies, federations, and individual teams. The intention of the research project was to have an ‘open mind’ towards what the contemporary and emerging challenges are for C-suite sport leaders in the twenty-first century. The deliberate focus on listening intently to interviewees and using their collective insight was a crucial first step in organising a potentially complex range of dynamic issues into specific and focussed book chapters. In essence, the interviewees drove the agenda for the conversations and the book that has since emerged.

The bulk of interviews was undertaken by the author over a period of four years, between May 2016 and July 2020, and followed a ‘semi-structured’ format with an ‘interview guide’ that utilised pre-defined topic areas to guide the discussion (Relvas et al., 2010). Broadly, the interviews began with an initial ‘introduction and background’ discussion of the rationale for the book, its anticipated structure and the ethical protocols associated with the interviewees’ participation. Second, the interviews probed the subjects’ professional background to contextualise and frame their career trajectory. Third, participants were asked to discuss their current roles and responsibilities within the club and to provide insight into its operational structures and working practices. Finally, interviewees were asked to critically reflect upon their own professional development and provide recommendations of how this could be further enhanced.

Commitment to a series of in-depth, semi-structured interviews was challenging on the behalf of the interviewees, given the demands that such high-profile individuals have upon their time and availability. Inevitably, this meant that several subjects eventually withdrew from the research process due to the demands of their role and the inflexibility that this created.

It was important for this project that each interviewee would consent to be named within their respective chapter. By naming the individual, the reader is then better able to form a mental picture of the individual and contextualise the experience that is articulated. I was unsurprised by the high levels of the professionalism that I encountered with each interviewee. Each executive was highly experienced at communicating their values and experiences (as would be expected of individuals who are in the public eye); however, what was surprising was that their professional curiosity regarding the topics covered extended into a sincere desire to ‘make a difference’. A commitment to detailed and inevitably time-consuming meetings was crucial if the book was to go beyond superficial observations and provide genuine insight. By allowing the subjects to identify and raise issues relevant to their own circumstances, the author ensured that the interview responses that followed were particularly candid regarding their career experiences (Andrews et al., 2005; Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Each interview was underpinned by sensitivity or ‘research empathy’ in order to help to minimise the ‘distance’ between researcher and respondent (Collinson, 1992; Oakley, 1990; Roderick, 2006). My aim within the interviews was to try and encourage the participants to become ‘detached’ enough to find those moments of clarity about why they do what they do but haven’t necessarily reflected upon sufficiently to articulate. The ability for both the interviewer and interviewee to cognitively ‘step back’ and reflect, without presupposition and preconceived notions was the ambition of the project – allowing both parties to deal with their own assumptions and challenge both not to conclude too hastily. This research approach was, in part, facilitated by maintaining a structure to each interview that was flexible, iterative, and continuous. As a result, the research themes, identified in each chapter, were adapted in terms of how they were introduced into each interview according to the personality, interests, and knowledge of the interviewee (Andrews et al., 2005; Daley, 2010). Each interview was then audio-recorded to allow for accuracy of recall and the data obtained analysed using a ‘thematic’ approach. Subsequent interpretation was then discussed with the interviewee to ensure that discussion points and conclusions accurately reflected the content of each interview. Whilst the interviews within each chapter provide several specific implications for theory and practice, it is important to recognise the study’s inevitable constraints. Beyond generalisability issues, interviewee comments and therefore data veracity may have been restricted by interactional effects such as poor recall, hindsight bias, and self-preservation bias (Nestler et al., 2008). However, despite such inevitable constraints I am confident that the research contained within provides insight to the lived experiences of C-suite executives and by doing so helps to further our ‘ontological’ appreciation of the world in which C-suite executives live. The research conclusions will inevitably have far reaching implications for analysis of ‘C-suite’ effectiveness (meeting the club’s objectives) and efficiency (deploying its resources, that is, finances and most importantly players, correctly).This book, therefore, aims to challenges the reader to consider peer reviewed literature in conjunction with insight from sports industry experts, not simply a vanity project or espousing home spun homilies.

