| Summary: | Political behaviour and decision-making have been central themes in the
organizational theory and organizational behaviour literature for decades (cf.
Bass, 1983; Hickson, Butler, Cray, Mallory, & Wilson, 1986; Pettigrew, 1973;
Pfeffer, 1981, 1992; Riker, 1964). As Mintzberg (1983) suggested, " i f we are to
improve the functioning of our organizations from within...then we must
understand the power relationships that surround and infuse them" (p. 1).
Many researchers have studied the concept of power as it pertains to
intercollegiate athletics in the United States (cf. Fleisher, Goff & Tollison, 1992,
Frey, 1982, 1985a, 1985b; Koch, 1982; Nyquist, 1985; Padilla & Baumer, 1994).
However, literature with respect to power and the Canadian interuniversity
athletic system is somewhat more limited in its scope (Armstrong-Doherty,
1995a, 1995b; Hill, 1996; Hill & Kikulis, 1999; Inglis, 1991). Using a framework
developed by Hickson et al. (1986), this study examined the perceived level of
influence exhibited by senior administrators and Canadian Interuniversity Athletic
Union (CIAU) head coaches over funding decisions in an interuniversity athletics
department. This study revealed how power is wielded by various individuals and
interest groups who are affected by strategic funding decisions.
"Retrenchment and the reallocation of resources have changed the complexion of
Canadian universities and their athletic programs" (Schneider, 1997, p. 88) and as
athletic departments realign their budgets and seek funding from non-traditional
sources in the face of further financial cutbacks, more research was needed that
addressed this issue of influence over funding decisions. This study helped to fill
some of the gaps in the current literature by answering the following three
questions: (1) who is perceived to influence funding decisions, (2) what means of
influence are used, and (3) to what extent do policies and procedures dictate
funding decisions.
In order to fulfill the purpose of this research, a single-case study approach
involving the use of semi-structured interviews, observations and document
analyses was used to collect data at a large university in Western Canada. A
qualitative data analysis software program was used to analyze the results of this
study.
Results indicated that head coaches of high priority sport teams tended to be
perceived as having more influence over funding decisions than coaches of low
priority teams. As well, an individual's position in the department appeared to
affect his/her perceived level of influence in the department. The methods of
influence most commonly used by individuals in the athletic department included
displays of emotion and reason. Finally, results indicated that in this particular
organization, policies and procedures did not impact on the decision-making
process. These results have important implications for strategic decision-making
in interuniversity athletics departments.
|
|---|
