Network Key: Solid shape: Key Organisation included in research Transparent Shape: Organisation in broader network of Key Organisations Bold line: Connection between Key Organisations Faint line: Connection between organisations in the network secondary to the focal network Dashed line: Variable connections between sport organisations impacting on legacy for Masters sport Star: Organisation replaced previous NSW Major Events Board
Responds to RQ2 - How do the conceptualisations of sport development legacies by key organisations in an event network affect the development of a common domain? Domain Consensus Increase Participation – These promises were an argument on paper Raise Awareness – Some Sport Organisations already providing Masters sport, others have no intention of making changes, others concerned by the suitability of their sports for Masters participants Enhance Opportunities – qotes on next slide
Responds to RQ3 - What processes do the key organisations consider should be undertaken to secure sport development legacies? Ideological Consensus Mass Participation – SWMGOC information guide promoted SWMG as being for everyone, from past elite athletes to newcomers. However, some sports conducted as World Championships – justified – wouldn’t have attracted the participant numbers if these sports were NOT WC’s. In turn, these sports couldn’t promote their sports as ‘come-try’ formats Event Media – notes over the page
Event Media - NSW S+R – messages were around one-off participation, not about joining clubs, training, preparing, etc. Some Sport Organisations happy with amount of coverage, others critical of focus on 100 year old participants and focus on only a few sports.
Responds to RQ 4 - How and why do key organisations interact around a large-scale sport event to deliver sport development legacies? Interorganisational Evaluation Relationship Building – SWMGOC used NSW S&R resources, but reluctant to share information with them Organisational Cultures – - SWMGOC needed to achieve consistency across the different sports, tried to assist Sport Organisations in terms of capacity, but then also reported that it depended on what Sport Organisations normally did Sport Organisations – SWMGOC did not understand that SWMG was not the first priority of the Sport Organisations, labelled SWMGOC’s approach as a one-size fits all approach, and this was seen to come at a cost to some Sport Organisations Successes SWMGOC - attracted new people to Masters sport and inspired many others to get active – however, research based on question about participation in WMG Sport Organisations – only 2 sports were able to provide insights into positive participation legacies from the SWMG
Responds to RQ5 - What factors enable and constrain the coordination of leverage activities by key organisations for sport development legacies? Work Coordination Impetus of individuals – Sport Orgs – only one sport provided an example of individual experience leading to positive changes in the organisations
Large-Scale Sport Events and Sport Development Outcomes
Large-Scale Sport Events andSport Development Outcomes Alana Thomson PhD Candidate University of Technology, Sydney Sport Management Association of Australia and New Zealand (SMAANZ) Conference 29th – 30th November, 2012
Structure of Presentation• Background• Research Questions• Research Design• Findings & Discussion• Conclusions
Background Large-Scale Sport Events• Large-scale sport events offer a range of outcomes and legacies for host cities• Sport development legacies are often used to encourage public support and justify government spending on events• Sport Development defined as: – “policies, processes and practices that form an integral feature of work involved in providing sporting opportunities and positive sporting experiences” (Bramham & Hylton, 2008, p. 2)
Background Sport Development LegaciesType of Legacy Description Trickle-down effectIncreased Inactive and irregular sport participants encouraged to DirectParticipation become more active more often *Improved sport performance – the next generation of OlympiansEnhanced Refurbishment or development of new facilities IndirectFacilitiesImproved Event-related media coverage of sports improves profile of IndirectProfile of Sport sportStrengthened Opportunities to train volunteers, gain financial legacies, IndirectSport enhance links between sports and event stakeholders, gainOrganisations exposure and expertise working with organising committees, other sports and other sport event stakeholdersImproved Sport Opportunities to improve sport policy for increased IndirectPolicy participation
Research Problem• Limited research that supports the trickle-down effect• There is limited understanding of the relationship between large-scale multi-sport events and sport development legacies• Concept of Event Leverage (ex ante frameworks) applied to economic, tourism and broader social outcomes (Chalip, 2002, 2006; Chalip & Leyns, 2002; Kellet et. al., 2008; O’Brien, 2005, 2006, 2007; O’Brien & Chalip, 2007, 2008; O’Brien & Gardiner, 2006)– Highlighted the importance of understanding of relationships between organisations in networks that influence these broader outcomes
Theoretical Framework• Interorganisational Network (ION) Theory (Benson, 1975; Hudson, 2004) – Collaborative outputs influenced by interrelationships between many organisations operating interdependently in a network• Effectiveness of IONs based on 4 dimensions: – Domain Consensus – agreement between organisations regarding the scope of activities within the ION; – Ideological Consensus – agreement between organisations regarding the appropriate methods for tasks; – Interorganisational Evaluation – perception of the value of contributions by other organisations in the ION; – Work Coordination – patterns of collaboration and cooperation between organisations to achieve effectiveness and efficiency.
