Public Value In Elite Sport Management: An Insider's View

Aim and Research Questions The growing costs associated with developing international sporting success forces elite sport policy makers to justify their expenses. Hence, governments increasingly tend to advocate for elite sport development by stating that it will trigger a range of societal benefits for the public (e.g. increased happiness or inspiration to participate in sport). In contrast, researchers argue that governments overstate the positive impact of elite sport and pinpoint a lack of clear evidence to support the governmental claims (De Rycke & De Bosscher, 2019). In addition, little is known how elite stakeholders, such as athletes, coaches and performance directors perceive the impact of elite sport for society. Their views can support or question the justification of elite sport investments (Funahashi et al., 2016). As such, the following research question was posed: What are the assumed potential outcomes of elite sport in society according to elite sport stakeholders in the Netherlands? In doing so, we seek to extend the notion of societal impact by focusing on public value creation. Theoretical Background and Literature Review In 1995, Mark Moore published his seminal book Creating public value. In this work he expresses the need for public managers to identify social goals and to build support for their policies. The concept of public value can help sport policy makers understand how elite sports can create positive outcomes for the public. By asking their views on the societal impact of elite sport (in this case by using the categories of the MESSIframework of De Rycke & De Bosscher, 2019), the public is given the opportunity to express what they value in sport. However, it is important to not only focus on the views of the public, but it is equally important to incorporate the views of a multitude of stakeholders and to combine their interests and values. Important groups in this respect are elite athletes, their coaches and technical directors (representatives of sport federations) (cf. Chelladurai & Chang, 2000). The MESSI-framework as developed by De Rycke & De Bosscher (2019) provides a valuable categorization of the potential both positive and negative societal impact areas of elite sports. Ten categories are distinguished within the framework: 1. Social equality and inclusion; 2. Collective identity and pride; 3. Ethics and fair play; 4. Feel good and passion; 5. Fans and (media) attraction; 6. International prestige and image; 7. Athletes’ ability and quality of life; 8. Sport participation and health; 9. Sponsors and commercial activity; and 10. Local consumption and living conditions. Research Design, Methodology and Data Analysis The data were collected in the Dutch National Elite Sport Survey, which is conducted every four years. The survey consists of four questionnaires for different subgroups: elite athletes (n=289), elite sports talents (n=302), coaches (n=100) and technical directors 705 (n=29). In the 2019 survey the ten categories in the MESSI-framework were included as ten items in the survey. Respondents had the opportunity to indicate on a five point Likert scale whether they think elite sports can create positive societal impact. Results/Findings and Discussion At the time of writing the abstract, the research is in its final stages of data collection. The preliminary results indicate that among the four groups there is widespread support for the idea elite sports can deliver positive societal impact. For almost all categories the majority of the respondents agreed that elite sports contributes to that particular category. Most support was found for ‘feel good & passion’ (average agreement of 88%) and ‘collective identity & pride’ (87%). Respondents had their biggest doubts on the contribution elite sport can make on ‘local consumption and living conditions’ (on average 34% agrees that elite sports can contribute, while 24% disagrees). Surprisingly, despite recent doping and matchfixing scandals, there are little doubts among all four groups about the positive impact on ‘ethics & fair play’. Disagreement on this topic varies from about 5% among athletes to 14% among technical directors. Conclusion, Contribution and Implication ** An understanding of an insider's perspective on the societal impact of elite sports can advance the discussion of what is the public value of sport and how this value can be enlarged. This paper contributes to a deeper knowledge of the perspectives of athletes, coaches and technical directors on societal impact. In general, we can conclude that the views of elite sport stakeholders are far more favorable than the available evidence-base suggests. These insights should be taken into account when policy makers want to create public value with the positive impacts of elite sports and when they combat the negative impacts. References: Chelladurai, P. & Chang, K. (2000). "Targets and standards of quality in sport services." Sport Management Review, 3 (1):1-22. De Rycke, J. & De Bosscher, V. (2019). Mapping the potential societal impacts triggeredby elite sport: a conceptual framework, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, DOI: 10.1080/19406940.2019.1581649 Funahashi, H., De Bosscher, V., and Mano, Y., 2015. Understanding public acceptance ofelite sport policy in Japan: A structural equation modelling approach. European Sport Management Quarterly, 15 (4), 478–504. Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.