The Paradox of Gender Diversity, Organizational Outcomes, and Recruitment in the Boards of National Governing Bodies of Sport

Abstract

Diversity have become a desired value in sport organizations. However, regardless of the aspiration towards more gender diverse leadership, women leaders remain a minority. Diversity and its impact on group performance has also increased interest among scholars. Building on information/decision-making theory and the concept of the right fit, this paper introduces a new theoretical model that sheds light on the contradiction of gender-biased recruitment/selection processes in sports organization boards and the impact of diversity on organizational outcomes. The model is partly tested with survey data from the Finnish National Governing Bodies of Sport (NGBs). This paper shows that, because of the gender-biased recruitment/selection process, the benefits of gender-diverse organization boards may not be fully actualized, which not only affects the functioning of sports organizations, but may also limit women’s inclusion on sports organization boards.

Analysis of gender equality policies on the boards of directors of national sports federations: an exploratory analysis: survey report

“…Several research studies have focused on finding explanations for the gender inequality regimes in sports governance (Adriaanse, 2016a;Evans & Pfister, 2021). First, research explored women's leadership roles, gender equality, and diversity on sports boards (Gaston et al, 2020;Mikkonen et al, 2021). Within the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Inclusion Scorecard, it was examined if gender diversity in the governance structures of the national governing organizations of sport impacted the gender of members (Gaston et al, 2020).…”

“…Within the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Inclusion Scorecard, it was examined if gender diversity in the governance structures of the national governing organizations of sport impacted the gender of members (Gaston et al, 2020). In another study, a theoretical model for the boards of Finland's sports organisations was proposed by categorising the inconsistencies of gender-biased recruitment and selection methods and the impact of diversity on organisational performance (Mikkonen et al, 2021). Another research investigated the practices of three organisations with essential stakes in Australian professional sports (Banu-Lawrence et al, 2020).…”

Multidisciplinary perspectives on equality and diversity in sports 2022

“…Diversity has become a desired value in sports organisations (Knoppers et al, 2021). However women leaders in sports remain under-represented (Evans and Pfister, 2021;Mikkonen et al, 2021). Women have easier access to the sport practice than to the governance of sport organisations (Pape, 2020).…”

“…In this regard, Evans and Pfister (2021) highlight that patriarchal selection practices and organisational cultures reinforce inequality. This may be explained because the masculinity is often the operating principle of sports organisations, "homologous reproduction", a common practice in the selection processes of these entities that allows the influence of leaders to be preserved by selecting those candidates who have similar characteristics to them (Burton, 2015;Mikkonen et al, 2021;Walker et al, 2017). Therefore, only women who possess certain (masculine) traits and qualities or who can adapt to the mould of these demands are considered proper candidates (Mikkonen et al, 2021).…”

“…The under-representation of women in sport senior positions has not only forced regulatory bodies to issue rules to increase the women's presence (Crosby and Bryson, 2018;Hovden et al, 2019), but has also aroused the interest of academic research (Allison, 2016;Elling et al, 2019;Mikkonen et al, 2021;Sotiriadou and De Haan, 2019). Thus, alongside studies that analyse the possible reasons for this underrepresentation (Burton and Leberman, 2017;Soler et al, 2019), others focus on the disadvantages for sports organisations of limiting women's access to positions of responsibility (e.g.…”