SIGNIFICANCE AND DELIVERY OF SPORT IN : PERCEPTIONS OF

SELECTED EXPERTS

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate

School of The Ohio State University

By

Clara R. Cuellar, M. A. Ed.

*****

The Ohio State University

2002

Dissertation Committee:

Dr. Packianathan Chelladurai, Adviser Approved by

Dr. Donna Pastore

Dr. Ketra Armstrong Adviser College of Education Graduate Program UMI Number: 3081907

UMI UMI Microform 3081907 Copyright 2003 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road PC Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 ABSTRACT

Significant stakeholders in = 689) of sport in Belize expressed their perceptions

of (a) the criticalness of Mass, Elite and Commercial Sport; (b) the relative emphasis to be placed on these domains of sport, and (c) the organizational form best suited to deliver the services in each of the domains. The instrument consisted of items in three parts to measure the above, and the fourth part to assess the demographic information on the respondents. Principal component analyses yielded one factor in both Mass Sport and

Elite Sport, and two factors under Commercial Sport (i.e.. Business Sport and

Entertainment Sport). Item-to total correlations showed that all items except three were

correlated higher with their own totals than with irrelevant totals. The alpha coefficients were higher than .68.

The differences among subgroups defined by (a) gender, (b) employer status

(Four levels), (c) involvement in sport (two levels), and city status (two levels) were

assessed through multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) followed by univariate

ANOVA and Scheffe’s post hoc analysis. Although the subgroup differences were

statistically significant, their practical significance was rather limited and thus the results were analyzed on the total sample through t-test procedures. Overall the respondents perceived Mass and Elite Sport to be more critical than Business and Entertainment Sport. There were no significance differences between Mass and Elite Sport or between

Business and Entertainment Sport.

Further the respondents placed more emphasis on Mass Sport (43%) than on Elite

(29%) or on Commercial Sport (28%). There were no significant differences between

Elite Sport and Commercial Sport. The chi square analysis of respondents’ choices for various organizational forms showed that overall they favored public-nonprofit combine form to deliver Mass Sport services, private for-profit organization to deliver Elite Sport

services, and private for-profit to deliver Commercial Sport services. Dedicated to

Athletes and Participants

of Sport in Belize

May I always keep your development

at the center of my work

and to

Mum, for teaching me about play, laughter, and love. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to sincerely thank my advisor, my committee members and all my professors at The Ohio State University for their assistance and support.

My academic development was as a result of your willingness to share your knowledge and expertise, thank you. Dr. Chella, as my mentor you have taught me the importance of objective academic thinking, conceptualization, investigation and analysis. I appreciate your insight and dedication to the academic advancement of our profession.

Thanks to the sports leaders, athletes and sports community of Belize who forged this opportunity for me to learn and work in the sport profession in

Belize. I have benefited from your years of dedication to the development of

sport in Belize. I hope I am as giving and committed as you continue to be.

Thanks to the sport leaders of The Ohio State University for contributing to my knowledge and understanding of the current practices and challenges in our profession.

Thanks to the Ministry of Education and Sports, and to the Government of

Belize for their support to my academic development and for their commitment to delivering sports to the Belizean community. To my family and friends thanks for your love in this endeavor and in my life for in the end keeping the love alive has made all the difference in this experience. VITA

February 17, 1962 Bom - , Belize

1989 ...... B.A. Education, University of Southwestern Louisiana.

1989 - 1991 ...... Teacher, Coach, Sports Director, St. John’s College, Belize.

1991 - 1993 ...... Director Physical Education and Sports, National Sports Council, Belize

1996 - 1999 ...... Special Event Programmer, Department of Recreational Sports, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1997 ...... M. A. Sport Management, The Ohio State University

1999 - 2002 ...... Executive Director, National Sports Council, Belize City, Belize FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Education

Specialization: Sport Management TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

A bstract ...... ii

D edication ...... iv

Acknowledgments ...... v

V ita ...... vii

List of Tables ...... xii

Chapters:

1. Introduction ...... 1

Statement of the Problem ...... 18 Objective of the Study ...... 18 Research Questions ...... 19 Limitation of the Study ...... 20 Delimitations of the Study ...... 20 Definition of Terms ...... 20

2. Literature Review ...... 23

Function of Sport: Individual Perspective ...... 23 Function of Sport: Collective Perspective ...... 25 Three Domains of Sport: Mass, Elite, and Commercial ...... 26 Organizational Attributes ...... 29 Organizational Ownership ...... 30 Revenue Generation ...... 33 Governance ...... 36 Models of Sport Delivery ...... 37 Volunteer Sport Organization ...... 38 Public Sports Organization ...... 42 For-Profit Sport Organization ...... 45 Sports Organizations of Mixed Rationale ...... 47

3. M ethods ...... 49

Research Design ...... 49 Selection of Sample ...... 51 Instrumentation ...... 56 Panel of Experts and Field Test ...... 59 Data Collection Procedures ...... 62 Data Analysis Procedures ...... 63

4. R esu lts...... 66

Purification of Subscales ...... 66 Descriptive Statistics ...... 72 Subgroup Differences ...... 72 Criticalness of Sport Functions ...... 72 Relative Emphasis on sport Domains ...... 76 Correlation of Criticalness and Relative Emphasis ...... 78 Suitability of Organizational Forms ...... 80 Mass Sport ...... 80 Elite Sport ...... 82 Commercial Sport ...... 84 5. Discussion ...... 86

Subscale Structure ...... 86

X Subgroup Differences ...... 87 Criticalness Function of Sport Services ...... 88 Relative Emphasis of Sport Domains ...... 89 Suitability of Organizational Forms ...... 90 Mass Sport ...... 91 Elite Sport ...... 93 Commercial Sport ...... 95 Summary...... 97 Practical Implication and Future Research ...... 98

References ...... 101

APPENDIX A. Panel of Experts Survey Instrument ...... 107

APPENDIX B. Field Test Survey Instrument ...... 117

APPENDIX C. Final Survey Instrument ...... 129

APPENDIX D. Anova Results Criticalness Eunction of Sport Domains ...... 139

APPENDIX E. Anova Results Relative Emphasis Of Sport Domains ...... 144 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

3.1. Population, Selected Sample, and Response R ate ...... 55

3.2. Definition of Organizational Forms ...... 58

4.1. Factor Loadings for Mass, Elite, and Commercial Sport ...... 68

4.2. Item-to-Total Correlation of Criticalness Subscale ...... 70

4.3. Item-to-Total Correlation of Final Criticalness Subscale ...... 71

4.4. Means and Standard Deviations for Criticalness Subscales and Percentage Emphasis ...... 73

4.5. Results of MANOVA - Criticalness Function of Sport Domain ...... 74

4.6. Results of MANOVA - Relative Percentage Emphasis of Sport Domain ...... 77

4.7. Correlations Among Percieved Criticalness of Sport Functions and Relative Emphasis on Sport Domains ...... 79

4.8. Chi Square Analysis of Organizational Forms and Services for Mass Sport 81

4.9. Chi Square Analysis of Organizational Forms and Services for Elite Sport 83

4.10. Chi Square Analysis of Organizational Forms and Services for Commercial Sport ...... 85

xn CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Belize is a small country located in and the . In

2000/2001, its population was 247,000 people living in a land of 23,000 square kilometers (World Bank, 2001). Its gross national product was 673 million dollars translating into an annual per capita income of 2,730 dollars (World Bank, 2001).

Belize’s independence was established in 1981 with a democratically elected parliamentary government and is now a member of the British Commonwealth. The official language is English although Belize has a diverse population of Creoles,

Garifunas, Meztizos, Mayas, and more recently Mennonite, Asians, and East Indians. The country has seven administrative divisions called districts, with an expansion of diverse land and waterways. It is 8,867 square miles of lowlands, forest, Maya ruins, rivers and the world’s second largest barrier reef.

Like many other countries Belize has had sports as an aspect of leisure since its early history. Sport involvement started with the Mayan people and their popular ball games.

However, as in other Caribbean and Latin American countries, the influence of the

British, Africans, Spaniards and North Americans are more evident in the current sport situation (Arbena, 1988; Dacosta, 1996; Malic, 1995). , water sports, boxing, horse racing, cycling, soccer, and were among the early favorites. The early development of sport was provided by volunteer individuals and later by volunteer organizations. The distinction of which social group played what sport was evident in

Belize as in other countries (Clarke, 1993; Pettavino & Pye, 1996). Early development of

sport cluhs for cricket and tennis were initially maintained for the middle class, while the working class utilized open public fields and rivers for traditional games, hoat races,

soccer, and softball. This early development of community sports through cluhs and volunteer associations may be attributed to the British influence and their system of sport delivery, while the school sport development was influenced by the North American

system of sport delivery through the missionaries at that time (Arbena, 1988; Dacosta,

1996; Malec, 1995). Thus community and school sport in Belize refleets its roots of the

European and the North Ameriean systems (Dacosta, 1996). School involvement maintained activities in some sports and the communities maintained aetivities in several other sports through voluntary sport governing bodies. The sports within sehools were

soccer, , and athletics. The sports within the community were horse racing, boat racing, cycling, soccer, cricket and softball. Sports were the central leisure activity of major holidays and vacations. For example, horse racing and cycling were the sports organized for Easter and Boxing Day celebrations while hoat racing and softhall were organized for the summer and Easter celebrations.

The sport governing bodies were small and informal. Volunteer eommittees were eompletely responsible for all sporting events and had some levels of success including the private sector and the public sector in Belize. These sport governing bodies had

2 established relationships with the private sector for financial support and some assistance with administrative leadership. The relationship with the publie sector was confined to free services from public utilities, police, public works, transportation, and some cash donations.

In 1974 and 1979 the Women’s softhall team won the gold medal at the Central

American and Caribbean games and this brought much national pride and community

solidarity. The performance of this sport discipline has slowly declined to the point of great dismay and disappointment. Yet, women’s softball remains the most prominent female sport in the nation and is still among the top sports irrespective of gender. No other female sport comes close to having the national development, participation, performance or significance of female softball. There are some moderate developments in women’s , basketball, football, and track and field. Other sporadic international

successes during the 1970s included boxing, bodybuilding, cycling, and athletics medals at the regional games.

The foregoing achievements spurred the to become more involved in the promotion of sport in Belize. Accordingly, the government established the National Sports Council in 1979 to channel government initiatives to facilitate the efforts of national sport governing bodies. The government passed the first Sports Act in

1980, a year before the country’s independence from the British rule. This set the stage of formal legal charter of government’s involvement in sport.

The Sports Act established the National Sports Council with the objective, “to promote, develop and improve the knowledge and practice of sports in the interest of the

social well-being of and the enjoyment of leisure by ” (Laws of Belize, Chapter

3 35, Sports, 1980; p. 3). The Act also encouraged the co-corporation with the sporting organizations for the attainment of high standards in sport (Laws of Belize, Chapter 35,

Sports, 1980). Thus, the government hegan its involvement in sport focusing both on mass participation and elite performances. The Sport Act also promoted the production of

sport services within the schools as well as within the volunteer sport associations.

The government involvement impacted three major areas of sport development; facility construction, employment, and program development. During the 1980s the government was focused on developing competitive facilities, initiating paid positions for physical educators and sports leaders, and initiating mass sport services including an emphasis on women’s programs. Concurrently, semi-professional teams in football and basketball were established; coaching certification programs were initiated, offices for the sport governing bodies were provided, and training programs for sport administrators were instituted (National Sports Council Minutes, 1984 - 1993).

Despite these lofty goals, the implementation of programs was not carried out effectively and thus the goals were not fully realized. As Chalip & Johnson (1996) has noted sport policy goals can be achieved only through effective design of programs and efficient implementation of those programs. In the case of Belize, national sport policy and implementation of its programs were not aligned. Given this state of affairs, the

National Sports Council produced a paper in 1993 titled “Sports in Belize: Policy

Analysis and Recommendation.” The paper stated:

In the past the sports council has had no comprehensive, well researched national plan. This has led to problems because athletes, coaches, administrators and members of the general public are confused as to the role and priorities of the quasi government body. (National Sports Council Development Plan, 1994-1997; p. 4) The paper then stated, “It is extremely important that the national sports council and indeed all national sporting associations produce a development plan” (National

Sports Council Development Plan, 1994-1997; p. 18). This movement toward a comprehensive program that sought to align roles, goals, design, implementation and evaluation of the government’s sport administrative systems and procedures provided the rationale for two important questions posed in this study. First, what ought to be the goals of a national sport policy for Belize. In other words, what do Belizeans believe the role of sport should be in their society? Second, what type of organization would be assigned the responsibilities for various programs of sport development. These two issues—the role of sport in Belize and appropriate organizational forms to deliver sport programs or

services—are explicated in the following sections.

Role Of Sport In Society

This question on the role of sport is a crucial one as it has not been addressed before, and there has never been any assessment of the tunctions of sport from the

Belizean perspectives. As the impacts of sport participation span the economic, political, religious, social, and educational domains (Arbena, 1988; Malec, 1995), it is important to capture the collective opinions of significant stakeholders on the role of sport which, in turn, would facilitate the formulation of a meaningful sport policy for Belize. Without

such a consensus, any effort by any agency including government would prove futile.

This collective consensus can be focused on the development of one or more of the three domains of sport of Mass Sport. Elite Sport and Spectator/Commercial Sport (Chalip,

1996; Chelladurai, 2001).

Functions of Sport

The benefits of sport and physical activity for individuals had been known since ancient Greek ideal of “a sound mind in a sound body.” Modem scientific research has produced a body of literature attesting to the health benefits of sport and physical activity.

More specifically, sport and physical activity contribute to (a) psychomotor/physical development as in various skills, (b) fitness development, (c) cognitive development such as knowledge of sports skills, mles and tactics and improvement in decision making; (d) affective development such as development of positive attitudes, and (e) values and appreciation for sport as well as character and leadership building, and appreciation of the aesthetics and self-respect (Bucher, 1979; Horine, 1985).

While the health benefits that accrue to individuals through participation in sport and physical activity have been researched and documented in the literature in exercise physiology, sport and exercise psychology, and health behavior, the focus of the present

study is on benefits that accrue to society as a whole through sport participation. In this regard, several societal functions of sport have been proposed in the literature. Chalip

(1996) refers to several authors who had dealt with different functions of sport at the

societal or national level. For instance, McFlenry (1980) explained how sport has been used as a tool for nation-building; Macintosh and Flawes (1993) described the ways in which sport was used as a diplomatic tool; and Martinsen and Stephens (1994) spoke of

6 the influence of sport on public health. Sport has also been associated with national defense (Chalip, 1996; Bucher, 1979), promotion of health (Bucher, 1979; Horine,1985), education (Chalip, 1996; Bucher, 1979; Horine, 1985), and economic development and tourism (Mahoney & Howard, 2001). Sport is also seen as a social institution fostering inspiration, contributing to order and stability, and promoting traditional values (Coakley,

2001). In the final analysis, “it has been shown that our sense of community is determined, at least in part, by the nature of sports programs and opportunities that our policies afford (Chalip, 1996; p. viii).

The various functions served by sport (i.e., those that benefit individuals and those that benefit society as a whole) are realized through three significant domains of

sport—Mass Sport, Elite Sport, and Spectator/Commercial Sport. The distinction made by Keating between sport and athletics underlie the need to separate the three domains of

sport. In his words,

sport is a kind of diversion which has for its direct and immediate end fun, pleasure, and delight and which is dominated by a spirit of moderation and generosity. Athletics, on the other hand, is essentially a competitive activity, which has for its end victory in the contest and which is characterized by a spirit of dedication, sacrifice, and intensity (p. 28).

In the international context, the term "athletics" refers to one form of physical activity which is known as track and field in North America. To avoid this confusion, Chelladurai (1998,

2001) used Keating’s other labels —pursuit ofpleasure and pursuit o f excellence to refer to these two differing enterprises. In addition to the pursuit of pleasure, individuals may also engage in sport in pursuit of health and fitness. These motives for participation in sport collectively lead to the notion of “participant sport” as a distinct domain of sport involvement (Chelladurai, 2001). The term mass sport has generally been applied to designate this domain of sport.

Mass Sport. Mass Sport refers to the extensive participation of the public in sport.

The United Nations sponsored “Sport for All” movements around the world encourage people to participate in sport for the physical and psychological benefits accruing from

such participation. As another example, the goals of municipal and community recreation departments would reflect the emphasis on mass participation. From a national policy perspective, the focus on Mass Sport is expected to yield benefits in terms of enhanced public health and reduced public health costs.

Promotion of Mass Sport would entail the production of goods and services, construction and maintenance of facilities, programs, funding, and appropriate leadership.

Further, Mass Sport requires the design and provision of programs such as physical fitness programs, competitive and recreational sport leagues and youth summer camps.

These programs should focus on ensuring the fitness for all in a society, the fundamental physical education and sport skills. Such a focus would also entail the training of sport personnel including those who train and lead participants, officials who supervise organized competitions and administrators who organize the competitive leagues.

Elite Sport. Elite Sport is an offshoot of participant sport in the sense that those who have the talent and motivation to excel in a given sport would dedicate themselves to the pursuit of excellence in that sport. While excellence denotes an attained pursuit o f excellence refers to a process whereby one attempts to attain excellence, a process that implies intense preparation, enormous effort, dedieation, and sacrifice. From a larger

societal perspective, elite sport refers to the system of structures and processes that promote and sustain the pursuit of excellence in specific sports. Intercollegiate athletics in the United

States is a prime example of a system that promotes pursuit of excellence. The national

sport governing bodies are geared to the promotion of excellence in their respective sports.

Governments as in China and Cuba and/or government agencies as in England and Canada may be involved in promoting excellence in sport. Demonstration of excellence in international sport competitions are said to contribute national pride and prestige, and national solidarity.

Elite Sport requires that specific services, programs, facilities, leadership, and finances he provided by sport organizations to facilitate the pursuit of excellence.

Pursuit of excellence at the eolleetive national level involves identifying and nurturing talent across the nation, instituting training programs, and organizing competitions to promote excellence. Such efforts would include the selection and management of national teams, coaches and athletes as well as the provision of support sport services such as nutrition, sports medicine, strength training and trained personnel for these services.

Spectator/Commercial Sport. Spectator sport refers to that domain of sport where the excellence in sport is offered as entertainment through organized competitions for commercial purposes. The term Commercial Sport has also been used to refer to this domain of sport. Excellence in any sport and the competitions thereof are attractive to watch. However, for historical and cultural reasons, excellence in some sports have greater spectator appeal for the masses than other sports in a given society or nation. For

9 instance, while soccer has the greatest spectator appeal in Europe and South America it is not as popular as football, baseball, and basketball in North America. Commercial Sport requires the formation of elite teams in the more popular sports and organization of leagues and competitions thereof as in the case of the National Collegiate Athletic

Association, the university leagues such as the Big-Ten as well as the professional leagues such as the National Football League (NFL) and the National Basketball

Association (NBA). It must be noted that enterprises undertaking to provide sport excellence as entertainment may be profit-oriented (e.g., the NFL, the NBA) or nonprofit organizations such as the universities in America. Irrespective of profit-orientation, the organization that deliver sport as entertainment need to be involved in revenue generation, marketing and public relations, organizing competitive leagues, and managing the leagues and the competitions.

In some cases the development of mass, elite, and commercial sport services may compete for limited resources, may conflict over methods and outcomes, and thus may retard the development of each other. In either option the development of mass sport for its own purposes or the development of elite and commercial sport for its own purposes does not ensure the development of the other option. All options have distinct enough goals resulting in distinct design, policies, implementation and assessment (Chalip, 1996;

Chelladurai, 1987). Thus, there is a need to clarify and prioritize the importance of the three domains of sport to a given nation in the formulation of its national policy on sport.

10 Strategies For The Promotion Of Sport

After selecting and articulating the goals of sport policy, it is necessary to identify the most appropriate strategies to achieve those goals. In the foregoing sections, some elements of the strategies were articulated (e.g., training of sport leaders, identifying athletic talent, etc.). In essence, promotion of any of the three sport domains would involve appropriate services and programs of services to the participants. While the literature would suggest the services appropriate to each domain of sport (i.e., mass, elite, and commercial sport), it is not clear on what type of organizations could hest produce and deliver the services. As noted, the sport services are delivered by different kinds of organizations. A sport policy for Belize should also identify the organizational forms that would be most suited to promote and foster each of the three sport domains.

