Connecting the community through sport club partnerships

Abstract

This article examines the nature of community sport connections evidenced by relationships between community sport clubs and various organizations in the community. This article uses a social capital perspective to highlight the potential of interorganizational relationships through sport as a mechanism for generating community connections and social cohesion. The findings of interviews with 20 club presidents illustrate how interorganizational relationships connect sport with the broader community as clubs reach out to and link with a variety of partners. Critical relationship qualities included engagement, reciprocity and trust, which are consistent with the tenets of social capital. Opportunities for friendship and community outreach were also identified as aspects of club relationships and are a further indication of how sport may connect the community.

Resourcefulness, reciprocity and reflexivity: the three Rs of partnership in sport for public health research

“…Trust, at one level, involves an appropriate degree of respect and courteousness between those committed to work together on a project (Barber et al 2011). Trust, cooperation and friendship, for example, are proposed as building blocks for collective action towards the promotion of a range of sport and non-sport-related outcomes in alliances between sport clubs and other community organisations (Misener and Doherty 2012) Yet trust in RPP partnerships also operates at an ethical level in terms of confidentiality, consent and discretion. The relationship between reciprocity and trust then should be thought of as going beyond the boundaries of politeness and into the maelstrom of honesty and integrity which are framed by an open approach to partnership working; one which reflects a moral code of carefulness, exactitude and veracity no matter how difficult decisions might become.…”

Exploring organizational capacity in a Sport for Development and Peace setting.

“…Prior literature on community sport clubs indicates infrastructure and process capacity to be a relatively small challenge among clubs (Wicker & Breuer, 2011). At the same time, those lacking access to sport facilities (i.e., limited infrastructure capacity) often form additional inter-organizational partnerships (Misener & Doherty, 2012;. The emergent findings in this study on the perceived importance of strengthening infrastructure and process capacity for increased organizational capacity does not appear in prior capacity literature.…”

“…In a more recent study of community sport clubs, Misener and Doherty (2012) found Canadian sport clubs were involved in an average of six external partnerships.…”

“…Many of these organizations engage in partnerships with other groups including government agencies, sport organizations, and other development organizations (Giulianotti, 2011a;Sugden, 2010). Sustainable partnerships involving nonprofit sport organizations are characterized by a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities, trust, a shared vision, proactive problem-solving, mission alignment, two-way communication, appropriate and balanced decision-making structures, and multiples types of evaluation (Doherty et al, 2014;Misener & Doherty, 2012Parent & Harvey, 2009). …”

“…However, many of these organizations engage in partnerships with other types of organizations including government agencies, sport organizations, and other development organizations (Giulianotti, 2011a;Sugden, 2010 (Doherty et al, 2014;Misener & Doherty, 2012Parent & Harvey, 2009). …”