Conceptual FrameworkDomain Consensus Key Key Organisation Organisation Ideological Sport Consensus Development Key Key LegaciesOrganisation Organisation from a large- Key Inter- scale sport Organisation organisational event Evaluation Work Coordination
Research Objective & Questions• To understand what facilitates and/or inhibits sport development legacies from large-scale sport events1. Who are the key organisations impacting on sport development legacies from a large-scale sport event and how is the network structured?2. How do the conceptualisations of sport development legacies by key organisations in an event network affect the development of a common domain?3. What strategies do the key organisations consider should be undertaken to secure sport development legacies?4. How and why do key organisations interact around a large-scale sport event to deliver sport development legacies?5. What factors enable and constrain the coordination of leverage activities by key organisations for sport development legacies?
Research Design• Case Study: Sydney 2009 World Masters Games• Data collection: – Documents – Interviews from key organisations (July ‘09-May ‘10)• Data analysis: – Process of Open and Pattern Coding (Bazeley, 2007; Bryman, 2004) • sport development legacies • relevant interactions by organisations in the network
Sydney 2009 World Masters Games• Awarded to Sydney in 2004, formalised under the Sydney World Masters Games Organising Committee Act (2005)• 27,500 competitors, 28 sports, 72 venues, 9 days• $8.5m NSW Govt. investment• $8.5m Australian Govt. investment• Estimated $AU48m direct and flow on economic impact• Bid promises to leave a lasting legacy for Masters sport
Event Networks (1)Key Organisations•Event organising committee – Sydney 2009 World Masters Games Organising Committee (SWMGOC)•Relevant government departments: – NSW Major Event Board (bid phase and legislation), Events NSW established in 2007 – NSW Sport & Recreation (came under the auspices of Communities NSW in the lead up to the SWMG)•Event governing body – International Masters Games Association (IMGA)•Sport organisations - 28 sports contracted by SWMGOC including SSOs, NSOs and a Masters Sport Association, representatives from 24 sport organisations agreed to be interviewed for the research
Event Networks (2) Key Organisational Purpose Network Roles OrganisationSWMGOC Plan, organise and stage •Documents indicate role in securing legacy the SWMG •Interviews revealed SWMGOC focus on event delivery, not responsible for securing legacy(NSW MEB) (To attract events to NSW) (n/a)Events NSW To attract and develop •No role to secure legacies for sport, where it events in NSW occurs is a bonusNSW Sport & Deliver NSW sport and •Identified by other org as having a role to playRecreation physical activity objectives •Legacies to Master sport from SWMG not part of their strategyIMGA Promote and affect •Identified by other orgs as having a role to play change in mainstream •Identified role in securing legacies for Masters sport for improvements in sport, but no capacity to do so for the SWMG Masters sportSport Promote, develop and/or •Identified by other orgs as having a role to playOrganisations grow their sports •Focused on event delivery •Limited identification of role in securing legacies
Event Networks (3) IMGA IFsNSW GovernmentTourism Portfolio Events NSW NSOs (contracted) Other NSOs SWMGOC SSOs (contracted) Other SSOs NSW Sport & Recreation MSA (contracted)Communities NSW
Legacy Visions Key Increase Participation Raise Awareness Enhance OpportunitiesOrganisation Raise Show Sport Organisations Encourage participation in awareness/understanding Masters sport worth SWMGOC ever-lasting, active and of Masters sport, increase focusing on, but no healthy lifestyles responsibility by Sport discussions with Sport Organisations Organisations Promote and inspire active Raise awareness of Masters Encourage increased NSW MEB lifestyles and increases in sport by Sport provision of Masters sport sport participation Organisations opportunities SWMG fit agency purpose, Enhancing opportunitiesNSW Sport & but not incorporated into n/a dependent on Sport Recreation agency strategy Organisations Raise profile and interest of IMGA n/a n/a Masters sport – Host City Sport Most Sport Organisations Uncertain of such legacies n/aOrganisations already aware, mixed impl. Need for ROI
Legacy Strategies Mass Org’l Government Event Media Key Orgs Participation Pathways Learning Funding (EM) (MP) (OL) (GF) Promoted Promoted Implemented Success (Qty) access to SWMGOC MP ‘Observer n/a Legacy (low) SWMG Mixed Impl. Program’ database Promoted Promised OL NSW MEB Success (Qty) n/a n/a MP opps PathwaysNSW Sport & Messages n/a req’d to n/a n/a Recreation questioned secure legacy Promoted Messages GF needed to IMGA MP n/a n/a questioned secure legacy ‘Sport for All’ Current GF Mixed Could not Sport OL opps does not Mixed Impl. perceptions utilise SWMGOrganisations desired support of EM database
