Issues and Strategies Pertaining to the Canadian Governments' Coordination Efforts in Relation to the 2010 Olympic Games

Parent, Milena M.; Rouillard, Christian; Leopkey, Becca

doi:10.1080/16184742.2011.599202

Cited by 36 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, there already are some published research findings in this field, especially on swimming (Parent & Séguin, 2007;Breitbarth & Harris, 2008;Ferkins & Shilbury, 2010), on sporting events (Sotiriadou, 2009;Parent, Rouillard & Leopkey, 2011;Sallent, Palau & Guia, 2011;Xue & Mason, 2011) and on football (Michie & Oughton, 2005;Stevens & Watkins-Mathys, 2006;Holt, 2007;Anagnostopoulos, 2011;Peachey & Bruening, 2011;Walters, 2011 However, Breitbarth and Harris (2008) argue that the application of this theory remains something new to professional football managers, in terms of explicit knowledge on stakeholders (often contractual), the degree of transparency incorporated into business practices, or even interactions with groups formally considered as beyond the game's scope. In addition, in a study applied to American university football, Bravo (2004) tried to prioritize manager choices in relation to stakeholders existing in the state education system.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do stakeholders matter in strategic decision making of a sports organization?

Miragaia¹,

Ferreira²,

Carreira³

2014

Rev. adm. empres.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to identify and prioritize the stakeholders involved in making decisions in a sports organization. A multiple linear regression analysis was used to assess the influence of the attributes of power, legitimacy and urgency on the salience of the various stakeholders. The results showed a convergence of external and internal decision makers' perceptions, concerning the three main stakeholder groups: top management, sponsors and member association. Pearson correlations identified four types of stakeholder: definitive, dangerous, demanding and non-stakeholders. A generalized differentiation was also found in stakeholder classification, regarding evaluation of attributes, between external and internal decision makers. In addition, the study suggests the success of organizations' management will depend on correct identification of stakeholders and consequent assessment of their relevance, in order to highlight who should get priority, and how, in strategic decision making.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do stakeholders matter in strategic decision making of a sports organization?

Miragaia¹,

Ferreira²,

Carreira³

2014

Rev. adm. empres.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most citations with the sport event theme adopted systemic governance related focus as they were primarily interested the role stakeholders within the governance of sporting events. More specifically there were several studies that focused on the stakeholders of the event generally (e.g., Leopkey & Parent, 2015;Parent, 2016) while others delved deeper into the roles of specific stakeholders within the governance of the event (e.g., Nichols, Grix, Ferguson, Griffiths, 2016;Parent, Rouillard, & Leopkey, 2011).…”

Section: Research Contextsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance in Sport: A Scoping Review

Dowling

Leopkey

Smıth

2018

Journal of Sport Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the current state of sport governance research within the field of sport management. In adopting Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) framework, a scoping review was conducted involving a comprehensive search of all published literature between 1980 and 2016.The process involved searching four electronic databases and a manual search of sport management journals. The search identified (n=243) journal articles that examined sport governance related issues. Findings are presented as a frequency and thematic analysis. The frequency analysis reveals a notable increase in sport governance research in recent years with a large number of non-empirical studies focused on the not-for-profit sector. The thematic analysis draws upon and extends Henry and Lee's (2004) three notions of governance and identifies sport governance-related topics, research contexts and social issues. Findings indicate that all three forms of governance (organizational, systemic, and political) have contributed to our understanding of sport governance but more empirical and theoretically driven research is needed.Keywords: sport governance, research methods, sport organisation governance GOVERNANCE IN SPORT: A SCOPING REVIEW Governance in Sport: A Scoping Review Governance in sport has become a central concern to sport management academics and practitioners in recent years as evidenced by the number of keynotes (e.g., Shilbury, 2015), special issues (e.g., Dolles & Söderman, 2011), and books (e.g., Hoye & Cuskelly, 2007;King, 2017) dedicated to examining sport governance issues. This interest has emerged, in part, from broader societal concerns surrounding governance (e.g., Enron scandal and the global economic crisis) but also due to recent high profile failures specifically within the context of sport (e.g., Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and the Russian doping scandal). In general, the application of governance to the sport context sensitizes us to how sport organizations and systems are steered and controlled. Central to the concept of governance is the notion of power, where power lies within sport organizations and systems, and the extent to which power has shifted.Yet despite governance being recognized as a "paradigm-generating concept" (Bellamy & Palumbo, 2010, p. xii) that "has spawned a veritable cottage industry of its own" (Grix & Phillpots, 2011, p. 6), there has been no systematic attempt to capture the extent of this burgeoning literature base by either public administration, management or sport management scholars. It is also evident that despite much academic and practitioner interest in the concept of governance, definitional agreement within the broader public administration and management literature remains problematic. The concept of governance has been described as confusing (Kjaer, 2004), elusive (Pierre, 2000), and fuzzy (Colebatch, 2014), with its application to date being imprecise (Bevir, 2012) and with "too many meanings to be useful" (Rhodes, 1996, p. 660).Furthermo...

show abstract

“…Parent, Rouillard, and Leopkey 2011); ∘ A democratic approach to stakeholder governance, that is emphasis on performance, accountability, legitimacy, trust, transparency and stakeholder participation (cf. Chappelet and Kübler-Mabbott 2008), including public participation to foster momentum, energy and pride in the Games and in Canada; ∘ The co-location of key partners (see Parent, Rouillard, and Leopkey 2011); ∘ Introduction of new actors to fulfil specific goals, roles and responsibilities (e.g.…”

Section: Further Analysis and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A third key difference is co-location. Based on the experiences in Sydney for the 2000 Olympic Games, where issues occurred between the key partners, Vancouver 2010's partners chose to co-locate their offices; this was doubly important in a country with three time zones separating the nation's capital and the location of the event (for more information, see Parent, Rouillard, and Leopkey 2011).…”

Section: Governancementioning

confidence: 99%