Sport Organizational Forms

The question here is what kinds of organizations are best suited to deliver a given

sport service. There are several sport delivery systems in the world hased on volunteer

sector, government sector, and for-private sector. In addition, hybrid organizations involving different combinations of the three sectors are also evolving (e.g., volunteer and for-profit organizations; volunteer and government organizations; government and for-profit organizations, and a mix of all three types oforganizations). Some roles and values of these different combinations have been identified within different countries’

sports delivery systems. Volunteer (Nonprofit) Sport Organization. Volunteer (or nonprofit) organizations were the first to provide sport services while the public and profit sector organizations were initially disinterested in sport. In the beginning, these volunteer organizations were mainly concerned with developing and administering sport programs for their communities. Over time, however, they showed an interest in, and enthusiasm for sports at the national and international levels. Early volunteer sport was known for a collegial pattern of decision making with no administrative structures. As noted, local volunteers managed the organization and its efforts. The rules of the organizations were largely based on conventional standards of etiquette, fashion and style (Chalip, 1996; Clarke,

1993).

As these organizations interacted with organizations in the public and for-profit

sectors, they became more formalized and their operations began to be codified. With increasing formalization of structures and processes, the decision making became centralized. As both government and for-profit sectors became more involved sport became more structured, scientific, and commercialized. This set the stage for the ensuing conflict over the control of resources and the relative influence on sport delivery

systems.

Government Sport Organization. While volunteer involvement in sport was there from the initial stages, governments' involvement in sport had its beginnings only after

World War II. As governments became involved in sports with a view to gain international recognition, tension between public and volunteer sport authorities also increased. Further, as governments began funding the volunteer organizations, they attempted to transform the volunteer organizations (Chalip, 1996). This tension was

12 higher in countries were the sport portfolio became an integral tool of foreign policy and international development (Chalip, 1996). Government support meant increase in the number of paid employees, office buildings, centralization, bureaucracy, and political influences. In Brazil, for example, the first sports policy sought to maintain the Ifeedom of sports club and yet reorder the leadership and managerial levels of sport practices and competition. Thus is managed through a hybrid of private-govemment- volunteer mix in which all sectors function to provide, develop and govern athletic programs, facilities and events (Dacosta, 1996). This mix of all three sectors had emerged in other countries such as Canada and Finland (Kikulis, Slack, & Hinings 1995; Koski,

1995; Koski & Heikkala, 1998; Slack & Hinings, 1992).

For-Profit Sport Organization. The complex relationship among volunteer, government and for-profit organizational forms in the delivery of sports was influenced hy the early interaction of the for-profit organizational form with sport delivery. The for- profit sector involvement in sports started with small individual business owners

supporting teams in various ways—providing sites, buying uniforms, providing prize money, or covering other financial cost to teams. The for-profit sector involvement in

sport was marked with three distinctions labor relations, product control and service extensions. The lahor relations in sport started at an early stage although in an informal manner. The middle class would pay for players to be in matches representing their clubs

(Clarke, 1993). At times this relationship was marred with unfulfilled commitments as well as condescending attitudes to the players. The second distinction was the product control in which the location and times of matches were then controlled by the for-profit

13 organizations. This resulted in control of entrance to the playing area and entrance fee charges to the very people who were first seen as supporters and were then converted into a paying client of the private organization. The third distinction of the for-profit organization was the expansion of sport service delivery to the full product line as known today. This expansion included allowing for sport to he a medium for mass advertising,

utilizing media to expand the revenue generating opportunity, expanding the sporting

services and products for income generating purposes. Sports thus moved heyond the

self-determination and citizen provision to include free enterprise and heavy capitalization (Clarke, 1993). The questions of whose agenda will be followed, who gets what, why and how those issues are considered depended on the whether the public, for- profit or volunteer sector is delivering the sport services.

A modem trend in several countries is for the government and the profit and/or nonprofit sectors to collaborate in providing needed services for the public. In Canada, for example, the federal government through Sport Canada provides funds to various

sport governing bodies to promote elite sport (i.e., pursuit of excellence). As another example, it is becoming common for municipal governments in Great Britain to contract out specific services to the profit-sector. Thus, there are two more organizational forms that can be employed in delivering sport services. The puhlic-for profit combine is an organizational form where the government provides funds to a for-profit organization to provide out specific sport. By the same token, the public-nonprofit combine would represent a form where the government offers fund to a nonprofit organization to carry out specific sport services. The present study investigated stakeholder perspectives on

14 the suitability of these organizational forms to deliver the sport services oriented toward promoting any of the three domains of sport—mass, elite, spectator-commercial sport.

Stakeholder Perspectives

While the foregoing discussion had focused on the priority among sport domains and the organizational forms that would best deliver the services to promote and sustain each sport domain, there is still the question of “who decides” on these issues. The approach taken in this study flows from the stakeholder theory (Clarkson, 1995;

Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Jones & Wicks, 1999). Clarkson (1995) defines

stakeholders as “persons or groups that have or claim, ownership, rights, or interests in a corporation and its activities, past, present, or future. Such claimed rights or interests are the results of transactions with, or actions taken by, the corporation, and may be legal or moral, individual or collective: (p. 106). In paraphrasing the above definition to suit the present purposes, stakeholders of the national sport enterprise are persons or groups that have or claim, ownership, rights, or interests in the national sport enterprise and its programs. Clarkson (1995) distinguishes between primary and secondary stakeholder groups. A primary stakeholder group is “one without whose continuing participation the corporation can not survive as a going concern” (p. 106). He would include shareholders and investors, employees, customers, and suppliers as primary stakeholder groups as well as the various levels of governments whose laws and regulations must be obeyed. The

secondary stakeholders would be “those who influence or affect, or are affected by, the corporation, but they are not engaged in transactions with the corporation and are not essential for its survival” (p. 107).

15 It must be noted that Clarkson (1995) and other writers on stakeholder theory deal with and deseribe stakeholders groups and their influences on a single organization. In the present case, however, the focus is on the national sport enterprise in which several organizations and their respective stakeholder groups are potentially interested. The most obvious and the most critical stakeholder group is the population of Belize who are comparable to the owners of a single corporation. The second obvious and critical group is the participants in the various sports programs. They are critical because they are the prime beneficiaries of the enterprise (Blau and Scott, 1962). They are also critieal because none of the sport services could be produced without their active participation in those services. Thus, these two stakeholder groups constitute primary stakeholders benefiting from sport.

When we consider all the functions sport performs in a society, other stakeholders emerge as primary ones. For example, if speetator sport would have an economic impact, then the businesses which would foster speetator sport and gain from it emerge as primary stakeholders. Similarly, as promotion of sport is undertaken in the educational

sector, the educational institutions and their leaders become primary stakeholders.

Further, these sets of stakeholders (i.e., apart from participants and the general society) are also more knowledgeable about Belize in general and the business and education in particular. In addition, as the elites of the society, they would have considerable influence in shaping the preferences of the people and, therefore, the directions the government and its agencies would take. From this perspective, we can consider these groups as strategic stakeholders. The other strategic stakeholder groups would include

(a) the organizations that deliver sport, (b) the volunteer and professional administrators

16 of the sport organizations, (c) the local and eentral governments who provide over

support and governance to sport, (d) the edueational institutions, and (e) the media.

For the purposes of the study, the researcher will be tapping into the expertise and experiences of the more strategically critical stakeholders such as the sport administrators, government administrators, educators, business leaders, and media personnel. As noted, while the society at large and the sport participants are the prime beneficiaries of the Belizean sport system, the other stakeholders are involved in providing or ehanneling the resources, and/or managing the enterprise. Their eolleetive opinions would be reflective of the society in general, and their judgments would be based on their expertise and experience with the sport system.

The approach taken in this study parallels the distinction made between the demand-side and supply-side stakeholders in the ease of nonprofit organizations (Ben-

Ner & Gui, 1993; Ben-Ner & Hoomissen, 1993). "Demand-side stakeholders include individuals, organizations or public bodies that either: (1) pay for and consume a good

(traditional consumers), or (2) sponsor the eonsumption of a good hy someone else"

(Ben-Ner & Gui, 1993 p. 30). In the present context, the society in general and the sport participants would constitute the demand-side stakeholders. On the other hand, supply-

side stakeholders are those such as the workers, managers, providers of equity or debt, banks, parent organizations, or the state that provide the human and material resources to deliver effective sport programs. The stakeholders selected for this study would be

supply-side stakeholders.

17 Statement Of The Problem

Belize has had many challenges in serving the sporting needs of its citizens over the past few decades. The different sport services can be grouped into three categories

(Chelladurai, 2001). First is the set of services that are oriented toward promoting and facilitating participation hy the public in sport (i.e., Mass Sport). The second set of

services is oriented toward the pursuit of excellence in sport (i.e., Elite Sport). Finally, the provision of entertainment home out of the excellence in sports (specific to a particular nation and/or culture) entails sets of services that are unique to that sphere (i.e.,

Commercial sport). A primary purpose of the study was to identify the relative importance placed hy experts in Belize on the three domains of sport.

The second concern is with the fit between the organizational form and the type of

sport services that need to he offered. The organizational science literature states that

services are impacted hy the organizational form that delivers the service and that some organizational forms are more successful in delivering certain types of services (Ben-Ner

& Gui, 1993). Accordingly, this research was focused on identifying the types of sport

services to be provided in the Belizean context, and the type of organizational form that

could best provide a given sport service or services.

Objective of the study

This study determined the role and function of sport as perceived by Belizean

experts and secondly, it identified the organizational forms that are best suited to deliver 18 the various sport services in Belize. The general purpose of this study was to first determine the preferences of Belizean experts for the role of Mass, Elite and Commercial

Sport. This was done using a survey research method sampling multiple stakeholders and analyzing for subgroup differences. The second purpose was to assess the opinions of the experts on the appropriate organizational forms (i.e., public, private for-profit, private nonprofit organizations, puhlic-profit combine, and public-nonprofit combine) that are best suited to provide a given service. The study specifically assessed the preferences and perceptions of selected sets of stakeholders to address these issues.

Research Questions

The specific questions posed by the study are:

1. What are the perceptions of Belizean expert stakeholders regarding the critical

function of Mass, Elite and Commercial Sport in Belize?

2. What are the emphasis Belizean experts want for the three sport domains: Mass,

Elite and Commercial Sport?

3. What are the perceptions of Belizean stakeholders regarding the organizational

forms best suited to serve Mass, Elite and Commercial Sport services in the

Belizean context?

19 Limitation of the Study

The limitation of this study was the use of strategic stakeholders as respondents and thus the results reflected the views of those in power to influence the effectiveness of the sport enterprise and not the prime beneficiaries such as the citizens of Belize and participants in sport. The study cannot be generalized to the sport participants or to the general community.

Delimitation of the Study

The delimitation of this study is that the participant list of sport leaders and media was restricted to those sport organization registered at the national or district level. In a few cases the list was incomplete at the national level and for several cases the list was incomplete at the district level. This may reflect that the organization does not exist at that level or that presently management does not have a comprehensive list. The media list is small a sample of time and there may be significant changes in this subgroup over time. This would not have a bearing on the study as the few subgroup differences were not significant from a practical standpoint.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this study the following terms are defined.

20 1. Criticalness of the functions of mass, elite and commercial sport is operationally

defined as the mean scores on the 11 items representing the critical function of

mass sport; 8 items representing the critical functions of elite sport; and 7 items

representing the critical functions of commercial sport. Respondents rated, on a

scale of 1 to 7, (1 = least critical, 7 = most critical) how critical each function is in

the Belizean context.

2. Relative emphases on mass, elite and commercial sport is operationally defined

as the mean percentage score for each of mass sport, elite sport and commercial

sport on a single item measure. The respondents indicated their relative emphases

hy assigning percentages to each of the three domains for a total of 100%.

3. Organizational form hest suited to serve mass, elite and commercial sport services

is operationally defined as the frequency with which each of the five

organizational forms is selected as best suited to deliver a given each of the 37

listed services (11 items to promote mass sport; 13 items for elite sport; and 13

items for commercial sport). Based on the literature, comprehensive definitions of

the public, private for-profit, private nonprofit, combination of public for-prolit,

and combination of public nonprofit forms of organizations were provided to the

respondents (please see helow). The respondents were requested to check the

form of organization that would best deliver a given service.

21 4. Public Organizations are the central, provincial, and/or regional governments

and/or their units that provide services to the public.

5. Private For-Profit Organizations are organizations owned and operated hy private

owners or shareholders engaging in commercial activities to make profit for

owners/shareholders.

6. Private Nonprofit Organizations are organizations owned and operated hy

members providing services for the benefit of members and/or clients. Any

surplus of revenue over expenditure would be invested back into the organizations

and its programs for service.

7. For-Profit and Public Comhine/Syndicate is a private for-profit organization(s)

that is funded by government to provide specific services to the public.

8. Nonprofit and Public Combine/Svndicate is a private nonprofit organization(s)

that is funded hy government to provide specified services to the public.

22 CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The purpose of this chapter is to present a review of previous studies and literature related to this research. The chapter is divided into three sections that review

sports in Belize, functions of sports, models of sport delivery, and organizational forms.

Function of Sport: Individual Perspectives

Sports have been a part of society as far back as 2500 B. C. and have played a role in national festivities and military defense. Boxing, gymnastics and wrestling have been a part of historians' writings of ancient Greece (Bucher, 1979). Sports have been instituted in several forms and the history of physical education in modem society finds its roots in the sport development from ancient society. The benefits of sports and physical education in developing the individual are traced to the ancient Greek ideals of sound mind in a

sound body. This belief of the importance of the development of an individual physically as an important aspect of total development extends into modem day sports and physical education programs (Bucher, 1979).

23 Today physical education is defined as "any process that increases a person's tendencies and abilities to play competitive and expressive motor activities" (Siedentop,

1976). The role of physical education and sport are viewed as: (a) psyehomotor/physieal development in locomotor development, skill development, fitness development, (b) cognitive development in knowledge of sports skills, rules and tactics, and improvement in decision making, and (c) affective development such as attitudes, values and appreciation for sport as well as character and leadership building and appreciation of the aesthetics and self-respect. These benefits of sport were incorporated as objectives and program plans within several physical education and sport programs (Bucher, 1979;

Horine, 1985). Physical education in schools gained momentum after Child-Study movement gained ground (Bucher, 1979). This movement emphasized play and games as a means of fulfilling the needs of children and youth. The importance of education through the physical became an international movement and the World Congress on

Physical Education held its first congress in Helsinki, Finland in 1952. Other aspects of the movement education program developed such as the fitness movement and lifetime

sport. These programs emphasized the lifetime physical activities that promoted physical fitness, social well-being, healthy leisure, and emotional and psychological health. These activities included biking, aerobic dance, walking and swimming. The focus was on the provision of opportunity for participation by every individual. It was accepted that the personal benefits of sport were gained from actual participation (Horine, 1985). The benefits of sport for personal development has been established since the early historical development of nations and are still central to many national educational systems

(Bucher, 1979; Horine, 1985).

The abovediscussion identifies some of the individual benefits of sports. The benefits of sport extend beyond the individual. Based on the benefits discussed aboveby

24 extrapolation there are eommunity and national benefits of health, however, there are other functions of sport separate from, and in addition to, health that may also benefit a

society and a nation.

Function of Sport: Collective Perspective

Sport development was founded in the fields of play and sport in ancient times, moved through the physical education and sports administration to current sport management as introduced in 1966 by Dr. Mason at Ohio University. Sport has been defined as the genre of all forms of participation in professional sport, recreational sport and fitness activity (Chelladuaria, 2001). Several functions of sport have heen touched in the sports literature. These functions include sport for the use of national defense (Chalip,

Johnston & Staehura, 1996; Bucher, 1979), sport for promotion of health ( Bucher, 1979;

Horine, 1985), for social and educational development (Chalip, et ah,1996; Bucher, 1979

& Horine, 1985), nation-huilding and national festivities (Chalip, et al., 1996; Clarke,

1993), public health, environment, economic development, and tourism (Chalip, Johnston

& Staehura, 1996; Mahoney & Howard, 2001) There are also social theories that provide frameworks for sport development. The functionalist theory of sport view sport as an inspiration, value and contrihution to order and stability, traditional values and positive character. In this view, sport is a social institution that benefits society as well as the individual (Coakley, 2001).

To address the role of sport in society is to address the tunctions of sport to the eolleetive. In the sport industry there are goods, products and services. Sport services

25 have been elassified under three domains: mass, elite and eommercial sport. A eomprehensive model for sport services was first offered by Chelladurai (1985) and further developed hy Chelladurai (1992; & 2001). Keating (1964) introduced the concepts of sport for the pursuit of pleasure and sport for the pursuit of excellence. As the

sport industry developed and the economic aspect of sport grew the study of sport expanded to sport as an entertainment and revenue generating opportunity. Important distinctions exist for sport for the pursuit of pleasure, sport for the pursuit of excellence and sport for the pursuit of entertainment and revenue generation. Those distinetions were further developed in the classification of the three domains of sport services

(Chelladurai, 1985; 1992).

Three Domains Of Sport: Mass, Elite, And Commereial Sport

Chelladuarai (2001) developed a framework for the identifieation of sports

services hased on the service quality of employee-customer interface in service production and (b) the clients motive for participation. That classification scheme yielded three domains of sport: Mass Sport, Elite Sport and Commercial Sport. Each sport domain has its unique purposes and characteristics. Mass Sport is the pursuit of pleasure,

skill development, health and socialization. The motives of the participants are for enjoyment of a physical activity, the enjoyment of movement and the pleasure of play.

Other motives are the development of sport skills, maintenance and improvement of health benefits that physical activity offers and the acquisition of basic sport fitness skills.

26 Participants enjoy the socialization with other participants as much as the sport activity itself.

Participants view participation as more important than winning and may opt to balance skills on a team so as to have a more even contest so the point or game is not ended quickly. The objective is to keep the game going and to enjoy the physical exertion of the contest. The Elite Sport domain has the motive of winning against a standard, individual or a team. The focus is determining the hest through winning of a contest. The pursuit of excellence involves dedication, sacrifice and intensity. The pleasure is in the winning. The preparation is hard work unlike the pursuit of pleasure in which the participation is a diversion from work. Elite Sport has the element of deliberate practice and professional coaching that make specific demands on the participant to enable maximum development (Chelladurai, 1992; 2001).

It is important to note that pursuit of pleasure and excellence both have skill acquisition, however, in Mass Sport skill development is used to equalize teams and to achieve the pleasure of the sport, thus one may only develop as much as the league in which one is playing or only as much as is needed to maintain a game with ones opponent. In Elite Sport the goal is mastering all skills. The object is to develop to the highest standard and then to set new standards. The pursuit of excellence and the pursuit of pleasure have separate and distinct goals and thus need separate processes to accomplish each purpose (Chelladurai, 1992; 2001). In providing for Mass Sport and

Elite Sport the structures and processes may involve providing equipment and facility for participation, however, three basketball courts and three halls would suffice for a league practice, while a team developing excellence would need three basketball courts and

27 thirty balls for twelve to fifteen athletes. League teams may practice two or three times a week for an hour and elite athletes practice five to six times a week for two to three hours with a coach and in addition will have four to six sessions of strength training. This distinction in purpose, processes and structure also exist for the third domain of sport:

Commercial Sport.

The third domain of sport: Commercial Sport has developed rapidly. Sport as entertainment dates hack to the Mayan Ball Games. Many countries have spectacular

sports festivals as aspects of national celehrations (Arhena, 1988; Malec, 1995). The contest of excellent skill provides a good source of entertainment in society. The sports business in 1990 had a remarkable performance with most estimated indicators being

surpassed ( Mahony & Howard, 2001). Not all sports have the same level of entertainment and thus revenue generating opportunity. Some sports just do not have the

spectator appeal of other sports. The entertainment value of the sport is a cultural and traditional one. One sport may be very popular in one country and have no appeal in another country. Commercial Sport has three elements that make it entertaining: the contest, the spectacle and the third place elements. The contest needs to be an excellent exhibition of skills with an unpredictable degree of the outcome. The teams or contestants also need to have large fan base. These are the people loyal to a particular athlete or team or sport and thus will be faithful spectators or buying public (Chelladurai, 2001).

Commercial Sport also has other appeals such as the ceremonies at the opening, halftime, or closing of the contest. These ceremonies have become attractions and entertainment in their own right and are referred to as the spectacle in sport entertainment. The final entertainment aspect of the commercial sport is the atmosphere or environment created 28 for the viewing of the contest. This atmosphere can be at the stadium itself or in a restaurant or bar and is referred to as the third place. The three domains of sport give a good classification of sport services and their distinction. With such distinct purposes, processes and structures in sport services it is easy to comprehend why there are several

sports models.

Organizational Attributes

Organizations develop for distinct purposes and thus have distinct goals, processes, and outcomes. To best function in society these organizations also have constraints to ensure the fulfillment of both societies' and organizations' goals. Critical distinctions for organizations are their purpose and constraints. Each organization possesses distinctive attributes to advance its purposes and maximize its constraints. The distinctive organizational attributes of for-profit, public, and nonprofit organizations are categorized on the basis of (a) the organization's objectives, (b) the identity of its owners, (c) the identity of its beneficiaries and (d) the major constraints that the organization faces. (Ben-

Ner & Gui, 1993; Weisbrod, 1998). First, economists have used the criteria of ownership of profit-maximizing organizations to distinguish who the principals are and the rights of the owners. This criterion of ownership has worked well with the profit maximizing firms, but does not address the complexity of public and nonprofit organizations. Nutt and Backoff (1992) supported this view and expanded on it by stating that ownership and property of public and nonprofit organizations can not be transferred for they are in the hands of various oversight bodies and not in the hands of shareholders.

