Leadership Succession and Performance: An Application to College Football

Abstract

This article examines the impact of leader succession on organizational performance. We argue that both time and size of program are critical factors that need to be considered to appropriately determine the impacts of the leader succession on performance. We focus our analysis on the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) and examine the effect of performance-related coaching firings on on-field performance (win-loss percentage, Sagarin rating, Sagarin rank) and financial performance (team revenue). We cluster teams into three categories based on revenue and analyze team performance following leader succession after the first, second, and fourth year following the change. While most studies in this area report findings consistent with vicious cycle theory or ritual scapegoating, our findings offer primary support for common sense theory and ritual scapegoating, contingent on time and the size of the program as determined by team revenue.

Who should we hire?: Examining coaching succession in NCAA Division I women’s basketball

“…In a similar study, Canella and Rowe 23 examined the effect of ability and experience on the results of succession in Major League Baseball. Similar to Pfeffer and Blake, 21 Canella and Rowe found that managerial succession did not have any effect on team performance, supporting ritual scapegoating theory. 23 However, the authors found that teams with managers of higher ability (i.e.…”

“…Despite much of the existing literature indicating that coaches are scapegoats for losing and that coaching changes do not translate to more wins, 7,[20][21][22] intercollegiate athletic coaches are routinely replaced for low performance. Pressure from students, fans, alumni, and a variety of other stakeholders often leave an athletic director with little choice but to replace a coach, especially in instances where winning is at a premium.…”

“…In many cases, these administrative decision-makers have no choice but to hire a new coach in instances where the coach retires, takes a new position, or performs so poorly that the pressure to replace the coach becomes insurmountable. 21 The research that has addressed the whom should I hire question has focused on the ability, experience, and previous position held by the newly hired coach. Born from social learning theory, 26,27 the concept that more experience helps to build skills is one that is widely used when assessing potential job candidates, or when determining one's career path.…”

Ch-Ch-Ch-changes: How Action Phase Functional Leadership, Team Human Capital, and Interim vs. Permanent Leader Status Impact Post-transition Team Performance

“…For example, Dohrn et al (2015) found support for both the common sense and ritual scapegoating approaches within their study of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) football teams. Likewise, McTeer et al (1995) found that within-season coaching changes across four professional sports leagues in North America-the National Basketball Association (NBA), National Football League (NFL), National Hockey League (NHL), and MLB-were associated with improved post-change performance improvements during that season, but not in the subsequent season.…”

The year-two effect: Evidence and antecedents for second season success in NCAA division I football

“…In terms of peer-reviewed literature that has examined the potential effects of coaching tenure on performance, there exists a subset of studies that have lent insights to this area. One such study was conducted by Dohrn, Lopez, and Reinhardt (2015) to look at leadership succession in NCAA football and the impact it had on FBS teams' financial and athletic performances over one, two, and four-season timeframes. Following a series of regression analyses, it was reported that new coaches positively and significantly impacted the on-field performances of teams over these time periods, as determined by absolute increases in Sagarin ratings, Sagarin ranks, and winning percentages.…”