Search results

This study derives a new framework that comprehensively assesses management quality along four dimensions, namely Sporting Success; Financial Performance; Fan Welfare Maximization; and Leadership and Governance. Filled with measurable key performance indicators (KPIs), these dimensions serve the purpose of objectively quantifying the relevant success factors. Ultimately, the performance in all dimensions indicates a football club's management quality.

The study relies first on a review of the literature in the field of both general management and sports. Second, the authors adapt the balanced scorecard framework to the field of professional football and use a set of KPIs to assess the management quality of the Bundesliga teams over the seasons 2016/17 and 2017/18. Third, the authors validate the relative weights of the four dimensions composing the so-called “Football Management Quality score” (i.e. FoMa Q-Score) using expert interviews.

Two movements characterize the score development in 2017/18 compared to 2016/17: first, scores appear more contracted than previously. Second, both average and median scores improved, suggesting a general improvement in the management quality within the Bundesliga.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first exploratory study deriving and measuring relevant key criteria for managing football clubs and illustrating the findings in a ranking. The aim of this study is to establish a model that impacts both academia and practice. By utilizing existing management literature and adjusting it to football particularities, the newfound knowledge begins to close the gap in sport management literature.

Many factors influence success at a professional football club, as each club has an exclusive definition and interpretation of success. Using the Football Management Q-Score as a foundation, the authors set out to prove the framework's robustness in the industry's current environment.

To determine the purpose, the authors conducted interviews with Bundesliga experts. Using the Gioia Method, the authors could condense interview feedback into aggregate themes reflecting the main findings of the analysis process.

From 1,025 codes, three main contributions resulted – the concept of intercorrelation, a more balanced and dynamic framework, and four new key drivers.

Expert feedback validated the framework as robust, and the further main contributions gave the framework a wider application to a larger range of clubs, allowing the users of the framework to infer a greater context. Interview results proved the inclusion of Kaplan and Norton's original framework with vision and strategy.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context. 10;

Having to balance key sporting and business variables often makes it hugely challenging for professional football clubs. But appropriate emphasis on four performance dimensions and key drivers within them can make sustainable levels of success more attainable.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers’ hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

The primary purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the key perspectives that emerge in this Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal (AAAJ) Special Issue as a basis for determining the existence or otherwise of a Soccer Society, as well as reflecting on the challenges that evidence of corruption in soccer (the beautiful game) has had on the game to date. Reflections on these matters are then utilised to offer a prospective analysis of issues for further research.

The paper is a reflective analysis that draws on existing societal work to provide key dimensions of accounting and accountability for significant organisations in the world of sport in general and soccer in particular.

Much prior research on soccer has largely focussed on the internal workings of soccer organisations, with little discussion of the importance of context. This paper explores the influence of the game more broadly. Moreover, a number of the papers included illustrate an overwhelming sense of joy and pleasure from experiences of the beautiful game, as well as providing evidence of the general societal good that can flow from it. However, the study also highlights concerns emanating from weak, and seemingly pliable, governance, regulatory and accountability regimes that provide a fertile field for corruption and sportswashing.

This paper highlights a research agenda as an encouragement to interdisciplinary accounting researchers to investigate accountability and governance issues as a basis for evidence-based discussions of the impact of soccer and its regulation.

This paper specifically, and the Special Issue more broadly, offers a set of original empirical and theoretical contributions with respect to an activity that has faced limited scrutiny and consideration by academic accountants. Together, they offer a substantive body of work to enable future research in this area.

The purpose of this paper is to explore whether stocks in football clubs are valued in line with the valuation of other capital assets in the capital market. Moreover, it analyzes the risk profile of football stocks. By taking this perspective, the paper also contributes to the discussion on the motives of those who invest in football clubs, particularly the question of whether they expect extra benefits, i.e., in addition to dividends and share price appreciation, from the investments.

The empirical study analyzes the share prices of 19 listed European football clubs from January 2010 to December 2016. Building on the capital asset pricing model, the authors used Zellner’s (1962) seemingly unrelated regressions.

The results indicate that the majority of the football clubs in the sample are overvalued. This implies that investments in football stocks are mainly attractive for those investors who expect to derive extra benefits from their investment. That might be likely for strategic, patron and fan investors, but not for purely financial investors.

As a next step, more advanced factor models could be applied to the analysis.

For investors, the results imply that portfolio diversification is particularly beneficial while buying football stocks. For football clubs, the rather low general market risk, combined with the overvaluation, leads to low equity costs when new shares are issued.