29 The second distinction of organizational forms is the goods and services provided by the organization. This view states that public goods are provided from tax allocations versus private goods which are provided through an open economic market. Finally, the view on governance is that for-profit organizations are governed distinctly different from public or nonprofit as a result of being owned and controlled by shareholders, while public and nonprofit are owned by stakeholders (Nutt & Backoff, 1992; Salamon &

Anheier, 1997). These three themes: (a) ownership rights (b) revenue generation and (c) governance are covered by many organizational researchers as the salient distinctions for organizational forms.

Organizational Ownership

Organizational ownership has three distinctions ownership rights, profit return rights, and organization disposal rights (Ben-Ner & Gui, 1993; Weisbrod, 1988). These three attributes are for the purpose of benefiting the shareholders only, the members of the organization, or the general public. An organization may have impacts or benefits on one or all three recipients; however, its purpose and thus critical decisions are based on benefits to only one of the above recipients. The ownership rights, return rights and disposal rights of the organization determines if the organization exists for profit maximizing for its shareholders, improving quantity and quality of service to its members, or for improving quantity and quality of service for general public. For-profit organizations will have the ownership rights conferred on the shareholders and they have few stakeholders beyond the shareholders. Public and nonprofit organizations will have

30 stakeholders as oversight bodies. Nonprofit organizations are organizations that are private, organized and self-governing with a strong voluntary component and a non- distributional constraint (Anheier & Salamon, 1998). Public organizations are defined as government organizations that operate under political authority with no economic markets (Rainy, 1997). Stakeholder is defined as "any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization's objective. Stakeholders included employees, customers, suppliers, stockholders, banks, environmentalist, governments and other groups who can help or hurt the corporation" (Freeman, 1984 p. vi). The

stakeholder concept is also categorized into demand-side and supply-side stakeholders in the case of nonprofit organizations. "Demand-side stakeholders include individuals, organizations or public bodies that either: (1) pay for and consume a good (traditional consumers), or (2) sponsor the consumption of a good by someone else" (Ben-Ner & Gui,

1993 p. 30). Supply-side stakeholders supply resources and they may be workers, managers, providers of equity or debt, banks, parent organizations, the state or suppliers.

Demand-side stakeholders may be clients, customers, donors, the state or sponsors.

Hybrid stakeholders provide more than one type of input or are both demand and supply

sides (Ben-Ner & Hoomissen, 1993).

Shareholders are defined as "a set of stakeholders who have financial stakes in the firm and who can heavily influence the firm" (Freeman, 1984 p. 104). He explained that the values of management in the case of shareholders dictate that fiduciary obligation counts more than other kinds of interest thus the managers must seek to maximize market value of the firm. In the case of shareholders, their interest are is in profit return on their investment and this is determined by financial indicators. In the case of stakeholders they

31 represent the citizens and thus are influenced by the citizens as to their expectations for the organization. Public and nonprofit stakeholders may represent all citizens or specific citizen groups. Both public and nonprofit organizations have stakeholders as oversight bodies. A distinction between these two will be that all citizens are stakeholders in public organizations, while selected citizens groups are stakeholders for nonprofit based on the nonprofit's mission. Nut and Backoff (1992) introduced the concept of ubiquitous

stakeholders for public organizations, many stakeholders for nonprofit organizations and few stakeholders in the for-profit organization.

Two other important ownership issues are the return rights and the disposal rights of the organization. In the for-profit organization all profit returns are distributed among the shareholders and they have complete autonomy and flexibility limited only by the laws of the land and internal consensus. In public and nonprofit organizations there is a non-distrihutional constraint and all surpluses must he returned to the organization for the benefit of the organization's mission. Nonprofit organizations seek ways of ensuring that the organization exists heyond the life of the original founders and that their mission and vision is protected and thus the reason for non-distributional constraint. The non- distrihutional constraint is defined as follows: (a) "no one owns the right to share in the profits or surplus of a nonprofit; (b) nonprofits are exempt for taxes on corporate income; and (c) donations to nonprofits are tax deductible and they may enjoy other exemptions than the corporate tax" (Wiesbrod, 1988). The motives of shaping and protecting the mission and values of the organization may also stimulate conditions beyond non- distributional constraint. Nonprofits often establish a formal legal charter to identify: (a)

stakeholder groups to he represented, (h) services to be supplied by the organization, (c)

32 beneficiaries to be served by the organization and (d) procedures and process to direet the organization ( Salamon & Anheier, 1998). The surplus of the nonprofit organization is

utilized to improve the quantity and quality of the goods and services provided by the organization. The non-distributional constraint limits the director and managers of the nonprofit organization from personally enjoying any of the returns of the organizations business. The disposal rights of the organization are determined by the shareholders in the case of the for-profit organization and by the public via a board in the case of the nonprofit organization. Even in organizations for whieh there is no formal legal charter these issues are relevant and must be addressed along with the other two critical organizational attributes of revenue generation and governance.

Revenue Generation

The second major category of organizational attributes is the financial management. An organization selects its financial strategy to support its organization mission, purpose and constraints. Organizations have several options to engage in revenue generation from (a) an open economic market, (b) collection of taxes, (c) voluntary donation, and (d) service charges and membership dues. The for-profit organization uses the open economic market that is determined by people's voluntary buying behavior, and competition among organizations offering the same services.

Market signals are usually clear and for-profit organizations eollect market data to assist with sale strategy. Publie organizations use colleetion of taxes to fund the organization.

This funding source is centrally controlled resulting in budget alloeations of which the

33 individual public departments have little control. Financial allocations are negotiated with oversight bodies and improved through collaboration with other organizations offering the similar services. Market signals are weak and data usually unavailable. Nonprofit organizations use a mix of revenue generating activities (Nutt & Backoff, 1992).

The primary source is usually a collection of service charges and membership dues, followed by government subsidy or allocation and then by private donations. The nonprofit organization must negotiate with oversight bodies and mixed market signals.

Selection of one or more of tbese revenue generating sources then determines the other three components of financial management: (a) type of services provided, (b) consumers or public to serve, and (c) financial accountability.

In the provision of services organizations will make critical decisions about type of goods and services it will provide and thus for the market in which it will compete.

Organizations may provide public goods and services or private goods and services.

A public good, in the economists' sense is a good that has two special attributes: first, it cost no more to provide that good to many persons than it does to provide it to one, because one persons enjoyment of the good does not interfere with the ability of others to enjoy it at the same time; second, once the good has been provided to one person there is no way to prevent the others from consuming it as well. Air pollution control and defense against nuclear attack, and radio broadcast are common examples of public good (Hansmann, 1987 p. 29).

Public organizations provide public goods and at the level of the median voter or citizen. The services of nonprofit organizations can be highly effective when the consumer demands are homogeneous. The for-profit organization provides a service based on market demand for it depends on sales as its revenue generating opportunity.

34 This affords the organization the opportunity to set its priee such as to maximize its returns. Seleetion of services determines the eonsumers or publie to be served.

The public organization will serve public goods to the masses. In countries or communities with a heterogeneous society, the demands for variety of services will be high, and such demands are usually not met by the public or the for-profit organizations.

The public organizations are better suited to deliver the variety of services to satisfy the various segments of society. Public organizations also provide services that cannot

strictly be labeled as publie good. However, as they entail high levels of teehnical information as in the case of medical services. Public organizations may also monitor and control such services as day care centers and nursing homes because the paying customer cannot adequately assess the quality of these services. These services, referred to as trust services are provided by both for-profit and nonprofit organizations.

Nonprofit organizations provide services to special groups for whom the services are presently not available or to those who would prefer a higher standard than the publie

service provided but cannot afford the for-profit market value. Nonprofits initiate provision of services that are not present in society. The subsidization of public good and the non-distributing constraint on nonprofit organization could make those organizations more appealing to some consumers purchasing services for which they are poorly informed (Weisbrod, 1988). The accountability and financial reports of organizations vary based on the owners. Public organizations are held responsibly for full accountability, scrutiny and reporting to the public, while for-profit organizations are aecountahle primarily to its shareholders. Nonprofit organizations are responsible to all

stakeholders.

35 Governance

The third major category of organizational attributes is the governance characteristics. The governance characteristics of an organization are the actions

undertaken to promote the objectives and internal procedures of the organization. These include the choice of internal processes and procedures; and board structure and authorities. In a for-profit organization the control of governance falls under the board of

shareholders, in a volunteer organization the control falls under the board of members, in a public organization the control falls under the politicians and in a nonprofit the control falls under the board of stakeholders. An important distinction for a nonprofit organization is that its board while it may have political members cannot be dominated by political representatives nor can the board utilize government processes and procedures for governance (Salamon & Anheier, 1997). Public goods can be provided by public, for-profit and/or nonprofit organizations. Important issues under the governance in the for-profit organizations are: (a) it innovation and efficiency; (b) its managerial control of internal processes; (c) it control over employee recruitment, training and retention; (d) its limited oversight bodies; and (e) its clear goals and directions. In public organization the governance issues are (a) high concern for impact to society and equity in society; (b) central control of all processes with heavy bureaucracy (c) lack of managerial discretion and authority; (d) ubiquitous accountability structures that are

sometimes contradictory; and (e) ambiguous goals that are complex, shifting and conflicting. The nonprofit organization has governance issues as follows: (a) a mix of

36 innovation and societal impact concerns; (b) control over internal process by board; (e) managerial eontrol over internal processes; (d) several oversight bodies that can be managed; and (e) goals that are multiple and difficult but can be prioritized.

The organizational attributes of ownership rights, revenue generation, and governance were utilized to discuss the various implications of organizational purposes, process and outcomes. These implications are important for sports delivery as sport services can be categorized as public or private good based on the values of the society. If such determinations are made then there are important implications for delivery of sports. As

stated previously some European countries value Mass Sport as a public good and thus

spend tax revenue to ensure the development of sport services under this domain.

Whether Mass Sport, Elite Sport or Commercial Sport services will be offered and

sustained in a society will depend on the preferences and values of the role of sport by that society. Those preferences will determine whieh organizational form delivers those

sport services or if those sport services are even available.

Models Of Sport Delivery

Sports have been delivered by varied organizations throughout history. The prominent

organizations involved in the delivery of sports include volunteer organizations,

governmental organizations, for-profit organizations. These three forms of organizations that deliver sport are described below in terms of the attributes discussed earlier. As noted, the three important attributes that distinguish voluntary, public, and for-profit

organizations are ownership, governance, and revenue generation. Each organization will

37 be discussed drawing on their unique characteristics and identities based on their ownership, governance, and revenue generation.

Volunteer Sport Organization

Volunteer organizations were the first to recognize the need for leisure and provide services to fulfill that need. The main purpose, goal and mission at the time were to promote play, competition and contest. Some early efforts included organizing boxing matches in an open space near a pub or organizing a baseball match between two municipalities. Even at the early stages the interest was in national and international affiliation and competition. Cricket recorded early travels and so did baseball and rugby

(Clarke, 1993; Malec, 1995). Many times the organization of a competition demonstrated the need for forming a body to mange, oversee and direct the competition, to established

standards for competition as well as to increase opportunity for more competitions. Once initiated the voluntary organizations quickly expanded to include issues of coaching, officiating, and in some cases compensation for the athletes (Clarke, 1993).

Governance. All voluntary sports organizations have a common element of voluntary leaders. This notion of a voluntary board is a very important distinction for

sport organizations (Anheir & Salamon, 1998; Kikulis, Slack & Minings, 1995). The voluntary board allows the organization to be controlled by the volunteers rather than paid personnel, for-profit organizations or public organizations. Volunteer sports organizations ranged from committees of three people to very complex board structures. 38 Leaders were recruited from (a) athletes in some eases who then had to organize and eompete; (b) fans who had high interest and were loyal spectators to the sport; (c) prominent leaders in the community with interest in sport and from; and (d) those who had neither leadership nor sport knowledge but were willing to do the job (Kikulis, Slack,

Hinings & Zimmermann, 1989). Leaders were selected in a wide range of procedures. In many cases a small group of people gathered and selected informally among themselves who would he responsible to lead, and their respective responsibilities. On the other hand,

some organizations were formally ehartered and the election of officers was a complex process that was far removed from the athletes or participants of the sport (Kikulis, Slack,

Hinings & Zimmermann, 1989). In many cases the coaches and or managers of the athletes at the time were involved in the formation of these informal first stages of volunteer organizations. As the need for national and international affiliation and eompetition grew, the eomplexity and bureaucraey of the governing bodies also grew.

The need to have representation for all stakeholders were recognized and aceommodated for at several levels in the large voluntary sports organizations. Many federations formed

sub-committees for player, officials, coaches, trainers and mangers, and gave these groups representation at upper level decision-making. On the other hand some sport organizations in many countries are still organized by a small group of three to five members who act as coaches, officials and administrators. The athletes in many cases directly select these leaders (Clarke, 1993; Malec, 1995).

Many voluntary sport organization have paid full time personnel to implement the hoards' goals, programs and activities while others depend exclusivelyon voluntary personnel to implement all its goals, programs, and activities. These variations of paid

39 and voluntary personnel also impact the level of professionalization, centralization and

specialization of the organizations (Kikulis, Slack, Hinings & Zimmermann, 1989;

Kikulis, Slack & Hinings, 1995). Some voluntary sports organizations are formal chartered organizations legally registered within national or international laws, while

some exist as informal communal organizations. These ranges of organizations also influence the types of organizational procedures and policies of the voluntary sport organization. Some sport organizations have very standardized, centralized, bureaucratic organizational units, policies, procedures and reports, while others have little structured organization, procedures and reporting.

Ownership. Voluntary sports organizations are owned hy their members and

serve the needs of their members. They are private organizations and independent from government and for-profit organizations. Voluntary sports organizations have always maintained a relationship with both government and for-profit sector. These linkages have had significant impact on the voluntary sports organizations; however, the organizations have retained control of their ownership, leadership, and mission.

Voluntary sport organizations existed and still exist in various forms. Volunteer sport organizations vary in terms of size as well as jurisdiction (i.e., single sport or multi­

sport). The Federation International de Football Association (FIFA) is an example of a large single sport organization while the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is an example of a large multi-sport organization. Other large multi-sport organizations include the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), Sport For All, and

International Student Games. The variation in the size of voluntary sport organization, the

40 number of sports it serves and the number of members whether athletes, municipalities, or nations all have an impact on the governance of that voluntary sport organizations. The combination of these characteristics yielded stmctures and procedures which are varied and distinct among voluntary sports organizations. While voluntary sport organizations recognize their interdependence with for-profit and public organizations, they tend to prefer to be independent of either the for-profit or public direct control (Thoma & Chalip,

1996 ).

Revenue generation. The financial management of voluntary sports organization also has many variations. The common distinction for all voluntary sports organizations is that its primary source of revenue is not from an open economic market. Another distinction is that while the organization can engage in revenue generation any surplus accrued must be utilized to further the organization's mission and can not be distributed to any individual member, director or employee for personal gain. Surplus can be distributed, however, to member organizations for that organizations mission. Thus, FIFA can distribute up to a million dollars to member nations, from revenue surplus for the development of football in specific countries as part of its Gold Project Program. The variation of the revenue generation of voluntary sport organizations is as varied as the organizations. Some sport services are financially profitable and generate enough

surpluses to off set all expenses of the organization. This includes expenses such as a budget to cover all the organizations goals, objectives and programs, including all expenses for athletes' development, travel and competition. On the other hand some voluntary sports organizations are funded through food sales and personal finances of

41 volunteers and athletes to cover cost of athlete's development, travel and competitions.

Given the challenges of financial survival for many voluntary sports organizations the issue of funding and finances became critical. This afforded the opportunity for both public and for-profit organizations to enter into the delivery of sport services. Some sport organizations have public funding support while others do not. For many countries public funding is their primary source of their sports survival, while in other countries the for- profit support is their primary source of funding (Thoma & Chalip, 1996). The need for voluntary organizations to cooperate with public and for-profit organizations is a reality at all levels and for all types of voluntary sports organizations, and the interest and involvement of public and for-profit sport organizations has been documented in most

sports discipline. (Thoma & Chalip, 1996).

Public Sports Organizations

Governments' involvement in sports has been documented as more recent and after World War II. Governments have used sports for nation building, defense, health,

social welfare and international diplomacy (Clark, 1993). Some governments became involved to further political or social ideology (Chalip & Johnson, 1996). Many governments became involved by forming Ministries of Sport as individual ministries or joint ministries along with Health, Welfare, or Education. The ownership of the government sport involvement was always the public and thus departments within the public service were established in many cases. These departments would range from complete centralized control of all sports policy and programs as in Cuba to hands off

42 specified responsibility as in United States of America (Pettavino & Pye, 1996; Thoma &

Chalip, 1996). Most of these government initiatives were formalized through a Sports Act as a legal document of the nation. One variation of government involvement include City

Recreation Programs in the United States, in which federal and of state funds support a public organization for the delivery of sport services within a specific geographical area and for specific population. City recreation programs serve some of the following sport

services: facility, league play, coaching education, officiating education, and sports skill development clinics. In other countries these services are provided by voluntary sports organizations with funding from government grants. In other cases a National Sports

Council established by government provides these services. Facility construction has been an important area of government involvement in sports development. This is done though several avenues: (a) full responsibility of ownership construction and maintenance; (b) donation of land and construction cost, with no maintenance responsibility; and (c) security of funding sources and provision of public land, then complete transfer of facility to a voluntary sport organization (Howard & Crompton,

1995).

Thus, governments' involvement may be through direct delivery of the sports

services or the funding of sport services of interest through the voluntary sport organization or for-profit organizations. The financing of government involvement of

sport is generated from tax revenue. Some sources of funding have been the establishing of special taxation for sport development such as alcohol, tobacco and gambling. In some cases legalized sports gambling is established solely for the purpose of generating funds for sport development. Government can also raise funds through international agreements

43 and assistantship programs specific for sports and through specific investment programs with the for-profit sector. Governments also establish special legal provision for sports development that include tax exemption privileges. Governments' involvement, however, are not limited to funding.

In many countries the governments with meaningful involvement established

some sort of board and organizational unit to serve its objectives. In many cases National

Sports Councils are established under a Minister responsible for Sports and presently there are conferences for Ministers of Sports to advance regional and international benefits of the sports. These sports organizations are heavily influenced by political mandate. In Canada the government's influence created an urgency to improve elite sport performance internationally hy supporting funding of elite sport. In many European countries government funds Sports for All programs for the purpose of national fitness and health influencing voluntary sport organizations to deliver these services.

Governance. Public involvement in sport is governed primarily by boards, that are a combination of appointed and elected officials representing the interest of the government. The involvement of government ensured paid personnel for many sports organizations including sports development officers within the government department and paid coaches and administrators to work for volunteer sports organizations. They also provided centralized office spaces for many voluntary sport organizations. This heavily influenced the voluntary sports organization with which the governments worked and many voluntary sports organization moved toward a more centralized standardized and professionalized management (Kikulis, Slack & Hinings, 1995; Kikulis, Slack & Hinings,

44 1995). The control by the board over the government departments is dependent of the

size, speeialization and complexity of the organization just as the case of the voluntary board over its organization. In the case of paid personnel in an organization of

specialization and complex structure many decisions are made or influenced by the professionals instead of the elected board. Governments involvement are now an embedded part of sport delivery from community level sports to Olympic Game hosting.

Governments recognize that sports are an important aspect of national development and political advancement; however, they also reeognize that they are not the sole owners of

sports and its development. Governments have thus had to leam to work with the volunteer sports organizations and for-profit sports organization to accomplish its goal for sport development.

For-Profit Sport Organizations

For-profit involvement in sports delivery has been as early as organized competition. The concept of sponsorship started by paying for uniforms, travel or equipment and now has reached the level of contracting out public sports facilities and programs to for-profit sector. The involvement quickly became more formal with the expectation that is prevalent of capitalist investments that of a profit return on their investment (Clarke, 1993). For-profit involvement in sports is for the purpose of profit maximizing with the shareholders owning and controlling the organization. For-profit

sports organizations have goals such as product and service promotion, ticket sales, sport and non-sport merehandize sale, and image enhaneement. Sport services may include: (a)

45 participant services such as legal, financial, managerial, officiating, coaching, medical, and nutritional; (h) spectator service such as entertainment, contest, spectacle and (c)

social ideas such as fitness, health and leisure. Sports products include sporting goods, market access or association and donor services. Whether a for-profit sport organization is delivering services or products or a combination of both the purpose is for profit maximizing and the distribution of such profit return to its shareholders fMahoney &

Howard, 2001).

