Managing legitimacy and uncertainty in professional team sport: the NBA's draft lottery

Soebbing, Brian P.; Mason, Daniel S.

doi:10.1108/13527590910964928

Cited by 24 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…He argued that legitimacy judgments stem from constituents observing perceived dimensions of organizational action (e.g., competition fairness; Soebbing & Mason, 2009). Once an action is perceived, social judgments form based on congruence between an action (within a perceived dimension) and a constituent's expectations for appropriate practice.…”

Section: The Development Of a Framework To Capture Perceptions Of Spomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bitektine (2011) argued that legitimacy judgments stem from constituents perceiving specific organizational actions, which then inform evaluations. For example, previous work in sport management shows us that constituents scrutinize the draft policy or fairness of a competition (Soebbing & Mason, 2009), the viability of a ticketing market (Drayer & Martin, 2010), or the branding choices of national sport organizations (Phelps & Dickson, 2009). Scrutiny of each area of organizational practice informed legitimacy judgments in prior sport work.…”

Section: Perceived Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the analytic processing stage involves constituents classifying organizations (e.g., professional basketball organization; nonprofit CSO) as a basis to make sense of their actions. In turn, this allows constituents to evaluate organizational practices in relation to a set of myths that apply to all organizations in a classification (Meyer & Rowan, 1977;Santomier, 1979;Soebbing & Mason, 2009;Suchman, 1995;Washington & Patterson, 2011;Zucker, 1987).…”

Section: Perceived Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moral legitimacy judgments occur when constituents perceive that organizations have 'done the right thing'. Sport management researchers have explored efforts to obtain (Babiak & Trendafilova, 2011;Babiak, 2007) and repair moral legitimacy (Soebbing & Mason, 2009). Babiak (2007) found that a Canadian Sport Centre (CSC) formed relationships and partnerships to comply with accepted practices in its field (cf.…”

Section: Perceived Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Development of a Framework to Capture Perceptions of Sport Organizations Legitimacy

Lock

Filo

Kunkel

et al. 2015

Journal of Sport Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this manuscript, we use Bitektine's (2011) theory of organizational social judgments to develop a framework to Capture Perceptions of Organizational Legitimacy (CPOL). We outline a three-stage framework as a method to measure the perceived dimensions on which constituents scrutinize sport organizations legitimacy. In stage one of the framework, we defined the organizational context of a nonprofit sport organization in Sydney, Australia to establish the classification, purpose, and relationship of the focal entity to its constituents. In stage two, we distributed a qualitative questionnaire (N = 279) to identify the perceived dimensions on which constituents scrutinized organizational action. In stage 3 we distributed a quantitative questionnaire (N = 860) to test six perceived dimensions, which emerged during stage two of the CPOL framework. The six dimensions explained 63% of respondents' overall organizational judgment, providing support for the CPOL framework as a contextdriven process to measure constituent perceptions of the legitimacy of sport organizations.Running head: LEGITIMACY FRAMEWORK 3

show abstract

Section: The Development Of a Framework To Capture Perceptions Of Spomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Perceived Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Perceived Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Perceived Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Development of a Framework to Capture Perceptions of Sport Organizations Legitimacy

Lock

Filo

Kunkel

et al. 2015

Journal of Sport Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Games became predictable and less competitive as the dominant regional team would inevitably win, eroding the sporting ethos, and drawing fewer crowds. 1 Even though the sport was suffering, the system was selfperpetuating: winners continued to recruit the best players, drawing on their money and prestige. In 1947, the then Basketball Association of America (now the NBA) introduced a draft to correct for these imbalances.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Global Social Support System: What the International Community Could Learn From the United States' National Basketball Association's Scheme for Redistribution of New Talent

Ooms

Stuckler

Basu

2015

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If global trade were fair, it is argued, then international aid would be unnecessary and inequalities inherent to the economic system would be justifiable. Here, we argue that while global trade is unfair, in part because richer countries set the rules, we believe that additional interventions must go beyond trade regulation and short-term aid to redress inequalities among countries that will persist and possibly worsen in spite of such measures. Drawing on an example of measures taken to redress the characteristics of a system that inherently increases inequality, the ability of dominant teams in the National Basketball Association (NBA) to recruit the most talented players, we argue that market-based competition even in the context of fair rules will create and amplify economic inequalities. We argue that, just as the NBA created a draft to reduce the emergence of severe inequalities among teams, systems of social support within richer countries should be paralleled by a global system to counterbalance persisting inequalities among countries that are produced by market forces. We explain how such a mechanism might operate among integrated market economies, and identify the Global

show abstract

Anchoring bias in the evaluation of basketball players: A closer look at NBA draft decision‐making

Berger

Daumann

2021

Manage Decis Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The NBA installed the draft mechanism to fairly distribute young amateur players among its franchises. As this policy hinges on appropriate talent evaluation skills of the respective organizations, it can be considered a proxy for decision‐making under uncertainty. Such judgments are prone to fallacies and systemic mistakes. The article found the RSCI rank as a problematic metric, which is the source for systematic draft errors. It can be shown that in many cases, managers do not deviate enough from the pre‐draft rankings of players, leading to systematically over‐ and undervaluing certain groups of talents. This can be described as a decision‐quality‐lowering anchoring bias.

show abstract

Managing legitimacy and uncertainty in professional team sport: the NBA's draft lottery

Cited by 24 publications

References 31 publications

The Development of a Framework to Capture Perceptions of Sport Organizations Legitimacy

The Development of a Framework to Capture Perceptions of Sport Organizations Legitimacy

A Global Social Support System: What the International Community Could Learn From the United States' National Basketball Association's Scheme for Redistribution of New Talent

Anchoring bias in the evaluation of basketball players: A closer look at NBA draft decision‐making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About