The results suggest that dividends and share price appreciation are not the only benefits football stock owners derive from the stocks, thus underlining that further investigations in their motives to hold football stocks are very promising.

The aims of the research are twofold: (1) exploring whether football club stocks can be considered an asset class of their own; (2) investigating whether football stocks enable well-diversified investors to achieve more efficient risk-return combinations.

Using efficient frontier optimization, a base portfolio, with standard stocks and bonds, and a corresponding enhanced portfolio, which includes football stocks in the investment opportunity set, are defined. This procedure is applied to four portfolio composition rules. Pairwise comparisons of portfolio Sharpe ratios include a test for statistical significance.

The results indicate a low correlation of football stocks and standard stocks; thus, football stocks could be considered an asset class of their own. Nevertheless, the addition of football stocks to a well-diversified portfolio does not improve its risk-return efficiency because the weak performance of football stocks eliminates their advantage of low correlation.

This study contributes to the evidence that investments in football are different from ‘ordinary’ investments and need further research, particularly into market participants and their investment motives.

Football stocks are not attractive to pure financial investors. Thus, football clubs need to know more about which side benefits are appreciated by which kind of investor and how much it costs to produce these side benefits.

To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to analyse the risk-return efficiency of football stocks from the perspective of a pure financial investor, i.e. an investor in football stocks who does not earn side benefits, such as strategic investors or fan investors.

The purpose of this paper is to find the optimal environmental quality criteria for a strategic eco-labeling authority with three objectives (i.e. maximizing the aggregate environmental quality, maximizing the industry profit and maximizing the social welfare). Particularly, the authors investigate how the existence of imperfectly informed consumers affects labeling criteria determination and competition among firms.

A game-theoretic modeling approach was adopted in this paper. A three-stage sequential game was modeled and backward induction was used to solve for a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium. To investigate the impacts of the existence of imperfectly informed consumers, the equilibrium, if all consumers are perfectly informed of the eco-label, was studied as a benchmark.

A more strict eco-labeling criterion improves revenues for both the labeled and unlabeled firms. It is interesting to find that the eco-labeling criteria to maximize industry profits are stricter than the criteria to maximize social welfare. Moreover, when the fraction of imperfectly informed consumers increases, the eco-labeling criteria to maximize aggregate environmental quality or industry profits will be more strict, while the criteria to maximize the social welfare will be looser.

The authors analyze the equilibrium strategies for firms against the eco-labeling criteria certified by authority with different objectives. The obtained optimal labeling strategies could provide insightful guidelines for the certifying authority to select the best suitable labeling criteria to achieve its goals.

Since the beginning of the 2000s, investors have more frequently invested into professional football clubs, thereby radically changing the industry landscape. This review's purpose is to analyze and synthesize the state of research to understand motives, roles and implications of football club investors, and to provide recommendations for further research.

The paper presents an integrative literature review by identifying relevant English articles based on the search terms investor, owner, investment, ownership, shareholder and stakeholder in combination with soccer or football. Around 2,431 articles were reviewed. A total of 129 relevant articles was analyzed and synthesized within eight subject areas.

Investors in professional club football is a young research stream with a clear European focus. Investor motives and roles are diverse and implications are multidimensional. Investors mostly aim for indirect returns rather than pure profit- or win-maximization.

Football clubs comprise an own investment class for which the identified, unique specifics must be considered to develop a financially successful investment model. Thorough academic research of investors' inherent characteristics, investor-club pairings and the pillars of long-term strategies for successful investor-club liaisons are avenues of future research. Furthermore, the results illustrate the need for research outside of Europe.

The paper is the first systematic, integrative review of existing literature in the domain of equity investments into professional club football. The findings genuinely show that, depending on the investor type and ownership structure, investors have a wide impact in professional club football.

Let there be two individuals: “rich,” and “poor.” Due to inefficiency of the income redistribution policy, if a social planner were to tax the rich in order to transfer to the poor, only a fraction of the taxed income would be given to the poor. Under such inefficiency and a standard utility specification, a Rawlsian social planner who seeks to maximize the utility of the worst-off individual will select a different allocation of incomes than a utilitarian social planner who seeks to maximize the sum of the individuals’ utilities. However, when individuals prefer not only to have more income but also not to have low status conceptualized as low relative income, and when this distaste is incorporated in the individuals’ utility functions with a weight that is greater than a specified critical level, then a utilitarian social planner will select the very same income distribution as a Rawlsian social planner.