The governance of a for-profit organization is controlled by the shareholders of the organization. The organization utilizes paid personnel to fulfill its programs and objectives. It establishes procedures that advance its profit maximizing purpose and thus can he quite efficient, accountable and innovative. The primary source of revenue for the organizations is through the open economic market and thus the organization provides

services and products for which it can sell to consumers for a profit.

It is important to note that for-profit organizations may also capitalize on funding available from various levels of governments. For example, in the United States of

America the majority of stadiums and arenas are funded by public funds and then handed over to professional teams for gratis or nominal fess (Howard, 1995). On the other hand the cost of entrance fees to the public has increased significantly with the projected cost of a family of four to attend games in 2003 will he: (a) NBA $296.93; (b) NFL $ 285.57 and (c) MLB $146.36 (Howard, 1995). For-profit sport organizations engage in donations of services and funding to sports and other areas of society, however, this activity is distinct and independent from its profit maximizing purpose. Thus for-profit sports organizations will not construct a sports facility for use hy the public for no entrance fee

46 and if for-profit sports organization manages a facility then the revenue generated from rentals of the facility must cover that cost and ensure profit return. This has serious implication for sport development for in the future most of the public will view and know

sports only through television, video or virtual representation of sport and have no actual experience of a live game (Howard, 1999).

The relationship of voluntary, public and for-profit organizations in the delivery of sports has served many purposes. It is important to examine the benefits of those

services and the benefits of specific organizations delivery of specific service to a nation.

Such review has been done by several sports researchers and new models of sport delivery are emerging ( Koski & Heikkala, 1998; Koski, 1995; Thibault & Harvey,

1997).

Sports Organizations of Mixed Rationale

Research on Canadian and Finish Sport organizations has demonstrated a need for a mix of the present organizational forms to better meet the need of sports delivery. The research traced the relevant changes in the volunteer sport organizations as resources diminished; need for legitimacy and accountability increased; government demand for professionalism increased and government financial grants increased. In the case of the

Canadian sports organization the desire for better performance at international sporting events resulted in an increase in government involvement in sport (Slack & Hinings,

1992). This relationship between government and volunteers resulted in more professionalism, standardization, and centralization. It also resulted in increased financial

47 resources, more paid staff, programs and facilities. Government displayed a bias to certain programs and positions for funding and required more strategic planning, formalization in structure and processes and more involvement in decision making. There was resistance on the part of the volunteers to relinquish their autonomy and authority and their volunteer centered values. Although the resources exchange on average was

seventy four percent of the sport organization's budget the volunteers still resisted elements of bureaucratization and maintained some control in decision making through boards (Slack & Hinings, 1992; Kikulis, Slack, & Hinings 1995, & Kikulis, Slack,

Hinings & Zimmerman, 1989). The research on Finish sport organizations revealed a clearer move to the establishment of a mixed organizational stmcture of government and volunteer and even identified the involvement of the for-profit sector. One study also concluded that a relaxed structure was not compatible with effectiveness (Koski, 1995;

Koski & Heikkala, 1998). Similar to the Canadian studies the Finish studies identified changes in structure and processes. On the other hand the Finish studies identified the characteristics of the evolving organizations. Koski and Heikkala (1998) identified the evolving sport organizations "Organizations of Mixed Rationales" which had two dimensions. The first dimension was a mix of professionalism with a relaxed structure of volunteer values. The second dimension was a mix of public authorities, volunteer values and for-profit values. The movement of the Canadian and Finish sport organizations raises the question of whether different sport services may be better delivered by various and distinct organizational forms.

48 CHAPTER 3

METHODS

The chapter describes the methods and procedures used in this research. These procedures are outlined in the following sections: (a) Research Design; (b) Selection of

Sample; (c) Instrumentation; (d) Data Collection Procedures and (e) Data Analysis

Procedures.

Research Design

The method was descriptive research using survey procedures. The characteristics

explored were (a) the critical functions of sport and (b) the suitability of an organizational

form to deliver specific sport services in the . The researcher utilized mailed questionnaires to survey a cross-section sample of strategic stakeholders of sport

in Belize. The sample mail survey technique is often used in behavioral sciences to

explore and describe the attitudes and beliefs of different groups on an issue (Ary, Jacobs

& Razavieh, 1996). Since little empirical research has been conducted on sport functions

and organizational form for sport services, this investigation was exploratory and therefore the descriptive survey research was used. Surveys gather data via interviews or

49 questionnaire and permit the summary of opinions of different groups. Surveys are also a good option when the sample is large and time span is short (Ary et al., 1996).

A researcher could target a small group of participants for which a census would he appropriate or a large group for which a sample would be appropriate. The information gathered could be over a period of time using a longitudinal survey or a

single time collection using a cross-sectional survey (Ary et al., 1996). For this research, the most appropriate focus and scope was a one-point-in-time collection of data from a

sample of the population; and, thus, the method used was a cross-sectional sample

survey. As a result of the focus and scope of the study, a mail questionnaire was utilized.

The mail questionnaire is efficient and allows for gathering of information quickly from a large sample (Ary et al., 1996; Salant & Dillman, 1994).

Survey research has the potential of five important errors that must he controlled:

(a) sample error defined as “the difference between a population parameter and a sample

statistic” (Arys et al, 1996); (b) selection error defined as a predisposition toward some

sample units to have a greater chance of selection than others; (c) frame error defined as a discrepancy between the intended target population and the actual population from which the sample is drawn; (d) non-response error defined as participants that can not he located or who fail to respond; and (e) measurement error resulting from not ensuring the validity and reliability of the measurement instrument. There are specific procedures to control for these errors. For this research sample error was controlled by ensuring external validity. External validity is the extent to which the results of the study can he generalized to groups and environments outside the research setting. The technique of representative random sampling was used to ensure that the sample represented the

50 population. Selection error and frame error were controlled by using updated and accurate list of the target population. The list of the sport strategic stakeholders was obtained from the respective organizations and their 2002 list of members. Measurement error was controlled for by validity and reliability procedures of panel of experts, field testing and pilot testing. These procedures are further discussed under instrumentation.

Other advantages of the survey techniques are the inclusion of more subjects from diverse locations, confidentiality and thus more truthful response, elimination of interviewer bias, and cost effectiveness. On the other hand some disadvantages include misinterpretation of questions, need for high education level for complex questionnaires, and the potential for low return rate. Several factors can improve the response rate of a mail survey. Some techniques that have been successful include: (a) length, clarity and attraction of the questionnaire; (b) cover letter and sponsorship; (c) the ease of completing and mailing back; (c) the use of incentives and (d) follow up procedures (Ary et al., 1996; Salant & Dillman, 1994).

Selection of Sample

Sampling is the concept of drawing and observing a representative portion of the population and then inferring that those observations will be true for the population.

These inferences are best estimates with known error rates and not absolute facts. To mitigate tbe problem of chance differences between samples that may bias the results a researcher utilizes a representative cross-section of the population, probahility sampling, and a low margin of error (Ary et al., 1996). There are four types of probabilistic

51 sampling methods: simple random, stratified, eluster, and systematic sampling. Stratified

sampling is best used when the population consists of a number of subgroups and when the researcher proposes to study differences that might exist between groups (Ary, et ah,

1996 ).

While the Belizean society at large and the sport participants are the primary beneficiaries of the sport system, there are other stakeholders involved in channeling the resources, and/or managing the enterprise. For purposes of this study, the strategic

stakeholder groups were: (a) elected local government officials, (h) senior government employees (c) office-bearers of sport governing bodies (d) representatives of business community, (e) educators/principal of schools, (f) representative of non-govemment organizations, (g) sport sponsors, and (h) media personnel. For each stakeholder group the top management personnel were included in the target population as follows: (a) elected local government officials - all members of the City and Town Councils and all national elected representatives {n = 86), (h) senior government employees- senior heads of government departments with representation in all districts {n = 158); (c) office­ bearers of sport governing bodies - the presidents and secretaries of all sport governing bodies registered with the national sports council in = 73); (d) representatives of business community - mangers of business organizations registered with the Belize Business

Bureau, and Belize Trade Organization in = 253); (e) educators/principal of schools - all principals of the thirty five secondary schools and principals of the primary schools in =

239); (f) representative of non-govemment organizations - presidents or managers of registered NGO {n = 112); (g) sport sponsors - managers of the list of sport sponsors

from the National Sport Council (n = 61); and (h) media personnel - managers of the

52 media houses and sport journalist as listed in the telephone direetory 2002 - (n = 52).

The target population consisted of a total of 1034 participants.

For the purpose of this study a mixed sampling procedure was utilized drawing

from eight groups of sport strategic stakeholders. The entire population was used in the

case of the following groups:

1. Fleeted government (n = 86)

2. sport sponsors, (n = 61)

3. office-holders of sport governing bodies, {n = 73) and

4. media personal (n = 52) the entire population will be used as a sample of time.

Stratified random sampling was utilized in the case of:

1. senior government employees, (n = 114)

2. representatives of business community, (n = 80)

3. non-govemment organizations, {n = 77) and

4. school principals, {n = 146)

The strategic group was considered as one strata and each group was further

stratified hy geographic location creating a second strata (district). There are seven

districts in the eountry of Belize and thus eaeh district is represented in each strategic

group. Wherever the total number of respondents in a group was less than 100, the

53 total group would be requested to participate in the study. In other groups, a sample

of 100 was randomly selected from that group with the expectation that at least 50

would respond to the questionnaire.

Table 3.1 lists the population size for all groups, the sample selected, the number of completed questionnaires returned, and the response rate for each group.

Subgroup Formation

The subgroups used in the study were defined by gender, sector (business, government, education, nongovernmental), district, and involvement in sport governance.

For the purposes of this study, the seven districts were collapsed into two categories- respondents from the city of Belize and those from the rest of the districts. Similarly, involvement in sport governance was dichotomized into involvement and no involvement.

54 Group Population # Sampled # Response Rate

Gender 188 Male 89 Female 6 Not Indicated Sector Business 366 193 84 43.5% Government 244 200 71 35.5% Education 239 146 81 55.48% NGO 112 77 39 50.65% Not Indicated 8 SGB Involvement Involvement 73 73 152 No involvement 110 Not Indieated 21 Location Belize Distriet 114 Other 6 Districts 167 Not Indicated 2

Total 1034 689 283 41.07%

Table 3.1 Population, Selected Sample, and Response Rates

55 Instrumentation

The instrument was designed to measure respondent’s perceptions of (a) the criticalness of the functions of each of the domains of Mass, Elite, and Commercial

Sport, (b) the relative emphasis to be placed on the three domains of sport, (c) the appropriateness of the organizational forms to deliver a given sport service, and (d) background variables. The final eomplete instrument consisting of four sections is provided in Appendix C. The instrument was developed through several steps: (a)

development of items, (b) panel of experts, (c) field test, and (d) pilot test. These are described below.

Development of Items/Dimensions

Based on the literature review the researcher developed definitions for the three domains of sport - mass, elite and eommereial. Second a list was generated of twenty-

seven items for Part 1 (CESS) and fifty items for Part 11 (OFSS) - sixteen items for Mass

Sport, sixteen items for Elite Sport, nine items for Commercial Sport and nine general items. These items were then submitted to a panel of experts.

Criticalness of Functions of Sport. The first section labeled Criticalness of

Funetions of Sport Scale (CFSS) consists of three subseales measuring the eriticalness of the funetions served by Mass Sport, Elite Sport, and Commereial Sport. The researcher

56 developed 27 items to refleet the eritiealness of the functions of sport—Mass Sport (n =

10); Elite Sport {n = 9); and Commercial Sport {n = 8). The response format was a scale of 1 to 7(1= least critical, 7 = most critical) in the Belizean context.

Relative emphases on the three domains of sport. The second section of the instrument was a single item in which the respondents indicated the relative percentage emphases to be placed on each of (a) Mass Sport, (b) Elite Sport, and (c) Commercial

Sport. The respondents were instructed to limit the total of the percentages assigned to the three domains to 100%.

Suitabilitv of Organizational Forms. The third section of the instrument labeled

Organizational Forms for Sport Services (OFSS) assessed respondent’s perceptions of the

suitability of eaeh of the five forms of organizations in delivering a given sport service.

This section listed 50 services related to Mass Sport {n = 16); Elite Sport {n = 16);

Commercial Sport (n = 9), and nine items under sports leaders/managers.

To facilitate respondents’ comprehension of the various organizational forms,

clear definitions of the public, private for-profit, private nonprofit, public-profit combine,

and public-nonprofit combine forms of organizations were provided to the respondents.

These definitions are stated in Table 3.2. The respondents were requested to check the

form of organization that would best deliver a given service.

57 Organizational Form Description

Public Organizations Central, provincial, and/or regional governments and/or

their units.

Private For-Profit Organizations owned and operated by private owners or shareholders engaging in commercial activities to make Organizations profit. Private Nonprofit An organization owned and operated by members

Organizations providing services for the benefit of members and/or

clients. Any revenue in surplus of expenditure would be

invested back into the organizations and its programs for

service.

Public-Profit Combine A private for-profit organization that is funded by

government to provide specific services to the public in

carrying out public good

Public-Nonprofit Combine A private nonprofit organization that is funded by government to provide specific services to the public in carrying out public good.

Table 3.2 Definitions of Organizational Forms

58 Panel of Experts and Field Test

There are two important measures that must be established before a survey instrument is mailed to the final sample group - validity and reliability.

Validity. Validity is extremely important when preparing or selecting survey instruments. Fraenkel and Wallen (2000) refer to validity as “the degree to which evidence supports any inferences a researcher makes based on the data he or she collects

using a particular instrument” (p. 169-170). Validity can be established through face, content, criterion-related, and construct validation procedures. Face validity determines whether the instrument appears to be measuring what it intends to measure and is established using psychometric procedures. Content validity is an important indication of whether an instrument measures its intended content area. Criterion-related validity refers to the relationship between the score on the instrument and some other criterion. It is used when the instrument’s purpose is to predict another established criterion. Construct validity determines whether the instrument measures a desired construct.

Panel of Experts. The content and face validity of the instrument for this research was verified through a panel of experts. The first version of the questionnaire consisting of twenty-seven items reflecting the function of the three domains of sport (mass, elite and commercial) the fifty items reflecting the services of the three domains of sport

(mass, elite, and commercial) was submitted to a panel of experts. The members of the

59 panel were professors in sport management {n = 5), administrators of sport {n = 5) and doctoral student in sport management (n = 5). They were asked to verify if the functions and services were exhaustive, and if they were described clearly. The panel of experts was provided with detailed information regarding the purpose of the study and directions to assist them (Appendix A). The information collected from the panel of experts resulted in several revisions. In Part I of the instrument labeled Criticalness Function of

Sport Scale (CFSS) seven new items were added to the list of functions of sport, one item was eliminated. For Part III of the instrument labeled Organizational Forms for Sport

Services (OFSS) twenty-three new items were added, three were eliminated and four were modified for the list of sport services. Finally, the questionnaire was redesigned into a booklet format and the modified version along with a comment form was then

submitted to a field test (Appendix B).

Field Test. In a field test, the questionnaire is administered to a small group of persons drawn from the population to further confirm content validity and face validity.

The field test addressed the following issues: (a) respondents’ comfort with the questionnaire, (b) clarity and interpretation of items, (c) clarity of instructions, and (d) length of time to respond to the questionnaire (Ary et al., 1996). For this study, the respondents for the field test were drawn from administrators of sport (« = 10) in Belize.

Based on the feedback from the field test the questionnaire was again modified before administering to the respondents of the study. For Part I (CFSS) two items (promotion of

social relations and enhanced community pride) were eliminated and for Part III (OFSS) two items (collection of library materials, building and maintaining recreational facilities

60 and playgrounds) were added. Respondents reported that the instrument was too long and time consuming. Despite this eomment the questionnaire in its entirety was kept for the pilot test.

Pilot Test. A pilot test was then conducted with masters students in = 28) at the

Ohio State University. Based on their feedback and the comment from the Field Test respondents on the length of the questionnaire, six items from Part I (CFSS) and 21 items from Part II (OFSS) were eliminated. The internal consistency of the items was estimated for each of the proposed scales through Cronbach’s alpha. These estimates were .76 for

Mass Sport, .78 for Elite Sport, and .83 for Commercial Sport.

Background information. The fourth section of the instrument elicited information on respondent’s age, gender, years of partieipation in sport, employer, primary involvement in sport, and distriet.

Final Scale. The final scale administered to the respondents of the study consisted of (a) 26 items in the Criticalness of Functions of Sport Scale (CFSS) reflecting the functions of Mass Sport {n = 11); Elite Sport {n = 8); and Commercial Sport (n = 7); (h) a single item assessing the relative percentage emphases placed on each of the three domains of sport; (c) 37 items reflecting the services related to Mass Sport (n = 11); Elite

Sport (n = 13); and Commercial Sport (n = 13); and (d) items eliciting background information (Appendix C).

61 Reliability. The second important measure of an instrument is the reliability. Reliability is the dependability, stability, consistency, and predictability of the instrument when applied to a certain population under certain conditions. Reliahility can he established hy test-retest (coefficient of stahility), equivalent-forms (coefficient of equivalence), or internal consistency (coefficient of internal consistency) methods (Fraenkel & Wallen,

2000). Test-retest involves administering a test to a group once and the same test to the

same group a few weeks later; equivalent-forms involves administering two different hut equivalent forms of a test to the same group; and, internal consistency involves administering the test once and calculating its internal consistency level. The reliability estimates (Cronbach’s alpha) derived from the final sample are reported in the results chapter.

Data Collection Procedures

Before the survey was sent to the participants, approval from the Human Subjects

Review Committee of The Ohio State University was obtained in May, 2002 (Protocol

Approval Number 02E0154). A modified version of the collection procedure proposed by

Salant and Dillman (1994) was used to ensure that as many questionnaires as possible were returned. This procedure is based on a “process of repeated, personalized, and well- timed contacts designed to send one basic message, which is that each respondent’s participation is essential to the success of an important study” (Salant & Dillman, 1994, p. 139).

62 A one-page eover letter with the purpose of the study, the usefulness of the study, assuranee of confidentiality, and the option of partieipation was prepared and included in the mailing. Each mailing included a cover letter, a questionnaire, and a return envelop.

There were seven geographical locations for the delivery of questionnaires. For six of the locations the participants are centralized and thus a contact person distributed the questionnaires in person. For the seventh location, hoth a contact person and the postal

service were used to distribute the questionnaires. The contact person, a paid administrative assistant, made follow-up phone calls and picked up the eompeted questionnaires. A third round of phone calls were also made after a lapse of three weeks.

Finally, a thank-you post card was sent to each of the respondents.

Data Analyses Procedures

Purifieation of the subscales. The first set of analyses were concerned with purifying the subscales measuring the eriticalness of the funetions in eaeh of the three domains of Mass, Elite, and Commercial Sport. Following Churchill (1979), the items in each of the subscales were submitted to a principal component analysis with a view to identify if there was only one factor with an eigen value of one or larger, and to verify if all the items loaded highly on the factor. These analyses showed that there were only one dominant factor in each of the Mass and Elite domains of sport. However, two factors emerged under Commereial Sport domain with three of the items loading on one faetor and another three loading on the second factor. (These factors are described in the

Results Chapter). The seventh item loaded equally on both factors, and thus it was 63 eliminated from further analyses. As a result there were four faetors of eritieal funetions.

Subsequently, eaeh item was correlated with the total of the remaining items in its own

sub-scale and the totals of the items in the other three subscales. An item was expected to correlate higher with its own subscale than with the other irrelevant subscales. Items that correlated higher with either of the irrelevant subscales were eliminated from the

subscale. After confirming the subscale structure of the CFSS, the average of the scores on the items in a subscale were computed and used to represent the score for the domain.

These four domain scores were computed for all subgroups of respondents and the total

sample.

Criticalness of Sport Functions. The second set of analyses was focused on identifying differences among subgroups defined by gender, sector status (Four levels), involvement in sport (two levels), and city status (two levels) in the eriticalness of the funetions of Mass, Elite, and Commercial Sport. A multivariate analysis of variance,

MANOVA, procedure was carried out with the above grouping variables as independent factors and the emergent components of functions of sport as the dependent variables.

Univariate ANOVAs were also carried out as the MANOVA showed significant effects.

Also, Scheffe’s post hoc analyses were carried out with regard to sector status as it had four levels.

Emphases on Sport Domains. The third set of analyses was focused on the relative emphases placed on the three domains of sport. First, a MANOVA was carried out to verify if the subgroups defined earlier differed in the relative emphases they placed

64 on the three domains of sport. Although the multivariate effect was significant, none of the univariate effects was significant. Therefore, the relative emphases placed by the total group was used to compare if the relative emphases on the three domains differed

significantly from each other through t-test procedures. Finally, three percentages were correlated with the four scores on the eriticalness of the four domains.

