Gender Segregation and Trajectories of Organizational Change: The Underrepresentation of Women in Sports Leadership

Abstract

This article offers an account of organizational change to explain why women leaders are underrepresented compared to women athletes in many sports organizations. I distinguish between accommodation and transformation as forms of change: the former includes women without challenging binary constructions of gender, the latter transforms an organization’s gendered logic. Through a case study of the International Olympic Committee from 1967-1995, I trace how the organization came to define gender equity primarily in terms of accommodating women’s segregated athletic participation. Key to this was the construction of women’s bodies as athletically able but inferior to men, an arrangement formalized in codified rules and procedures and legitimized by external stakeholders. Defined in these terms, gender equity did little to transform the organization’s binary and hierarchically gendered logic, which continued to shape the informal norms and procedures associated with the organization’s allegedly gender-neutral and meritocratic yet male-dominated leadership. I argue that the exclusion of women from ostensibly gender-integrated leadership positions allows organizations to avoid revealing gender similarity between men and women. This maintains a logic underpinned by notions of binary gender difference and masculine superiority.

Gender, Leadership, and Governance in English National Governing Bodies of Sport: Formal Structures, Rules, and Processes

“…However, these were examples of regulated liberties: small exercises of power that arise within the context of the existing social order (Bourdieu, 1991). Organizational change was not transformative of the two NGBs' (male dominated) gendered logic of practice (Bourdieu, 1992;Pape, 2020).…”

Real-Life Conundrums in the Struggle for Institutional Transformation

“…More diverse representation on the faculty could help to undermine old norms of “ideal workers” (Acker 1990) or “appropriate work” (Wooten and Branch 2012). There are also costs to focusing exclusively on increasing the proportion of women and people of color, including reifying gender binaries (Pape 2020) and making race/ethnicity seem merely about people rather than socially constructed power and relative advantage (Ray 2019). By looking for “impact” in numbers only, we undervalued a process of cultural change.…”

Gendering the Coronavirus Pandemic: Toward a Framework of Interdependence for Sport

“…To gain access to the sporting field, women have had to demand it as a right (Hargreaves, 1994;Schultz, 2014). To gain access to the decision-making table, women have had to prove their worth (Pape, 2020). Demands from women athletes and their advocates to expand professional opportunities, such as providing a women's Tour de France, are frequently met with the refrain: you are not economically viable.…”

“…As Alice Milliat (founder of the Fédération Sportive Féminine Internationale) might have warned were she alive today, women are always at risk of being expendable in a sporting structure built by men in service of supposedly independent male athletes and the ideology of masculinity that they stand for (Bryson, 1994). 5 This highlights the importance of changing the gendered logic of sports organizations, in part by bringing more women into decision-making positions, a goal that has proven even more elusive than access to the sporting field (Pape, 2020). Here again, there is a warning to be heeded in scholarship on the gendered impacts of economic shocks: women leaders tend to fare badly (Blanton et al, 2019;Lei & Bodenhausen, 2018).…”