References

• Andrews, D.L., Mason, D.S. and Silk, M.L. 2005. Qualitative Methods in Sports Studies, Oxford, Berg Publishers.

• Bloomberg. 2020. SJR Launches CEO Leaderboard: ranking impact of COVID-19 on FTSE CEOs’ Reputations, 2 July. Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2020-07-01/sjr-launches-ceo-leaderboard-ranking-impact-of-covid-19-on-ftse-ceos-reputations

• CarringtonCrisp. 2020. What future for the MBA? Available at: https://www.carringtoncrisp.com/news/news-and-articles/what-future-for-the-mba/

• Clark, A. 2006. Anonymising Research Data, ESRC National Centre for Research Methods NCRM Working Paper Series No. 7/06.

• Collins, H.M. and Evans, R. 2007. Rethinking Expertise, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.

• Collinson, D.L. 1992. Managing the Shopfloor: Subjectivity, Masculinity and Workplace Culture, Berlin, Walter de Gruyter.

• Daley, C. 2010. Perceptions of trust in football contexts: a multi-methodological approach. PhD thesis, Northumbria University. Available at: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/753/1/daley.cherrie_phd.pdf

• Hirt, E.R., Zillmann, D., Erickson, G.A. and Kennedy, C. 1992. Costs and benefits of allegiance: changes in fans’ selfascribed competencies after team victory versus defeat, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 724–738.

• Kipling, R. 1900. Ladies’ Home Journal, Philadelphia, PA, The Curtis Publishing Company.

• Lawrence, I. 2018. Football Club Management: Insights from the Field, London, Routledge.

• Magee, J. and Sugden, J. 2002. ‘The world at their feet’: professional football and international labour migration, Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 26(4), 421–437.

• Mintzberg, H. 2017. MBAs as CEOs: some troubling evidence. Available at: https://mintzberg.org/blog/mbas-as-ceos

• Mintzberg, H. and Lampel, J. 2001. Do MBAs make better CEOs?, Fortune, 19 February.

• Nestler, S., Blank, H. and von Collani, G. 2008. Hindsight bias and causal attribution, Social Psychology, 39, 182–188.

• Oakley, A. 1990. Housewife, London, Penguin.

• O’Connell, L. 2020. Market size of the global sports market in from 2011 to 2018 (in billion U.S. dollars), Statista. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1087391/global-sports-market-size/

• Parker, M. 2018. Why we should bulldoze the business school. Guardian Newspaper. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/apr/27/bulldoze-the-business-school

• Pillot de Chenecy, S. 2019. The Post-truth Business: How to Rebuild a Brand Authenticity in a Distrusting World, London, Kogan Page.

• PwC. 2019. At the gate and beyond. PwC Sports Outlook. Available at: https://www.pwc.com/us/en/industries/tmt/assets/pwc-sports-outlook-2019.pdf

• Relvas, H., Littlewood, M., Nesti, M., Gilbourne, D. and Richardson, D. 2010. Organizational structures and working practices in elite European professional football clubs: understanding the relationship between youth and professional domains, European Sport Management Quarterly, 10(2), 165–187.

• Roderick, M. 2006. The Work of Professional Football: A Labour of Love? London, Routledge.

• Roth, J.A. 1963. Timetables: Structuring the Passage of Time in Hospital Treatment and Other Careers, Indianapolis, IN, Bobbs-Merrill Company.

• Rubin, H. and Rubin, I. 1995. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.

• Sinek, S. 2011. Start with Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone To Take Action, London, Penguin.

• SportBusiness. 2019. Postgraduate Course Rankings 2019: The Top 40. Available at: https://www.sportbusiness.com/2019/05/sportbusiness-postgraduate-course-rankings-2019-the-top-40/

• Wacquant, L.J.D. 1992. The social logic of boxing in black Chicago: towards a sociology of pugilism, Sociology of Sport Journal, 7(3), 221–254.

• Wann, D.L. 2006. Examining the potential causal relationship between sport team identification and psychological wellbeing, Journal of Sport Behavior, 29, 79–95.

• Wilde, O. 1890. The Picture of Dorian Gray. Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine, London, Ward, Lock & Co.