Suitabilitv of Organizational Forms. The final set of analyses was concerned with the perceived suitability of the five organizational forms to deliver the listed sport

services. The items in OFSS represented different services that need to be provided to promote sport in Belize. These services were grouped into those that promote Mass,

Elite, and Commercial Sport respectively. The respondents were required to check the one organizational form they felt most suitable to deliver a given sport service. Thus, these scores were categorical in nature and, therefore, non-parametric analyses were carried out. More specifically, the choices of organizational forms for each service were

subjected to chi square analysis to verify if the distribution of choices was significantly different from the expected equal distribution. The significance of the chi square would indicate that one or more organizational forms were preferred over the others. Also, the total choices for each of the organizational forms over all the items under Mass Sport (n

= 11) were summed and subjected to chi square analysis. The significance of the chi

square would indicate if one (or more) organizational form(s) was perceived to be more

suitable to deliver services under Mass Sport in general over the others. This process was repeated for Elite and Commercial Sport as well.

65 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS

The results of the statistical analyses are provided under the following sections:

(a) Purification of the Subscales, (b) Subgroup Differences in Perceived Criticalness of

Sport Functions, (c) Relative Emphases placed on Sport Domains, and (d) Suitability of

Organizational Forms.

Purification of the Subscales

The first step in the purification of the subscales was to subject the set of items

under each of the three domains (Mass, Elite, and Commercial) to three different principal component analyses with varimax rotation in order to verify if (a) there was only one factor for each subscale as proposed utilized, and (b) all items loaded highly on the single factor for each subscale.

66 Mass sport

The principal component analysis showed that there was only one component with an eigen value of 5.52. The component explained 55.23% of the variance in the data. All other components had an eigen value of less than 1.0. The items and their factor loadings are shown in Table 4.1. All the loadings were equal to .6 or higher.

Elite sport

As in the case of Elite Sport, one component emerged with an eigen value of 4.34 and it explained 54.30% of the variance. The eigen values of other components were less than 1.0. As shown in Table 4.1, all items loaded highly on the factor (Factor loadings >

^ 5 ).

Commercial sport

The principal component analysis yielded two components whose eigen values exceeded 1.0. The first component with an eigen value of 3.14 explained 44.89% of the variance. The second component with an eigen value of 1.27 explained an additional

18.14% of the variance for the cumulative total of 63.03%. The items and their factor loadings are shown in Table 4.1. The three items loading on the first component were (a) promotion of tourism, (h) creation of job opportunity, and (c) generation of business activity. As these items reflect business and job opportunities, the component was

67 Item Mass Elite Commercial Number Sport Sport Entertainment Business

1 .604 2 .649 5 .759 8 .633 11 .820 14 .813 16 .786 19 .816 21 .681 22 .824 3 .748 4 .727 6 .652 10 .727 15 .694 18 .756 20 .776 25 .805 7 322 .693 9 ^03 .828 12 326 305 13 309 .786 17 .769 .145 23 .828 302 24 .812 381

Eigen Values 5.52 4 J 4 3.41 1.27 Percent Var 55.23 5430 4439 + 18.14 = 63.03

Table 4.1 Factor Loadings for Mass, Elite and Commercial Sport The Table contains results of three different principal component analysis.

68 labeled Business Sport. The three items loading on the second component were (a) promotion of fan identification, (b) satisfying spectator desires, and (c) provision of entertainment. As these items refer to the entertainment value of sports, the component was labeled Entertainment Sport. As the seventh item loaded equally on both factors, it was eliminated from further analyses.

The next step in the purification of the subscales was the item-to-total correlations where each item was correlated with the total of the other items in its own suhscale (i.e., corrected item-to-total correlation) and with the totals of the items in each of the other three suhscales. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 4.2. It was found that two items from Mass Sport (increased sense of competence and promotion of harmony in the community, and one item from Elite Sport (development of team spirit) correlated more highly with the irrelevant totals than with their own totals. Therefore, they were eliminated from further analyses. The item-to-total correlations of the final set of items and the internal consistency estimates are shown in Table 4.3.

Reliability Estimates

The internal consistency of the items in each of the purified scales was estimated through Cronhach’s alpha. These estimates were .91 for Mass Sport, .86 for Elite Sport,

.76 for Entertainment Sport, and .69 for Business Sport.

69 Commercial Mass Elite Business Entertainment

Mass ( = .92) Item # Increased sense of competence .54 ^7* .43 .39 Promotion of active lifestyle .57 .47 .25 .29 Promotion of emotional health .69 .55 .33 .35 Enhanced body image .55 .51 .45 .41 Promotion of physical health .76 .64 .28 .36 Feeling of well-being .75 .61 .37 .33 Development of physical fitness .72 .63 .27 .39 Promotion of mental health .75 .59 .38 .38 Promotion of harmony in comm .62 .67* .43 .40 Reduction in stress & tension .80 .56 .27 .43 Enhanced selfesteem .76 .66 .30 .48

Elite ( - .88) Item # Creation of community pride .63 .65 .42 .47 Develop of competitive spirit .62 .63 .30 .51 Develop of excellence in sports .54 .55 .37 .51 Enhancement of eomm. image .53 .63 .37 .53 International recognition .51 .60 .50 .43 Development of team spirit .67* .66 .23 .49 Fostering of national prestige .62 .69 .43 .51 Enhanced community pride .63 .72 .60 .39

Business ( = .69) Item # Promotion of tourism .37 .38 .44 .31 Creation of job opportunity .35 .44 .53 .23 Generation of business activity .38 .45 .56 .35

Entertainment ( = .76) Item # Facilitation of national festivities .46 .46 jg * .49 Promotion of fan identity .40 .56 .32 .54 Satisfying spectators desires .38 .52 .35 .68 Provision of entertainment .52 .54 .24 .58

Table 4.2 Item-to-Total Correlations of Criticalness Subscales * Denotes items that were deleted

70 Commercial Mass Elite Entertainment Business

Mass ( - .91) Item # Promotion of active lifestyle .56 .46 .29 .25 Promotion of emotional health .67 .54 .35 .33 Enhanced body image .54 .51 .41 .45 Promotion of physical health .77 .62 .36 .28 Feeling of well-being .75 .59 .34 .37 Development of physical fitness .74 .59 .39 .27 Promotion of mental health .75 .56 .38 .38 Reduction in stress and tension .76 .54 .43 .26 Enhanced self esteem .69 .65 .48 .30

Elite ( - .86) Item # Creation of Community pride .59 .67 .47 .42 Develop of competitive spirit .59 .62 .51 .30 Develop of excellence in sports .53 .54 .51 .37 Enhancement of comm image .50 .63 .37 .53 International recognition .48 .59 .43 .50 Fostering of national prestige .59 .68 .51 .43 Enhanced community pride .60 .71 .60 .39

Entertainment ( = .76) Item # Promotion of fan identity .38 .55 .53 .32 Satisfying spectator desire .36 .52 .68 .35 Provision of entertainment .51 .54 .58 .24

Business ( = .69) Item # Promotion of tourism .34 .39 .31 .44 Creation of job opportunity .31 .47 .23 .53 Generation of business activity .35 .48 .35 .56

Table 4.3 Item-to-Total Correlation of Final Criticalness Subscale

71 Descriptive Statistics

The descriptive statistics for all variables of the study are provided in Table 4.4 by

Gender, Employer, Location, SOB involvement, and total group.

Sub Group Differences

In order to assess the subgroup differences in perceived criticalness of function of

sport and relative emphases placed on the domains of sport, two separate MANOVA procedures were carried out with the grouping variables as the independent factors, and the four subscales of eriticalness and the three percentage emphases as the dependent variables respectively. Each MANOVA was followed by univariate analyses.

Criticalness of Sport Functions

The results of the MANOVA are shown in Table 4.5. It was found that only the

Location and the interaction of Gender and SGB involvement had a significant multivariate effect on the perceived criticalness of the four domains of sport. None of the other factors or their interactions had a significant effect. The univariate analysis showed that Location had a significant effect on criticalness of Mass sport (F {\, 253) = 12.78,/?

< .001) and on eriticalness of Elite Sport (F { 253) = 4.65 p < .05). Those respondents

from the district of Belize perceived Mass Sport (M = 5.74) to be more critical than those

72 Variable Gender Employer Location

M F 1 2 3 4 Belize Dist. Yes No Total

Critical 5.56 5.42 5.6 537 533 5.41 534 534 535 5^4 5.51

Mass .97 1.1 .85 1.21 .91 1.16 .81 1.09 1.04 1.0 1.01

Critical 5.55 537 5.77 53 4 53 9 53 9 532 538 535 536 549

Elite .95 1.15 1.04 1.19 .98 1.04 .92 1.07 1.05 .98 132

LU Critical 4.96 43 3 4 3 9 4.91 437 532 433 430 437 436 439

Business 1.12 1.12 1.15 1.13 1.07 1.10 1.21 1.06 1.15 1.09 1.13

Critical 5 09 4 9 6 5.21 439 438 537 5 03 532 539 4.91 534

Entertainment 1.12 1.34 1.04 139 1.19 1.31 134 1.16 133 1.15 1.20

Emphasis 42.86 4332 39.71 40.77 4535 4343 4236 4233 4331 4237 4333

Mass 16.31 15.85 14.75 17.51 15.04 17.14 4236? 4333 16.54 15.88 16.14

Emphasis 29 07 2932 32.13 2734 2733 2930 3037 2838 30.25 2737 2931

Elite 13.21 13.16 13.54 12.52 11.91 15.40 13.33 12.93 12.58 13.74 13.18

Table 4.4 Means and Standard Deviations for Criticalness Subscales and Percentage Emphases Source df F P n power

Gender 4,218 499 .015 267

Employer 12,218 1 J06 ^62 430 410

SGB 4,218 .904 462 .016 285

Location 4,218 1735 .006* .064 482

Gender* Employer 12, 577 1.057 495 419 453

Gender * SGB 4,218 2.905 ^23* .064 482

Employer* SGB 12, 577 J8 4 467 .014 409

Gender * Employer 12, 577 ^#7 469 .01 291 * SGB Gender * Location 4,218 1.23 298 422 283

Employer * Location 12, 577 .582 457 .011 299

Gender * Employer 12, 577 .555 478 .010 285 * Location SGB * Location 4,218 298 479 405 .116

Gender * SGB 4,218 1.754 439 .031 .531 * Location Employer * SGB 12, 577 1.00 .446 418 424 * Location Gender * Employer 12, 577 .695 .757 .013 260 * SGB * Location

Table 4.5 Results of MANOVA - Criticalness of the Function of the four Sport Domains (Mass, Elite,

Entertainment, and Business)

* Indicates significance at the p < .05

74 from the other distriets (M= 5.34). Also the residents of the distriet of Belize found Elite

Sport (M= 5.62) to be more eritieal than the others (M= 5.38). The effeet of the interaction of gender and employer was significant only in the case of criticalness of mass

sport (F (3, 253) = 2.89, p < .05). Females in Business had the highest rating for Mass

Sport (M = 5,85) while females in Government had the lowest rating (M = 4.97).

Although these subgroup differences were statistically significant, their practical

significance was rather limited as the eta squares associated with them were less than

.065. The results of the univariate analyses are shown in Appendix D. Therefore, the means of the total sample for the criticalness of Mass, Elite, Business and Entertainment

Sport functions were compared to each other through t-test procedures to verify if the total sample rated the criticalness of the sport functions differentially. Overall, the results

of the paired sample t-test indicated that the respondents perceived funetions of Mass and

Elite Sport to be more critical than Entertainment and Business Sport. There were no

significant differences between eriticalness of Mass and Elite Sport or between

Entertainment and Business Sport. The specific results of the paired sample t-test

indicated that the respondents perceived Mass Sport (M=5.5, SD = 1.0) to be more

critical than Entertainment Sport (M = 5.0, SD = 1.2), t (279) = 7.13, /? = .000. The results also indicated that the respondents felt that Mass Sport (M = 5.5, SD =1.0) was more critical than Business Sport (M = 4.9, SD = 1.1), t (279) = 9.06, p = 000. In addition the respondents perceived Elite Sport (M= 5.5, SD = 1.0) to be more critical than

Entertainment Sport (M= 5.0, SD = 1.2), t (279) = 8.04, p = .000; and than Business

Sport (M = 4.9, SD = 1.0), t (279) = 9.93, p = 000. The means and standard deviations for all variables are shown on Table 4.4. 75 Relative Emphases on Sport Domains

A MANOVA procedure was carried out to verify if the defined subgroups differed in the average percentages of relative emphases they placed on the three domains of sport. The results of the MANOVA are shown in Tahle 4.6. It was found that Gender,

Employer, SGB and Location as well as all their interactions had a significant effect on the three domains of sport. The univariate analysis, however, showed that there was no

significant effect of the grouping variables on the emphases placed on the three domains of sport (Appendix E). Therefore, the means for the total sample for the emphasis on

Mass, Elite and Commercial Sport were compared to each other through t-test procedures to verify if the total sample placed signifieantly different emphases on the three domains of sport. The results of the paired sample t-test indieated that the respondents placed

significantly more emphasis on Mass Sport (M= 42.88, SD = 16.17) than on Elite Sport

(M= 29.34, SD = 13.10), t (272) = 8.65,/? = .001. The paired sample t-test also indicated that the respondents placed significantly more emphasis on Mass Sport (M= 42.88, SD =

16.17) than on Commercial Sport (M= 28.12, SD = 13.56), t (272) = 9.05, p = .001. The average percentage on the relative emphasis of Elite and Commercial Sport did not differ

significantly.

76 Source df F P n power

Gender 3,213 3.464 .017 T47 .770

Employer 9,518 4238 .000 T56 T87

SGB 3,213 .4.11 .007 T55 .844

Eocation 3,213 3d35 T26 T42 224

Gender* Employer 9,518 3483 .001 T43 .941

Gender * SGB 3,213 4 697 TW3 T62 T92

Employer* SGB 9,518 .3.744 .000 T50 273

Gender * Employer 9,518 2J02 .015 .031 T24 * SGB Gender * Location 3,213 4J94 TW5 T58 T69

Employer * Location 9,518 3483 .001 T43 .941

Gender * Employer 9,518 3.690 TWO T49 .971 * Location SGB * Location 3,213 4 546 .004 T60 T81

Gender * SGB 3,213 1773 .011 T50 T08 * Location Employer * SGB 9,518 2442 .010 T33 T51 * Location Gender * Employer 9,518 3 064 .001 .041 231 * SGB * Location

Table 4.6 Results of MANOVA - Relative Percent Emphasis of three Sport Domains (Mass, Elite, Commercial)

77 Correlations of Criticalness and Relative Emphases

The correlations of the three percentage emphases with the eriticalness of the four domains of sport are shown in Table 4.7. It was found that the relative emphasis of

Commercial sport correlated significantly with the criticalness function of Business (r =

.156,/? < .01). No other correlation was significant.

Suitability of Organizational Forms

As noted in Chapter Three, the items in OFSS scale represented different services that need to be provided to promote Mass, Elite, and Commercial sport respectively. The respondents were required to check the one organizational form they felt most suitable to deliver a given sport service. The results of the chi square analyses of the choices of organizational forms for each service under each of the Mass, Elite, and Commercial

Sport domains are presented in the following section.

78 EET0T4 BUS HE ncertsn epixen tpertei M3TOTA F e * s)n 7 4 : ^ EC5^ 4 1 ^ -.071 0 39 EiS (2- 000 ICO ICO .116 I I I .5 24 N 300 ISO lEO 1^3 273 2? 3 EEfrO“A F 6 ar S3n -.111 .041 05? m Q- ICO ICO - ^2 . i l l 3i7 H ISO lEO 1^3 273 27 3 EHTE?T Fearsjn 1 ^ 4 ^ -.011 -.01 4 .015 Eia Q- ICO .145 .311 .8 32 N ICO I '3 273 27 3 E USINES Fearsan -.111 -.011 .1 36*^ 's O m Q- .118 .311 .010 H 1^3 273 27 3 rrp=T:en Fears^n -.5=:^ -.6 31^ Eia C- 311 .0 30 H 273 27 3 eper;erl Fearsjn .131^ Eia G- .0 31 H 27 3 cp-ran Fpas'in Eia G- H Correl alio-” is aignhlcait ^ the 0.0^ le\'= I G-

Table 4.7 Correlations Among Perceived Criticalness of Sport Functions and Relative Emphases on Sport Domains Mass Sport

The results of the chi square analyses for all services under Mass Sport are shown in

Table 4.8. The distribution of the choices of organizational forms for all Mass Sport

services except (publicizing benefits of sport participation, developing fitness instruction manuals and training and certifying fitness instructors) was significantly different from the expected equal distribution (p < .05). Overall the respondents favored either the public nonprofit combine organization or the public organizations to provide most of the

services related to Mass Sport. More specifically, the respondents favored the public nonprofit combine organization for five of the eleven listed services (organization of

sports competition for recreation and leisure, organizing sports camp and clinics, publishing manuals for volunteer leaders, organizing and conducting community level

sports programs, and providing fitness programs), and public organization to provide three of the listed eleven listed services (teaching of basic sport skills, building and maintaining recreational facilities and playgrounds, and training sport teachers and leaders).

The total choices of organizational forms over all mass sport services were

subjected to chi square analysis. As shown in Table 4.8, the most favored organization form for the delivery of Mass Sport services was the public-nonprofit combine. The

second most favored choice was the public organization.

80 Sport Services Public Private Nonprofit Public Public x" Profit Nonprofit 1. teaching of basic sport skills 117 13 46 18 87 143.68*** 2. building and maintaining recreational facilities and 95 19 37 49 79 68.62*** playgrounds 3. publicizing benefits of sport participation 75 26 69 36 74 38.46*** 4. training sport teachers and leaders 94 28 42 34 83 64.71*** 5. organization sports competition for recreation and leisure 68 24 61 36 89 48.22*** 6. organizing sport camps and clinics 71 22 39 47 93 57dl*** 7. developing fitness instruction manuals 66 54 45 44 69 9T# 8. publishing manuals for volunteer leaders 71 21 62 21 99 83.08*** 9. organizing and conducting community level sports programs 76 11 55 39 95 76.68*** 10. training and certifying fitness instructors 48 44 46 71 70 1T06* 11. providing fitness programs 51 54 45 49 74 9A0

TOTAL 832 316 547 444 912 423.68*** df = 4 for all analysis * p < .05 **p<.01 ***p< .001

Table 4.8 - Chi Square Analysis of Organizational Forms and Services for Mass Sport Elite Sport

The distributions of the choices of organizational forms for the services oriented toward

Elite Sport are shown in Table 4.9. All chi square values except (training and certifying

sport scientists, organizing competition for age group elite teams, and training talented individuals) were significantly different from the expected equal distribution (p < .05).

Overall the respondents favored either private for-profit or the public nonprofit combined organizations to provide most of the services related to Elite sport. In particular, the respondents favored the private for-profit organization to provide five of the thirteen listed services (Facilitation of competitive sports clubs, raising funds for elite teams/athletes, building and maintaining facilities for training of elite athletes, coaching elite teams, and securing sponsorship for elite teams and athletes), the public-nonprofit combine to provide four of the thirteen listed services (Maintaining sport injuries/athletics training centers, identification and selection of sport talent, training and certifying sports officials, training and certifying coaches) and public-profit combined organization to provide one of the thirteen listed services (organizing international competition for elite athletes). The total choices of organizational forms over all Elite

Sport services were also subjected to chi square analysis. As shown in Table 4.9, the respondents perceived private for-profit organization as the most suited organizational form to deliver most of the Elite Sport services {n = 890). The second most suited organizational form was public-profit combine {n = 830).