Interactions OrganisationalKey Organisations Relationship Building Successes Cultures Aware Sport Orgs SWMG successfully Relationships focused operate differently, delivered SWMGOC on event delivery but this did not come SWMG secured Temporary org. through in participation legacies interactions (Govt agencies and (NSW MEB) SWMG successfully Sport Organisations n/a Events NSW delivered critical to success) SWMGOC’s approach NSW Sport & n/a n/a not conducive Recreation participation legacies IMGA n/a n/a n/a Sport components Some frustrated by Perceived SWMGOC successfully deliveredSport Organisations high turnover of staff did not Participation legacies SWMGOC staff understand sport limited
Coordination Impetus ofKey Organisations Contracts Legitimacy Individuals Challenges attracting Individual’s impetus All relationships govt support and and advocacy key to SWMGOC formal - contracted buy-in by Sport motivating org. Organisations efforts Aware IMGA seeking Signed Host City NSW MEB ex-Olympic city to n/a Contract with IMGA improve legitimacy Relationship SWMG portfolio shift NSW Sport & legislated, but influenced SWMGOC n/a Recreation changed objectives Signed Host City IMGA selected Contract with Sydney to build IMGA n/a SWMGOC, required legitimacy of the further contracts WMG “contracted” Limited hype created Constraints onSport Organisations Created tensions limited impetus individual efforts
Concluding Comments• Limited efforts to form Domain and Ideological Consensus for sport development legacies• Interactions in the ION were narrowly focused on the successful delivery of the event, not legacy• Contracts, Legitimacy of the event and the Impetus of Individuals in organisations impact coordination ION
Key References• Bazeley, P. (2007). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. London: Sage.• Benson, J. (1975). The Interorganizational Network as a Political Economy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20, 229-249.• Bramham, P., & Hylton, K. (2008). Introduction. In K. Hylton & P. Bramham (Eds.), Sports Development: Policy, process and practice (2 ed., pp. 1-9). Oxon: Routledge.• Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.• Chalip, L. (2002). Using the Olympics to optimise tourism benefits: University lecture on the Olympics [online article]. Retrieved from http://olympicstudies.uab.es/lec/pdf/chalip.pdf• Chalip, L. (2006). Towards Social Leverage of Sport. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 11(2), 109-127.• Chalip, L., & Leyns, A. (2002). Local Business Leveraging of a Sport Event: Managing an Event for Economic Benefit. Journal of Sport Management, 16, 132- 158.• Hindson, A., Gidlow, B., & Peebles, C. (1994). The "trickle-down" effect of top-level sport: myth or reality? A case study of the Olympics. Australian Journal of Leisure Recreation, 4, 16-24.• Hudson, B. (2004). Analysing Network Partnerships. Public Management Review, 6(1), 75-94.• Kellett, P., Hede, A. M., & Chalip, L. (2008). Social Policy for Sport Events: Leveraging (Relationships with) Teams from other Nations for Community Benefit. European Sport Management Quarterly, 8(2), 101-121.• OBrien, D. (2005). Strategic Business Leveraging of a Mega Sport Event: The Sydney 2000 Olympic Games Experience. Australia: The Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre; Australian Government,.• OBrien, D. (2006). Event Business Leveraging: The Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(1), 240-261.• OBrien, D. (2007). Points of leverage: maximising host community benefit from a regional surfing festival. European Sport Management Quarterly, 7(2), 141- 165.• OBrien, D., & Chalip, L. (2007). Executive training exercise in sport event leverage. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 1(4), 296-304.• OBrien, D., & Chalip, L. (2008). Sport events and strategic leveraging: pushing towards the triple bottom line. In A. Woodside & D. Martin (Eds.), Advancing Tourism Management (pp. 318-338). Cambridge, MA: CABI Publishing.• OBrien, D., & Gardiner, S. (2006). Creating Sustainable Mega Event Impacts: Networking and Relationship Development through Pre-Event Training. Sport Management Review, 9, 25-47.• Toohey, K 2008, The Sydney Olympics: Striving for legacies-overcoming short term disappointments and long-term deficiencies, The International Journal of the History of Sport, vol. 24, no. 14, pp. 1953-1971.• Veal, A., Toohey, K. & Frawley, S.M. 2012, The sport participation legacy of the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games and other international sporting events hosted in Australia, Journal of Policy Research, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 155-184.