82 Sport Services Public Profit Nonprofit Public Public Profit Nonprofit 1. training and certifying sport scientists 54 50 42 57 73 9A7 2. maintaining sport injuries/athletics training centers 41 48 51 68 73 13.29* 3. identification and selection of sport talent 54 35 68 42 83 26.83*** 4. organizing international competition for elite athletes 26 84 34 90 45 61.74*** 5. training and certifying sports officials 48 47 51 50 81 14.968** 6. facilitation of competitive sports clubs 34 74 59 61 50 15.78** 7. raising funds for elite teams/athletes 20 102 38 84 33 91.11*** 8. training and certifying coaches 54 41 47 63 75 12.86* 9. organizing competition for age group elite teams 49 64 52 46 66 5.91 LU00 10. building and maintaining facilities for training of elite 48 80 31 72 47 28.80*** athletes 11. coaching elite teams 14 97 48 69 51 66.36*** 12. training talented individuals 42 65 46 60 66 8.83 13. securing sponsorship for elite teams and athletes 28 103 35 68 45 66.29***

TOTAL 512 890 602 830 788 136.31***

df ^ 4 for ali analysis ^p<.05 01 ^^*/7<.0001

Table 4.9 Chi Square Analysis of Organizational Forms and Services for Elite Sport Commercial Sport. The results of the ehi square analyses for ail services under

Commercial Sport are shown in Table 4.10. The distribution of the choices of organizational forms for all Commercial Sport services except (Managing organization- player relations, providing quality facilities for spectator, and effective conduct of event) was significantly different from the expected equal distribution (p>. 05). More

specifically, the respondents favored the private for-profit organization to provide seven of the thirteen services (Marketing of professional sports leagues, organizing competitions among professional sport teams, promoting the formation of professional

sports leagues, media relations and contracts (TV and radio), sale of team sponsored merchandize, and licensing products) and the public-profit combine for three of the thirteen services (building and maintaining facilities for commereial sport, providing of quality amenities for spectators, and training facility and grounds maintenance personnel). When the choices of organizational forms were examined over all services related to Commercial Sport it was found that the respondents chose profit organizations

{n = 1408) followed by public-profit combine {n = 940) as the most suitable organizations to deliver those services as shown in Table 4.10.

84 Sport Services Public Profit Nonprofit Public Public Profit Nonprofit 1. building and maintaining facilities for commercial sport 35 81 28 105 33 84.74*** 2. marketing of professional sport leagues 8 159 27 75 12 285T#*** 3. providing of quality amenities for spectators 37 82 30 92 38 59.73*** 4. managing organization-player relations 34 57 73 45 72 20.48*** 5. providing quality facilities for spectators 43 88 28 86 33 61.25*** 6. organizing competitions among professional sport teams 8 127 36 92 17 188TÜ*** 7. promoting the formation of professional sport leagues 26 123 21 73 31 13T24***

00 8. concession sales in and around the sport stadium (V, 26 145 25 56 19 205A4*** 9. media relations and contracts (TV and radio) 24 129 31 68 27 142.70*** 10. sale of team sponsored merchandise 6 172 29 64 8 341A5*** 11. training facility and grounds maintenance personnel 54 56 38 74 54 11.83* 12. effective conduct of an event 48 61 54 51 66 T89 13. licensing products 34 128 25 59 31 131Tn^** TOTAL 384 1408 445 940 441 110.62*** df = 4 for all analysis * p < .05 **p<.01 ***/?<.001

Table 4.10 Chi Square Analyses of Organizational Forms and Services for Commercial Sport CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION

The conceptual meaning and implications of the results are discussed below under the following headings: (a) subscale structure, (b) subgroup differences, (c) eriticalness function of sport services, (d) relative emphasis of domains, and (e) suitability of organizational forms.

Subscale Structure

It was gratifying that the proposed subscale structure of the scale to measure the

criticalness of the sport domains was largely supported. As expected, the principal

component analyses showed that only one component existed in the items measuring

Mass and Elite Sport respectively. However, there were two components in the case of

what the researcher called commercial sport. The two components were labeled business

and entertainment. On hind sight and based on the emergence of two components, it makes sense that the notion of business and job opportunities should be separated from the idea of sport providing entertainment. That is, a sport event could be entertaining and it could attract spectators without the event being commercialized. This is often the ease in amateur and/or seholastie sports. By the same token, entrepreneurs eould make those events with the highest entertainment value into a business venture and create more jobs.

It is also encouraging that emerging components in all four subscales explained more than 50% of the variance in the data. Further, the item loadings were all very high in each of the component. Finally, the item-to-total correlations also indicated that all but three items were correlated higher with their own totals than with the other irrelevant totals. That is, the subscale structure was confirmed. It must however be noted that confirming the factor structure of a scale through item-to-total correlations is not as rigorous as through a confirmatory factor analysis. As employing confirmatory factor analysis with the same data set that was used to purify the scale is not an appropriate procedure, it was not earned out in the present case. Flowever, the use of the scale in future studies would warrant confirmatory analysis of the scale.

Subgroup Differences

While several grouping variables were employed, the differences among

subgroups were very few indeed. Those respondents from the district of Belize perceived

Mass sport (M = 5.74) to be more critical than those from the other districts (M = 5.34).

Also the residents of the district of Belize found Elite sport (M= 5.62) to be more critical than the others (M^ 5.38). The effeet of the interaction of gender and employer showed that females from the business sector had the highest rating for Mass sport (M= 5.85) while the females in the government sector had the lowest rating (M= 4.97). Despite the

87 statistical significance of these differences, they were of less praetical value as the eta

square values associated to these differences were less than .065. Therefore, it is more meaningful to disregard these subgroup differences and deal with the perceptions of the total group.

Criticalness Function of Sport Services

The results of the paired sample t-test indicated that the respondents perceived

Mass (M= 5.5) and Elite (M = 5.5) sport to be significantly more critical than Business

(M = 4.9) and Entertainment (M = 5.0) sport. The criticalness of the functions of Mass

and Elite sport did not differ significantly. In addition the criticalness of the functions of

Business and Entertainment did not differ significantly. Thus, the respondents

eollectively believed that Mass Sport was very critical to Belize as it yields benefits of recreational participation and benefits of health and education. In addition, the selected

stakeholders of this study felt that promotion of Elite Sport is also eritical in the Belizean

context. Such a focus would foster excellence in sport, competitive spirit, community pride, national prestige and international recognition. It is logical that the respondents

would endorse both Mass and Elite Sport while not being as supportive of Business and

Entertainment Sport. One could argue that Elite Sport is based on mass participation and,

in fact, it is an offshoot of mass participation. Therefore, promoting both would not be a

eonstraint on mass participation. On the other hand, promoting the Business and

Entertainment domains of sport (i.e., the two components of Commercial Sport) would

entail additional structures and processes. Hence, the respondents might have felt that these two domains were not as critical as Mass and Elite Sport. Another line of thinking would suggest that the respondents perceived Mass and Elite Sport to be benefiting

society as a whole while commercial sport would benefit the more affluent segments of

society and, therefore, they perceived the former sport domains to he more critical.

Relative Emphasis of Sport Domains

The aboveline of reasoning is substantiated by the finding that when the respondents were confronted with making a choice between Mass and Elite Sport, they placed a much higher percentage (43%) emphases on Mass Sport than on either Elite

Sport (29%) or Commercial Sport (28%). When we consider these two results together, we can conclude that the respondents felt that Mass Sport was the most critical aspect of

sport for Belize, and that Elite Sport may also he supported in so far as the promotion of

Elite Sport does not minimize the importance of and/or constrain the efforts in Mass

Sport.

The emphasis on Mass Sport is consistent with the views expressed by scholars and practitioners elsewhere (e.g., Bucher, 1979; Chalip, 1996; Chelladurai, 1992;

Coakley, 2001; Horine, 1985; Thibault, Slack & Hinings, 1993). The essential argument in favor of Mass Sport is that it contributes to health and fitness while satisfying the recreational needs of the community. Further, as noted. Mass Sport is the foundation for excellence in sport and subsequent commercialization of the achieved excellence. This interpretation could he the cornerstone of planning by various sport organizations in

Belize. It could also serve as the foundation for the efforts of Belizean governments at

89 different levels. Indeed, the national government of Belize could use this interpretation in formulating a national sport poliey.

It is intriguing that the respondents from the business sector also would not endorse the commercial aspects of sport. It was expected that because Commercial

Sport would benefit the business people they would be inclined to support such an enterprise. One interpretation of this finding is that the business people were able to see that the commercial ventures in sport are not likely to be successful given the size of the population and national economy. As noted, Belize’s population is only about quarter million people with an annual gross national product of about 700 million dollars. The annual per capita income is around 3,000 dollars (World Bank, 2001). These figures do not portend a fertile ground for Commercial Sport. As Howard (1999) noted, even the

American professional sport franchises find it hard to survive. If this is the case in the richest country in the world, we ean understand why the business people in Belize would be reluctant to consider commercial sport as a viable option. Therefore, they would not place a great emphasis on the commercial aspects of sport.

Suitability of Organizational Forms

This part of the research was concerned with the perceived suitability of the five organizational forms to deliver the listed sport services that promote the three domains of

sport: Mass, Elite and Commercial sport. While three of the organizational forms are the traditional publie, for-profit, and nonprofit organizations, the other two forms included in the study were the eombination of publie and for-profit organizations (i.e., public-profit

90 combine) or the combination of public and nonprofit organizations (i.e., the public- nonprofit combine). The need to link the efforts of public, nonprofit and for-profit organization for the provision of the many sport services in all three domains of Mass,

Elite and Commercial Sport has been emphasized (e.g., Thibault & Harvey, 1997; Newell

& Swan, 1995).

Mass Sport. The chi square analyses showed that overall the sport strategic

stakeholders favored public-nonprofit combine as the most suited organizational form to deliver Mass Sport services with the public organization as the second choice. The choice of the public- nonprofit combine for Mass Sport is not surprising as the literature addresses the importance of public funding for the development of mass participation, recreational sport development, and sport for fitness and health (e.g., Newell & Swan,

1995; Thibault & Harvey, 1997). By definition. Mass Sport refers to participation by the masses and that it yields the benefits of health, fitness, and active lifestyles. As these are truly public benefits the government organizations should be involved in promoting mass

sport. But the best manner of such involvement is to provide the funds to the nonprofit organizations that have traditionally provided the Mass Sport services at the grass roots level. That is, the nonprofits have gained the experience and expertise in delivering the

sport services. More importantly, they are rooted in the communities and they are run by volunteers from the community. In Belize most sport governing bodies are not formally registered as legal nonprofit organizations. Thus the major contribution by the governments at various levels would be to facilitate the operations of the nonprofits by providing financial and other strategic assistance to the sport governing bodies (i.e.,

91 establishing a public-nonprofit combine) to provide the Mass Sport services for the community. This, in fact, was the definition perused by the respondents in answering this

survey. That is, the public-nonprofit combine was defined as “private nonprofit organizations funded by government to provide specific services to the public in carrying out public good

It is noteworthy that the public organizations were chosen most often to provide certain services related to mass sport. These services were (a) teaching of basic sport

skills, (b) building and maintaining recreational facilities and playgrounds, (c) publicizing benefits of sport participation, and (d) training sport teachers and leaders (Table 4.8). It

should be borne in mind that as the educational institutions in Belize are government organizations they are public sector organizations. It is only appropriate that these public institutions should be perceived as best suited to deal with physical education and sport and to teach the basic sports skills and train sport teachers and leaders. It is also logical to expect the public organizations to build and maintain the infrastructure for mass participation. The nonprofit organizations would not have the financial resources for that

undertaking. The for-profit organizations cannot be expected to invest their funds in such ventures as there is no return of profit from mass sport. Finally, the publicity regarding the benefits of sport participation is best left to public organizations. In summary, the respondents perceived the public-nonprofit organizations as the best suited to provide most of the Mass Sport services, and the public organizations to provide the Mass Sport

services that involve large investments. It must also be noted that the private nonprofit organizations were not deemed to be the most suited to provide any of the services by

92 themselves. The Belizean government may consider spearheading the development of a puhlic-nonprofit organization to deliver Mass Sport services.

The model of puhlic-nonprofit combine is quite prevalent in developed nations.

Specialized government ministries and/or units in European countries, Australia, and

Canada have been providing financial and logistic assistance to nonprofit sport organizations to promote mass sport. Respondents of the study might have been aware of this practice in other countries to endorse the model.

Elite Sport. The results relating to the suitability of organizational forms for providing Elite Sport services differ from those relating to Mass Sport services in several respects. First, the overall choices over all 13 services under this category in = 890) favored the for-profit organizations followed by the public and for-profit combine {n =

830). However, this statistic masks other fundamental differences in the choices of organizational forms for specific services. As shown in Table 4.9, the for-profit form of organization was chosen as the most suited only in five of the 13 services—(a) facilitation of competitive sport clubs, (b) raising funds for elite teams/athletes, (c) building and maintaining facilities for training of elite athletes, (d) coaching elite teams, and (e) securing sponsorship for elite teams and athletes. These services refer mostly to financing of the operations relating to elite sports. The puhlic-nonprofit combine was chosen as the most suited to provide four of the 13 services relating to training of sports officials and coaches, maintaining sport injuries/athletic injuries center, and identification of sport talent. These services refer to the actual operations relating to elite sports.

Finally, although the public-profit combine was second in overall choices, it was chosen

93 the most suitable only in the case of organizing international competitions for elite athletes.

Cumulatively, the above results show that the respondents favored the for-profit organizations to provide the financial services (e.g., raising funds, sponsoring elite teams/athletes) while they favored the public-nonprofit combination for actually carrying out specific operations in promoting elite sport. The results present an interesting twist to the issue of generating funds for elite sport. It is traditional to expect that the responsibility for fund-raising and sponsorships would reside with the nonprofits who deliver the elite sport services. That is, they would seek out the donors and sponsors from among the for-profit organizations. In this scenario, the for-profits would simply be the benefactors. In contrast, the perspective of the respondents of this study is that fund­ raising and sponsorship should be the responsibility of the for-profit organizations themselves. That is, from being simply the benefactors who respond to requests, they

should become the active seekers of funds and sponsorships.

The idea that the business sector should be involved in raising funds for sport programs is similar to what the Japanese have done in the past. There was, within the

structure of the Japanese Amateur Sport Association (JASA) and the Japanese Olympic

Committee (JOC), a committee composed of Government Ministers and senior government officials, and representatives of business and industrial giants like Toyota and Sony. The Committee's purpose was to raise funds and secure sponsorships to

support the programs of JASA and JOC. The Belizean government may consider constituting such a committee to promote and foster elite sport. The business and

94 industrial enterprises would be active in securing the necessary financial and material resources for elite sport.

Commercial Sport. As for the organizational forms suitable for commercial sport, it is not surprising that the for-profit organizational form was the overall favorite choice in = 1408) followed by puhlic-profit combine (n = 940). The for-profit organization was chosen as the most suitable in eight the 13 services in commercial sport. These eight

services refer to the actual operations of a professional sport league and/or franchises.

The three services for which the puhlic-profit combine was chosen relate to building and maintaining facilities such as the stadiums and training grounds. This perspective of the respondents reflects the practice in many of the cities in North America. These North

American cities build the stadiums at their own expense and lease them to professional

sport franchises. They do so to enhance their public image and increase the economic activity associated with professional sport (Howard, 1995).

The public-nonprofit combine was chosen as the most suitable only in the case of managing organization-player relations. It is not clear how the public-nonprofit combine best serve the function of organization-player relations. In the North American context, player associations are formed as nonprofit organizations, and they deal mostly with organization-player relations. Although the governments do not normally intervene in these disputes, there have been occasions when governments have been urged to take

steps to avert a strike or disruption of the league schedule. If and when a government takes action in this regard it will be only as a mediation between a nonprofit organization

(i.e., a players’ union) and the for-profit organization (i.e., the professional sport

95 franchise). But the definition of the puhlie-nonprofit combine presented to the respondents of this study would imply that the government would finance the players’

union, and thus take sides with the players’ union. Hence I am at a loss to explain this finding.

The discussion of the choice of organizational forms for commercial sport becomes moot because the respondents of the study did not perceive commercial sport as critical to Belize nor did they place much emphasis on it. If the views of the selected expert stakeholders are shared by the population of experts, the governments, and the citizens of Belize, and if commercial sport were to be given a low priority, it becomes irrelevant which organizational form is involved in which of the commercial sport

services.

Overall, the seleetion of the puhlie-nonprofit and puhlic-profit combines as appropriate organizational forms to deliver mass and elite sport related services implies that the government should finance at least partially the operations that are deemed essential to promote both mass and elite sport. This notion of government funding those operations in the private sector (For-protrt or nonprofit organizations) deemed vital to

society is nothing new. This type of alliance between the public and private organizations is labeled the third sector organization (e.g., Etzioni, 1973; McGill & Wooten, 1976). “The essential feature of a third sector organization is the partnership or collaboration between traditional private and public sector organizations. This partnership usually takes the form of fmaneial support from the public sector with the private sector being eharged with the management of the organization toward well-defined purposes” (Chelladurai, 2001; p.62).

96 The Belizean government may follow the governments of Canada, Great Britain, and

Australia in funding those sport operations that are deemed critical in the Belizean context.

The selection of the respondents for this study was hased on the criterion of

strategic stakeholders. That is those that would provide the resources and/or carry out the

sport operations were deemed strategic stakeholders. The assumption was that these

strategic stakeholders are the most likely to make decisions for the sport industry, and carry out those decisions. While this line of reasoning is logical, it does overlook the importance of the perspectives of the prime heneficiaries of the sport operations. That is, one could argue that the participants in sport are the prime beneficiaries and thus their perceptions and preferences are as critical as those of any other groups. In fact, the

slogan of customer is king [queen] would imply that the participants would be the most critical stakeholder group. Therefore, future research should tap into client perceptions and preferences before a viable sport policy is formulated. The government of Belize may indeed commission such a study.

Summary

In summary, an illuminating finding of the study was the empirical splitting of the domain of commercial sport into sport as entertainment and sport as business. This is in contrast to the traditional practice of viewing the two as one dimension. It is not clear if this finding is a function of smaller size and reduced wealth of the country in question or a function of culture and sporting tradition. It is also important to keep this distinction in focus in future studies. The respondents of this study placed the most emphasis on the

97 development of Mass Sport followed by Elite Sport. In contrast, they did not view

Entertainment or Business Sport as eritieal and, aeeordingly, plaeed the least emphasis on those domains. Finally, they perceived that the public-nonprofit organizations as most

suited to deliver Mass Sport followed by public organizations. As for the elite sport, the respondents favored the for-profit organizations to provide the financial support for Elite

Sport, and the public-nonprofit organizations for the development and management of

Elite Sport. They perceived that the delivery of Commercial sport services should be left entirely to the for-profit organizations. The foregoing preferenees and pereeptions are quite different from how sport is delivered and managed in Belize today. It is hoped that the findings of the present study would inform future national sport policy and encourage the inclusion of all sectors (public, for-profit, and nonprofit) in appropriate roles to deliver the services in the four domains of sport (Mass, elite, entertainment, and business).

Praetieal Implieation and Future Researeh

As was discussed in the introduction of this research, the success of any delivery of sport will depend on the expectations of those being served. The results of the present

study regarding the preferences of significant stakeholders for the functions of sport can facilitate better planning for the development and delivery of sport. Particularly,

stakeholder preferences for Mass and Elite Sport over Business and Entertainment Sport, and the greater stakeholder emphasis on Mass Sport than on Elite or Commereial Sport

should help the sport governing bodies, the national sports council, the government and the business eommunity to focus on mass sport as the cornerstone of any emergent sport

98 policy. It must be noted that the results of the study focusing on mass sport does not preelude individual enterprises venturing into eommercial sport. Even such an enterprise

should consider the present results as reflective of the market sentiments.

While the Government may consider the result of the present study in formulating the national sport policy, it is the sport governing bodies that need to pay special attention to the present results. It is indicated by these results that sport governing bodies need to

shift their focus from elite sport to mass sport. As forming a national team and training it for international competitions is the mandate of every sport governing body, and as this process is more prestigious sport governing bodies tend to focus more on elite sport than on mass sport. Our present results suggest that in the Belizean context, support for elite

sports is more likely to flow from the promotion of mass sport.

By the same token the government may eonsider leading the sport governing bodies, the other non-profit organizations and the for-profit organizations in establishing public-nonprofit and public-profit combines to deliver mass and elite sport services.

Another avenue may he to change the composition and by-laws of the National Sports

Council to reflect the thrust of the present findings. The government may also consider establishing a sport department. Such a department would act as an oversight body to enact govemmenf s mandate for sports through the puhlic-nonprofit and the puhlic-profit combined organizations as well as educational institutions. This department may also he made responsible for construction and maintenance of faeilities for sport.

99 Another practical implication is that the present results may be applicable to other

Caribbean eountries. To the extent these countries share the same eeonomie and population indices, the significant stakeholders are likely to share the same views on mass, elite, and commercial sport. But this view needs to be counterbalanced with the fact that some of the Caribbean countries do focus on elite sports and do very well in international sport competitions. For example, Cuba performs very well in sports such as baseball, boxing, track and field, and women’s volleyball. Similarly, the West Indies track and field athletes and cricketers are the envy of the world. It is not clear, however, if these countries do so well because of their emphases on mass sport or at the expense of mass sport. This needs to he verified in future research.

The question of organizational forms best suited to deliver sport services has immediate praetieal implications for the eountry of Belize. The seleeted stakeholders of

sport in Belize imply that policy formulation and implementation should shift from the present system of sport delivery by fomenting strong cooperation among the for-profit, public, and nonprofit organization for the best delivery of sport; more notably, fostering the puhlic-profit and public-nonprofit organizational forms to deliver sport in Belize.

Further research should be conducted to identify the specific attributes of these new organizational forms that are conducive for the effective delivery of sport in Belize.

While the present study was hased on distinctions among organizational forms, it is important to verify which of the distinctions and attributes noted in the study facilitate what in the delivery of sport in Belize and elsewhere.

100 LIST OF REFERENCES

Anheier, FI., & Salamon, L. M. (1998). Introduction: The nonprofit sector in the developing world in Anheier, FI., & Salamon, L. M., (Eds.), The nonprofit sector in the developing world: a comparative analysis (pp. 1-52). New York: Manchester University Press.

Arbena, J. L. (1988). Sport and the study of Eatin American society: An overview. In Arbena, J. E. (Ed.), Sport in Latin America: diffusion, dependency, and the rise of mass culture (pp. 1-14). New York: Greenwood Press.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavich, A. (1996). Introduction to research in education. Forth Worth, TX: Flolt, Rinehart and Winston.

Ben-Ner, A., & Gui, B. (1993). Nonprofit organizations in the mixed economy: A demand and supply analysis. In Ben-Ner, A, & Gui, B. (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in the mixed economy (pp. 27-58). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

Ben-Ner, A., & Gui, B., (1993). The nonprofit sector in a mixed economy. Ann Arbor: Michigan Pres.

Ben-Ner, A., & Van Hoomissen, T. (1993). Nonprofit organization in mixed economy: A demand and supply analysis. In Ben-Ner, A., & Gui, B., (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in a mixed economy (pp. 27 - 58). Ann Arbor: Michigan Press.

Blau, P. M., & Scott, W. R. (1962). Formal organizations. San Francisco: Chandler.

Bozeman. B. (1987). All organizations are public: Bridging the public organizational theories. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bryant, P. (1997). National Sports Council Development Plan.

Bucher, C., (1979) Foundations of physical education. London: C. V. Mosby Company

Buchholz, W., & Roth, T. (1987). Creating the high-performance team. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

101 Chalip, L., & Johnson, A. (1996). Sports Policy in the United States. In Chalip, L., Johnson, A., & Staehura, L. (Eds.), National sport polieies: An international handbook (pp. 404-430). Westport, Conneetieut London: Greenwood Press.

Chelladurai, P. (1998). Purpose of Participation, Task Interdependence, and

Dimensions of Leader Behavior in Sports. Invited paper at the 2nd. International

Meeting on Psychology Applied to Sport and Exercise. University of Minho, Braga,

Portugal. July 25-28, 1998

Chelladurai, P., (1999). Human resource management in sport and reereation. Champaign, IE: Human Kinetics.

Chelladurai, P. (2001). Managing organizations for sport & physical activitv: A systems perspective. Scottdale, AR: Holcomb Hathaway Publishers.

Churchhill, G. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Social Research, 39 (1), 164-182.

Clarke, A. (1993). Civic ideology in public domain: Victorian ideology in the “Lifestyle Crisis” of the 1990s. In Ingham, A. G., & Loy, J. W. (Ed.), Sport in social development: Traditions, transitions and transformations (pp. 245-266). Champaign, IE: Human Kinetics Publishers.

Clarkson, M. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20, 92-117.

Coakley, J. (2001). Sport in societv: Issues and controversies. Boston, MA:

McGill-Hill.

Collins, J., & Porras, J. (1994). Built to last successful habits of visionary companies. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.

DaCosta, L. (1996). The state versus free enterprise in sports policy: The case of Brazil. In Chalip, E., Johnson, A., & Stachura, L. (Eds.), National sport policies: An international handbook (pp. 23-38). Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.

Dillman, D., & Salant, P. (1994). How to conduct your own survey. New York: Wiley.

Donaldson, T., & Preston, E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the

102 corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65-91.

Etzioni, A. (1973). The third sector and domestic union. Public Administration Review. 3 314-327.

Fraenkel, J., & Wallen, F. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Hansmann, H. (1987). Economic theories of nonprofit organization. In Powell, W. (Ed), The Nonprofit Sector (pp. 27-42). London: Yale University Press.

Horine, E. (1985). Administration of physical education and sports programs. New York: Saunders College Publishing.

Howard, D., & Crompton, J. (1995) Financing sport. Morgantown, WV: Fitness International Technology.

Howard, D. (1999) The changing fanscape for big-league sports: Implications for sports Manager Journal of Sport Management 13, 79-91.

Ingraham, P. W., Romezek, B. R., & Associates. (1994). New paradigms for government Issues for changing public services. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Jones, T.M., & Wicks, A C. (1999). Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24, 206-221.

Kettl, D. F. (1994). Managing on the frontiers of knowledge in Ingraham, P. W., Romezek, B. R., & Associates. (Ed.) New paradigms for government issues for changing public services. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kikulis, L. M., Slack, C. R. & Hinings, B. (1995). Toward an understanding of the role of agency and choice in the changing Structure of Canada’s national sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management. 9, 135-152.

Kikulis, E. M., Slack, C. R., Hinings, B & Zimmermann, A. (1989). A structural taxonomy of sports organizations. Journal of Sport Management. 3. 129-150.

Kikulis, L. M.; Slack, T.; & Hinings, C. R. (1995). Does decision making make a difference? Patterns of change within Canadian national sports organizations. Journal of Sport Management. 9. 273-299.

103 Koski, P & Heikkala, J. (1998). Professionalization and organization of mixed rationales: The case of Finish national sports organization. Journal of Sport Management. 5, 7-29.

Koski, P. (1995). Organizational effectiveness of finish sports cluh. Journal of Sport Management. 9. 85-95.

Kotler, P. & Andreasen, A. (1991). Strategic marketing for nonprofit organization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change Boston, MA: Flarvard Business School Press.

Kuhnert, K. & Lewis, P. (1987). Transactional and transformational leadership: A constructive developmental analysis. Academv of Management Review. 12 (4), 648-657.

Laws of Belize, (1980). Chapter 35, Sports.

Light, Paul C. (1994). Creating government that encourages innovation in Ingraham, P. W., Romezek, B. R., & Associates. (Eds.) New paradigms for government Issues for changing public services. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Mahony, D. & Howard, D., (2001) Sport business in the next decade: A general overview of expected trends Manaer Journal of Sport Management 15, 275 -296

Malec, M. A. (1995). The social role of sport in the Caribbean. United States: Gordon and Breach Publishers.

Mansbridge, J. (1998). On the contested nature of public good in Powell, Walter & Clemens, (Eds.), Private action and public good. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.

McGill, M., & Wooten, L. (1976). Management in Third Sector. In Gibson, J., Ivancerich, J., & Donnely, J. (Eds.), Readings in Organization: Behavior, structure, process Dallas: Business Publication.

Milward, H. B. (1994). Implications of contracting out: new rules for the hallow state in Ingraham, P. W., Romezek, B. R., & Associates. (Eds.), New paradigms for government Issues for changing public services. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

National Sports Council Minutes, 1984-1993.

Nutt, P. C., & Backoff, R. W. (1987). Strategic Management Process for Public and Third-Sector Organizations, APA Journal Winter.

104 Nutt, P. C., & Backoff, R. W., (1992) Strategic management of public and third sector organizations: A handbook for leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Nutt, P. C., & Backoff, R. W. (1993.) Strategic issues as tensions. Journal of Management Inquiry. 2 (1), 28-43.

Nutt, P. C., & Backoff, R. W. (1995). Strategy for public and third sector organization Journal of Public Management Review, 5 (2). 189-211.

Nutt, P. C., & Backoff, R. W. (1996). Fashioning and sustaining strategic change in public organizations. Public Productivity and Management Review, 19 (3), 313 -3 3 7 .

Nutt, P. C., & Backoff, R. W. (1997). Crafting vision. Journal of Management Review 6 (4), 308-328.

Nutt, P. C., & Backoff, R. W. (1997). Organizational transformation. Journal of Management Inquirv. 6 (3), 235 - 254.

Peters, B. G. (1994). New Visions of government and the public service in Ingraham, P. W., Romezek, B. R., & Associates. (Eds.), New paradigms for government issues for changing public services. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Pettavino, P. J., & Pye, G. M. (1996). Sport in Cuba. In Chalip, L., Johnson, A., & Stachura, L. (Eds.), National sport policies: An international handbook (pp. 116- 138). Westport, Connecticut London: Greenwood Press.

Quinn, R. E., (1988). Beyond rational management: mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publication.

Rainey, Hal G. (1997). Understanding and managing public organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Salamon, E. M., & Anheier, H. (1997). Toward a common definition. In Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. (Ed), Defining the nonprofit sector: A cross-national analysis (pp. 29-50). New York: Manchester University Press.

Senge, Peter M. (1970). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York, NY : Currency Doubleday.

Siedentop, D. (1976). Phvsical education: Introductory analysis. Dubuque, Iowa:

Wm. C. Brown Publishers

105 Slack, T. & Hinings, C. R. (1992). Understanding change in national sport organizations: An integration of theoretical perspectives. Journal of Sport Management. 6 (2), 114-132.

Thoma, J. & Chalip, L. (1996). Sport governance in the global community. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology, Inc.

Weisbrod, B. (1988). The nonprofit economy. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Weisbrod, B. (1998). Institutional form and organizational behavior. In Powell, W., & Clemens, E. (Ed), Private action and public good (pp. 69-84). New Haven & London: Yale University Press.

Weisbrod, B. (2001). The future of nonprofit sector: Its entwining with private enterprise and government in Otto, J. S. (Ed.), The nature of the nonprofit sector (pp. 399-410).

World Bank. (2001). World Development Report 2000/2001. New York: Oxford University Press.

106 APPENDIX A

PANEL OF EXPERTS

SURVEY INSTRUMENT

107 Apnl S"', 2001

Dear

I am a doctoral student in sport management at The Ohio State University. I am currently proceeding with my dissertation research on “Experts’ Perceptions of Importance of Mass, Elite, and Spectator Sport” in Belize, my native country. I am at the stage of developing a questionnaire to be administered to Belizean experts drawn from among educators, government officials, elected representatives, officials in sport governing bodies, media and business cormnunity. I seek your valuable help in refining the questionnaire.

The questionnaire is designed to elicit from selected experts their opinions on the importance of sport for Belize. Various countries promote sport for the benefits derived through sport. These benefits are derived from three domains of sport—mass, elite, and spectator sport. The benefits that stem from each domain are listed for the experts and they would be requested to indicate the extent to which each benefit is critical for Belize. You are requested to verify if 1 have covered all the benefits that ean accrue from each domain of sport.

The second part of the questionnaire lists the services that need to be provided to promote each of the three domains of sport. Once again, 1 request you to scrutinize the list of services and provide me feedback on the list of services under each domain of sport.

I have attached the draft questionnaire for your perusal. For each set of items, I have provided instructions for you and some space to write in your feedback.

Your expert feedback is critical for the success of the scale development. Please respond as quickly as possible.

Thank you for your support and expertise.

Clara Cuellar Doctoral Student

108 Part I

The questionnaire is designed to elicit from selected experts their opinions on the importance of sport for Belize. Various countries promote sport for the benefits derived through three domains of sport involvement —mass, elite, and commercial sport. It is proposed to ask the Belizean experts on the relative importance of each domain for Belize. Thus it becomes necessary that I describe the three domains clearly and succinctly. Please peruse the following descriptions and provide me feedback on the clarity and sufficiency of the following descriptions of the three domains of sport.

(a) MASS SPORT refers to that domain of sport where participants seek the pleasure and Hin of participation, and/or the health and fitness benefits derived from such participation. Because such participation contributes to individual and community health, governments and other agencies promote participation by the masses in sport and physical activity. The “Sport for All” movement is aimed at increasing mass sport participation.

(b) ELITE SPORT refers to that domain where participants pursue excellence in a sport and seek to be the best or among the best in that sport. Such a pursuit of excellence is characterized by intensity, dedication and sacrifice in preparing for competitions which are necessary to prove one’s relative excellence.

(c) COMMERCIAL SPORT is that domain of sport where the achieved excellence in a specific sport is offered as entertaimnent in the form of organized competitions among elite competitors and teams. What distinguishes “commercial sport” from “elite sport” is the fee charged to spectators at sporting events (e.g., entrance fees to Olympic events or professional sports). It must be noted that not all sports have the same degree of spectator appeal in all countries.

Having described the three domains of sport, I propose to list the benefits that could accrue from each domain of sport— Mass, Elite, and Commercial Sport. Please verify/review the following list of benefits and provide me feedback on the following:

• Are the benefits that accrue from each domain exhaustive? That is, are there more benefits that stem from any of the three domains? • Are there overlaps among the benefits listed under each domain? • Are there overlaps among the benefits across the three domains of sport? 109 Mass Sport 1. Reduction in stress and tension 2. Promotion of mental and emotional health 3. Diversion from daily routine 4. Pleasurable activity 5. Promotion of Health 6. Development of physical fitness 7. Beneficial use of leisure time 8. Development of sports skills 9. Promotion of communal harmony 10. Promotion of social relations

11. .

12.

Elite Sport

1. Promotion of solidarity in the community 2. Fostering of national prestige 3. Development of discipline/work ethie 4. Creation of community pride 5. Enhancement of community’s self-esteem 6. Development of competitive spirit 7. Development of excellence in sports 8. Development of team spirit 9. International recognition

10. .

11. .

12 . . Commercial Sport

1. Provision of entertainment 2. Satisfying spectator desires 3. Promotion of tourism 4. Generation of business activity 5. Creation of job opportunity

110 6. Promotion of fan identification with specific teams 7. Building of new sport faeilities 8. Facilitation of national celebrations/festivities. 9. .

10. .

The instructions to the participants in the respond format for this section would be as follows:

Sport can serve many funetions for partieipants and the community as well. Listed below are the more eritieal functions that need to be eonsidered in the formulation of sport policy. Using the scale shown below, please indieate the extent to whieh each function of sport is critical in the Belizean contextby eireling the appropriate number on the rating scale to the right.

Least Most Critical Critical

1. Beneficial use of leisure time 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Please provide your feedback on the snitability of this format. Part II

The instructions to the participants in the respond format for this section would be as follows:

This section deals with the relative emphasis that need to be placed on one or more of the domains of sport: mass sport, elite sport, commercial sport. Please read the following descriptions of the three domains. Please indicate below the emphasis to be placed on these three categories of sport in the Belizean context in terms of percentages. Please note the percentages should add up to 100%.

Sport Form Percentage Emphasis Mass Sport Elite Sport Commercial Sport Total 100%

Please provide your feedbaek on the snitability of this format.

.12 Part III

The next part of the questionnaire would list the various services to be provided by different organizations in order to promote and sustain each domain of sport as outlined above. Please peruse the services (or programs) listed under each domain and provide me feedback on: • Are the services necessary to promote each sport domain exhaustive? That is, are there other services that need to be provided? • Are there overlaps among the services listed under each domain? • Are there overlaps among the services across the three domains of sport?

Mass Sport

1. Teaching of basic sport skills 2. Conducting fitness classes 3. Organizing sports camps and clinics 4. Organizing sports competitions for recreation and leisure 5. Building and maintaining recreational facilities and playgrounds 6. Building and maintaining fitness facilities 7. Provision of sports and fitness equipment for members/users 8. Organizing clinics on nutrition 9. Organizing weight-loss programs 10. Conducting weight-training classes 11. Organizing and conducting community level sports programs (e.g., 5K Run) 12. Organizing sports programs for families (e.g., Mother/Daughter Softball Tournaments) 13. Publicizing the benefits of sport participation 14. Advertising health benefits of sports 15. Propagating sport and fitness activities 16. Promoting the formation of recreational sports clubs 17. . 18. .

Elite Spoil

1. Facilitating the formation of competitive sport clubs 2. Identification of sport talent 3. Selection of talented individuals 4. Training of talented individuals 5. Forming of age-group elite teams

113 6. Organizing competitions for age-group elite teams of age groups 7. Coaching of elite teams 8. Financial support for elite athletes 9. Organizing international competitions for elite athletes 10. Training and certifying coaches for age-group elite athletes 11. Training and certifying sports referees and umpires 12. Building and maintaining facilities for training of elite athletes 13. Building and maintaining facilities for elite competitions 14. Maintaining sports injuries/athletic training centers 15. Securing sponsorship of elite teams and athletes 16. Raising funds for the elites teams/athletes 17. . 18. Commercial Sport

1. Building and maintaining facilities for spectator sport 2. Promoting the formation of professional sport leagues 3. Organizing competitions among professional sport teams 4. Marketing of professional sport leagues 5. Concession sales in and around the sport stadium 6. Sale of souvenirs and merehandize 7. Licensing of products 8. Media relations and contracts (TV and radio) 9. Sponsorship services

10. .

11. . Sports Leaders/Managers 1. Training sport teachers and leaders 2. Training sports officials 3. Training sport managers 4. Publishing youth sport manuals for managers and leaders 5. Publishing sport specific manuals 6. Publishing manuals for volunteer leaders 7. Developing fitness instruction manuals 8. Training and certifying managers of sport organizations. 9. Collection of library materials 10. .14 The instructions to the participants in the respond format for this section would be as follows:

The writings on sport and its management identify the various processes that need to be undertaken to promote the three categories of sport fMass, elite, and commercial sport). But it is not clear what form of an organization or organizations would be able to carry out these processes most effectively and efficiently. The government agencies carry out these processes in some countries while volunteer and non-profit organizations do so in some other countries. Also, it is not uncommon for some governments to support non-profit organizations in promoting sport. Recently, some governments tend to contract out their sport and recreation operations to private for-profit oriented organizations. The purpose of the following questionnaire is to assess your opinions on the type of organization that is best suited to carry out each of the listed processes in the Belizean context. First, please read the definitions provided below to review the distinctions among organizational forms that is meaningful for this research.

1. Public Organization Central, provincial, and/or regional governments and/or their units.

2. Private For-Profit Organizations An organization owned and operated by private owners or shareholders engaging in commercial activities to make profit for owners/shareholders.

3. Private Nonprofit Organization An organization owned and operated by members providing services for the benefit of members and/or clients. Any surplus of revenue over expenditure would be invested back into the organizations and its programs.

4. Public and For-Profit Combine/Syndicate A private for-profit organization that is funded by government to provide specified services to the public.

5. Public and Nonprofit Combine/Syndicate A private nonprofit organization that is funded by government to provide specified services to the public.

.15 Listed below are various sport serviees that need to be provided to tbe public. Based ou tbe distinctions among organizational forms provided above, please rate the suitability of each organizational form in providing each of the listed sport serviees. Mark the appropriate number in each column on the right side to indicate your rating.

The rating scale is: 1 - Least Suited 2 - Less Suited 3 - Moderately Suited 4 - More Suited 5 - Most Suited

For Example, if you think a profit-oriented organization is most suited to offer “fitness clinics”, you would mark a 5 in that column and so on.

Sport Services

Fitness Clinics

Please provide your feedback on the suitability of this format.

.16 APPENDIX B

FIELD TEST SURVEY INSTRUMENT

.17 I?'" April, 2002

D ear.

I send greetings from the Ohio State University, where I am a doctoral student in sport management. I am currently proceeding with my dissertation research titled “Significance and Delivery of Sports in Belize: Perceptions of Selected Experts” under the guidance of Professor Packianathan Chelladurai. The purpose of this research is two-fold. The first purpose is to elicit the opinions of selected experts on the importance of sport for Belize. The second purpose is to determine the best organizational form to deliver specific sport services. The questionnaire will be administered to Belizean experts drawn from among elected government officials, senior government employees, office-bearers of sport governing bodies, representatives of business community, principals of schools and media personnel.

I am at the stage of developing the questionnaire and I seek your valuable help in refining the questionnaire. Your expertise is requested to assist with the establishment of face and content validity for the enclosed survey. You were selected to review this instrument because of your membership in one of the expert groups to be surveyed. A draft of the questionnaire and a comment form are included in this mailing. Please provide comments and suggestions regarding the content, wording, format, clarity, focus, ease of use, appropriateness of individual survey items, and completeness of the instrument. Please fill out the survey and record the time it takes to complete it. I am also interested in your comments regarding the items on the survey, the directions and the appropriateness of the content for the sample population.

As a leader in the community, 1 can appreciate the busy schedule you have and would like to thank you in advance for taking the time and effort to complete this comment form. After completing the comment form please use the enclosed self-addressed envelope to return the survey and comment form by Friday, 19* April, 2002.

Your cooperation will greatly contribute to the success of this first ever research on sport development in Belize. There is a great need for expert involvement in the critical analysis of goals and processes of sport. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the survey or dissertation topic please contact either of the researchers listed below.

I look forward to your assistance and quick response.

Respectfully,

Clara Cuellar Dr. P Chelladurai Doctoral Student Professor Ohio State University

.18 Part I - Function of Sport

Sport can serve many flinctions for participants and the community as well. Listed below are the more critical functions that need to be considered in the formulation of sport policy. Using the scale shown below, please indicate the extent to which each function of sport is critical in the Belizean context by circling the appropriate number on the rating scale to the right. There are no right and wrong answer please do not spend too much time on any item your honest and spontaneous response is critical. Please respond to all items. Not Very Critical Critical

1. Beneficial use of leisure time 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. Pleasurable activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 3. Creation of community pride 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Development of competitive spirit 3 4 5 6 ■ 5. Promotion of emotional health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. Development of excellence in sports 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7. Promotion of tourism 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. Development of sports skills 1 2 3 4 5 6 ■ 9. Diversion from daily routine 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Enhancement of community image 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11. Promotion of Physical Health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

12. Facilitation of national celebrations/festivities. 1 2 3 4 5 6 " 13. Generation of business activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14. Promotion of social relations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 15. International recognition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

16. Development of physical fitness 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 17. Promotion of fan identification with specific teams 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 18. Development of team spirit 1 2 3 4 5 6 ■ 19. Promotion of solidarity in the community 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 20. Fostering of national prestige 1 2 3 4 5 6

21. Promotion of harmony in the community 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

22. Reduction in stress and tension 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 23. Satisfying spectator desires 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 24. Provision of entertainment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 25. Building of new sport facilities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 26. Creation of job opportunity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

.19 27. Development of discipline/work ethic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Not Very Critical Critical

28. Enhanced self esteem 1 2 7 4 5 6 7 29. Promotion of an active lifestyle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .70. Increased sense of competence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

.71. Enhanced body image 1 2 7 4 5 6 7 72. Feeling of well-being 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 33. Promotion of social relations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 34. Enhanced community pride 1 2 7 4 5 6 7

Part II Significance of Domains

This section deals with the relative emphasis that should be placed on one or more of the three domains of sport: mass sport, elite sport, spectator sport. Please read the following descriptions of the three domains. Please indicate below your view of the emphasis that should be placed on these three categories of sport in the Belizean context. Do this by placing a % beside each domain that best represents the amount of influence you fell should be placed on the three domains.

Sport can be categorized into; (d) MASS SPORT refers to that domain of sport where participants seek the pleasure and fun of participation, and/or the health and fitness benefits derived from such participation. Because such participation contributes to individual and community health, governments and other agencies promote participation by the masses in sport and physical activity. The “Sport for All” movement is aimed at increasing mass sport participation. Mass sport is also known as participant sport and/or recreational sport.

(e) ELITE SPORT refers to that domain of sport where participants have attained a relatively high level of excellence in a sport. Such excellence varies with the level of competitions from high school through college and amateur levels to professional level. Such excellence is achieved through intensity, dedication and sacrifice in preparing for competitions necessary to prove one’s relative excellence.

(f) COMMERCIAL SPORT is that domain of sport where the achieved excellence in a specific sport is commercialized and offered as entertainment in the form of organized competitions among elite competitors and/or teams. What distinguishes “commercial sport” from “elite sport” is the generation of revenue by charging entrance fees to sporting events. The events may be amateur as in the case of the Olympics, CARICOM games, and intercollegiate competitions in U.S.A. Or they may be professional sports as in the case of the NBA and NFL. It must be noted that not all sports have the same degree of spectator appeal and commercial value in all countries.

120 SPORT FORM PERCENTAGE EMPHASIS

Mass Sport Elite Sport Commercial Sport Total 100%

Part III - Sport Services and Organizational Forms

The writings on sport and its management identify the various processes that need to be undertaken to promote the three domains of sport (Mass, elite, and spectator). But it is not clear what form of an organization of organizations would be able to carry out these processes most effectively and efficiently. The government agencies carry out these processes in some countries while volunteer and non-profit organizations do so in some other countries. Also, it is not uncommon for some governments to support non-profit organizations in promoting sport. Recently, some governments tend to contract out their sport and recreation operation to private for-profit oriented organizations. The purpose of the following questionnaire is to assess your opinions on the type of organization that is best suited to carry out each of the listed processes in the Belizean context. First, please read the definitions provided below to review the distinctions among organizational forms that is meaningful for this research.

Public Organization Central, provincial, and/or regional governments and/or their units that provide services to the public.

Private For-Profit Organizations

An organization owned and operated by private owners or shareholders engaging in commercial activities to make a profit for owners/shareholders.

Private Nonprofit Organization

An organization owned and operated by members providing services for the benefit of members and/or clients. Any surplus of revenue over expenditure would be invested back into the organizations and its programs.

For-Profit and Public Combine/Svndicate A private for-profit organization that is funded by government to provide specified services to the public.

Nonprofit and Public Combine/Syndicate A private nonprofit organization that is funded by government to provide specified serviees to the public. 121 Directions: Listed below are various sport services that need to be provided to the public. Based on the distinctions among organizational forms provided above, please rate the suitability of each organizational form in providing each of the listed sport services. Mark the appropriate number in each column on the right side to indicate your rating. For each service each organizational form should be independently rated from 1 - 5 for its suitability.

The rating scale is: 1 - Least Suited 2 - Less Suited 3 - Moderately Suited 4 - More Suited 5 - Most Suited

For Example, if you think a profit-oriented organization is most suited to offer “fitness clinics”, you would mark a 5 in that column and so on.

Sport Services

• Fitness Clinics

Sale of merchandise

Sport Services

Teaching of basic sport skills

Conducting fitness classes

Organizing sports camps and clinics

Building and maintaining fitness facilities

122 sport Services

Provision of sports and fitness equipment for members/users

Organizing clinics on nutrition

Organizing weight-loss programs

Conducting weight-training classes

Building and maintaining facilities for elite competitions

Maintaining sports injuries/athletic training centers

Publicizing the benefits of sport participation

Advertising health benefits of sports

Publicizing sport and fitness activities

Promoting the formation of recreational sports clubs

Facilitating the formation of competitive sport clubs

Identification of sport talent

Selection of talented individuals

Training of talented individuals

Forming age-group elite teams

Organizing competitions for age-group elite teams of age groups

123 sport Services

Coaching of elite teams

Financial support for elite athletes

Organizing international competitions for elite athletes

Identification of sport coaches

Building and maintaining facilities for training of elite athletes Training and certifying managers of sport organizations. Collection of library materials

Securing sponsorship of elite teams and athletes

Raising funds for the elites teams/athletes

Building and maintaining facilities for spectator sport Promoting the formation of professional sport leagues

Organizing competitions among professional sport teams Training event facility managers

Concession sales in and around the sport stadium

Sale of team sponsored and merchandize

124 sport Services

Training facility and grounds maintenance personnel Media relations and contracts (TV and radio)

Sponsorship services

Training sport teachers and leaders

Training sport managers

Publishing youth sport manuals for managers and leaders Publishing sport specific manuals

Publishing manuals for volunteer leaders

Developing fitness instruction manuals

Organizing and conducting community level sports programs (e.g., 5K Run)

Organizing sports programs for families (e .g ., Mother/Daughter Softball Tournaments) Training and certifying sport scientists

Provision of quality facility for spectators

125 sport Services

Effective conduct of an event

Marketing of professional sport leagues

Training and certifying fitness instructors

Training and certifying coaches

Licensing of products

Training and certifying sports officials

Part IV - Background Information

To complete this survey, please answer the questions below. Circle the letter of the most appropriate response. All information is confidential.

1. Age in years _

2. Gender

a. Female b. Male

3. Years of membership in a sports organization years

4. Years of volunteering with a sports organization __ _ years

5. Years of participating in sport and/or fitness _____ years

Thank you for taking the time to Complete this questionnaire.

126 A Project to Assess Expert Opinion on the Significance and Delivery of Mass, Elite, & Spectator Sport in Belize

COMMENT FORM

Please respond to the following statements in the spaces provided. In addition, include any comments you wish to make directly on the instrument. Your suggestions for improving the instrument are greatly appreciated.

i. Please express your comments, concerns or suggestions on the lay out/format of the questionnaire, (spacious, neat, attractive and appropriate)

2. Please your express your comments, concerns, and suggestions on the phrasing and terminology of the items. Please make a note of the items that are not in the space below or on the questionnaire.

3. Please express your comments, concerns and suggestions on the clarity of the instructions and statements in the questionnaire.

127 4. Please express your comments, concerns and suggestions on the distinctions of mass, elite and spectator sport.

5. Please express your comments, concerns and suggestions on the definitions of the organizational forms.

6. After reviewing the above purposes of this study, do you feel the items on the survey are appropriate for collecting the needed information? Please explain.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SUGGESTIONS 128 APPENDIX C

FINAL SURVEY INSTRUMENT

129 .iïT- Development Of Sport In Belize

À PMijM* !o Aeewe E itpftrt jO pifiiert SIS Ttw iud &eîl’Mif| s-f WatS; EBlg, & SDWWWI SàpFl im B*êz#

-*■ i »■

-

Cam R, ÙftRtF - « r Glok ColutTtûe, ÔNo

130 Part I - Function of Sport

Sport can serve many functions for participants and the community. Listed below are the more critical functions that need to be considered in the formulation of sport policy. Using the scale shown below, please indicate the extent to which each function of sport is critical in the Belizean context by circling the appropriate number on the rating scale to the right. There are no right and wrong answers, so please do not spend too much time on any item. Your honest and spontaneous response is critical. Please respond to all items. Not Very Critical Critical

1. Increased sense of competence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. Promotion of an active lifestyle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3. Creation of community pride 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4. Development of competitive spirit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5. Promotion of emotional health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. Development of excellence in sports 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7. Promotion of tourism 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. Enhanced body image 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9. Creation of job opportunity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10. Enhancement of community’s image 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

11. Promotion of physical health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12. Facilitation of national celebrations/festivities. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13. Generation of business activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14. Feeling of well-being 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 15. International recognition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

16. Development of physical fitness 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 17. Promotion of fan identification with specific teams 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 18. Development of team spirit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 19. Promotion of mental health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 20. Fostering of national prestige 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

21. Promotion of harmony in the community 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 22. Reduction in stress and tension 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 23. Satisfying spectator desires 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 24. Provision of entertainment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 25. Enhanced community pride 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

26. Enhanced self esteem 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

131 Part II Significance of Sport Domains

This section deals with the relative emphasis that should be placed on one or more of the three domains of sport: mass sport, elite sport, spectator sport. Please read the following descriptions of the three domains.

Sport can be categorized into; (g) MASS SPORT refers to that domain of sport where participants seek the pleasure and flin of participation, and/or the health and fitness benefits derived from such participation. Because such participation contributes to individual and community health, governments and other agencies promote participation by the masses in sport and physical activity. The “Sport for All” movement is aimed at increasing mass sport participation. Mass sport is also known as participant sport and/or recreational sport.

(h) ELITE SPORT refers to that domain of sport where participants have attained a relatively high level of excellence in a sport. Such excellence varies with the level of competitions from high school through college and amateur levels to professional levels. Such excellence is achieved through intensity, dedication and sacrifice in preparing for competitions necessary to prove one’s relative excellence.

(i) COMMERCIAL SPORT is that domain of sport where the achieved excellence in a specific sport is commercialized and offered as entertainment in the form of organized competitions among elite competitors and/or teams. What distinguishes “commercial sport” from “elite sport” is the generation of revenue by charging entrance fees to sporting events. The events may be amateur as in the case of the Olympies, CARICOM games, and intercollegiate eompetitions in the U.S.A. Or they may be professional sports as in the ease of the NBA and NFL. It must be noted that not all sports have the same degree of spectator appeal and eommereial value in all eountries.

Directions: Please indicate below your view of the emphasis that should be placed on these three domains of sport in the Belizean context. Do this by placing a % beside each domain that best represents the amount of influence you believe should be placed on the three domains.

SPORT FORM PERCENTAGE EMPHASIS

Mass Sport Elite Sport Commercial Sport

Total 100%

132 Part 111 - Sport Services and Organizational Forms

The writings on sport and its management identify the various processes that need to be undertaken to promote the three domains of sport (iffass, elite, and spectator). But it is not clear what form of an organization or organizations would be able to carry out these processes most effectively and efficiently. The government agencies carry out these processes in some countries while volunteer and non-profit organizations do so in some other countries. Also, it is not uncommon for some governments to support non-profit organizations in promoting sport. Recently, some governments tend to contract out their sport and recreation operation to private for-profit oriented organizations. The purpose of the following questionnaire is to assess your opinions on the type of organization that is best suited to carry out each of the listed processes in the Belizean context. First, please read the definitions provided below to review the distinctions among organizational forms that is meaningful for this research.

Public Organization Central, provincial, and/or regional governments and/or their units that provide services to the public.

Private For-Profit Organizations

An organization owned and operated by private owners or shareholders engaging in commercial activities to make a profit for owners/shareholders.

Private Nonprofit Organization

An organization owned and operated by members providing services for the benefit of members and/or clients. Any surplus of revenue over expenditure would be invested back into the organizations and its programs.

For-Profit and Public Combine/Syndic ate A private for-profit organization that is fiinded by government to provide specified services to the public.

Nonprofit and Public Combine/Svndicate A private nonprofit organization that is funded by government to provide specified services to the public.

133 Directions; Listed below are various sport services that need to be provided to the public. Based on the distinctions among organizational forms provided on the previous page, please mark an X in the appropriate column on the right side to indicate the organizational form that is best suited to deliver the listed sport services. Please mark only one. There is no right and wrong answer, so please do not spend too much time on any item. Your honest and spontaneous response is critical. Please respond to all items.

For Example, if you think a profit-oriented organization is most suited to offer “fitness ciinics”, you would mark an X in that coiuirm and so on.

Sport Services

Fitness Clinics

Sale of merchandise

Sport Services

Teaching of basic sport skills

Building/maintaining facilities for commercial sport

Buiid/maintain recreational facilities/playgrounds

Marketing of professional sport leagues

Training and certifying sport scientists

Maintaining sports injuries/athletic training centers

Publicizing the benefits of sport participation

134 sport Services

Providing of quality amenities for spectators

Training sport teachers and leaders

Identification and selection of sport talent

Managing organization-player relations

Providing of quality facilities for spectators

Organizing international competitions for elite athletes

Organizing competitions among professional sport teams Training and certifying sports officials

Organizing sports competitions for recreation/leisure Facilitation of competitive sports clubs Raising funds for the elite teams/athletes Promoting the formation of professional sport leagues Organizing sports camps and clinics

Concession sales in and around the sport stadium Training and certifying coaches Developing fitness instruction manuals Media relations and contracts (TV and radio) Sale of team sponsored merchandise

Organizing competitions for age-group elite teams Publishing manuals for volunteer leaders 135 sport Services

Training facility and grounds maintenance personnel

Organizing and conducting community level sports programs (e.g., 5K Run; Mother/Daughter Softball Tournaments) Building and maintaining facilities for training of elite athletes Effective conduct of an event

Training and certifying fitness instructors

Coaching elite teams

Licensing products

Providing fitness programs

Training talented individuals

Securing sponsorship for elite teams and athletes

136 Part IV - Background Information

To complete this survey, please answer the questions below. Mark an X on the line of the most appropriate response. All information is confidential.

1. Age in years _

2. Gender

. a. Female b. Male

3. Years of participating in sport and/or fitness _____ years

4. Please indieate your employer ______business sector ______government sector ______education ______nongovernmental sector

5. What is your primary involvement in a Sport Organization? ______board member ______manager ______coach ______official ______athlete ______none

6. Please indieate the district you live in ______Corozal ______Orange Walk ______Belize ______Belmopan ______Cayo ______Stann Creek ______Toledo

Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. 137 Code number

Cover design by Rachel Auil

138 APPENDIX D

RESULTS OF ANC VA

CRITICALNESS FUNCTION

OF THE FOUR SPORT DOMAINS

MASS, ELITE, ENTERTAINMENT, BUSINESS

139 Source df F P n power

Gender 1 .671 .414 303 .129

Employer 3 .609 .610 308 .176

SGB 1 2.62 .107 .012 .364

Location 1 12.778 .000 355 345

Gender* Employer 3 Z892 .036 338 385

Gender * SGB 1 5J22 Ed8 325 363

Employer* SGB 3 259 355 .004 399

Gender * Employer 3 376 .770 305 .124 * SGB Gender * Location 1 E066 303 305 .177

Employer * Location 3 393 .901 303 386

Gender * Employer 3 396 356 305 428 * Location SGB * Location 1 ^03 339 .000 350

Gender * SGB 1 5377 319 325 352 * Location Employer * SGB 3 .111 354 302 370 * Location Gender * Employer 3 1381 249 318 .364 * SGB * Location

Error = .221

Results of ANOVA - Criticalness Function of Mass Sport

140 Source df F P n power

Gender 1 .421 .517 202 299

Employer 3 2791 .041 237 268

SGB 1 3.521 262 216 .464

Location 1 4.653 232 221 275

Gender*Employer 3 1.174 .321 .016 .313

Gender * SGB 1 1234 273 .014 j3 3

Employer* SGB 3 237 270 203 295

Gender * Employer 3 280 206 .010 216 *SGB Gender * Location 1 1.244 266 206 J29

Employer * Location 3 265 251 .004 .100

Gender * Employer 3 288 204 203 285 * Location SGB * Location 1 .001 274 .000 250

Gender * SGB 1 E458 229 .007 225 * Location Employer * SGB 3 226 299 206 .146 * Location Gender * Employer 3 230 297 208 .181 * SGB * Location

Error = .221

Results of ANOVA - Criticalness Function of Elite Sport

141 Source df F P n power

Gender 1 .507 A l l 3W2 .109

Employer 3 2765 .043 336 363

SGB 1 L278 260 006 203

Location 1 .925 337 .004 360

Gender*Empioyer 3 .317 313 .004 .111

Gender * SGB 1 7.501 .007 333 278

Employer* SGB 3 316 314 .004 .111

Gender * Employer 3 246 364 003 396 *SGB Gender * Location 1 2.622 .107 012 .364

Employer * Location 3 205 006 .144

Gender * Employer 3 .407 248 005 .130 * Location SGB * Location 1 ^81 .410 003 .130

Gender * SGB 1 2232 .137 .010 319 * Location Employer * SGB 3 383 265 305 .125 * Location Gender * Employer 3 262 352 .004 .100 * SGB * Location

Error = .221

Results of ANOVA - Criticalness Function of Entertainment Sport

142 Source df F P n power

Gender 1 1.075 .301 305 .178

Employer 3 E484 320 320 390

SGB 1 L620 304 307 345

Location 1 319 .001 379

Gender*Empioyer 3 .164 320 302 380

Gender * SGB 1 ^25 375 .000 353

Employer* SGB 3 E343 361 318 355

Gender * Employer 3 1.522 310 320 399 *SGB Gender * Location 1 399 328 302 396

Employer * Location 3 390 .447 312 343

Gender * Employer 3 319 383 303 391 * Location SGB * Location 1 300 386 .000 350

Gender * SGB 1 j 3 9 385 302 .107 * Location Employer * SGB 3 1.909 .129 325 j 3 0 * Location Gender * Employer 3 1.516 321 320 397 * SGB * Location

Error = .221

Results of ANOVA - Criticalness Function of Business Sport

143 APPENDIX D

RESULTS OF ANOVA

RELATIVE EMPHASIS

OF THE THREE SPORT DOMAINS

MASS, ELITE, COMMERCIAL

144 Source df F P n power

Gender 1 .678 .411 403 .130

Employer 3 3d80 ^25 442 230

SGB 1 .017 ^98 .000 452

Eocation 1 286 .593 .001 483

Gender* Employer 3 L599 .191 422 .417

Gender * SGB 1 .534 466 402 .112

Employer* SGB 3 .167 419 402 481

Gender * Employer 3 .175 413 402 482 * SGB Gender * Location 1 .411 .522 402 498

Employer * Location 3 1.553 202 421 406

Gender * Employer 3 L866 d36 425 480 * Location SGB * Location 1 Z799 496 o n 284

Gender * SGB 1 ^65 .416 403 228 * Location Employer * SGB 3 .166 419 402 480 * Location Gender * Employer 3 .764 .515 .011 213 * SGB * Location

Error = .221

Results of ANOVA - Percent Emphasis of Mass Sport

145 Source df F P n power

Gender 1 353 .004 .153

Employer 3 2.159 ^94 329 345

SGB 1 267 .606 .001 381

Eocation 1 E29 365 .000 353

Gender* Employer 3 1.611 388 322 420

Gender * SGB 1 3.537 361 316 465

Employer* SGB 3 1.022 384 .014 275

Gender * Employer 3 1.600 .190 322 .417 * SGB Gender * Location 1 .568 452 303 .117

Employer * Location 3 .511 375 307 .153

Gender * Employer 3 Z334 375 332 381 * Location SGB * Location 1 L307 254 306 207

Gender * SGB 1 .172 379 .001 370 * Location Employer * SGB 3 .179 310 302 383 * Location Gender * Employer 3 .442 312 245 * SGB * Location

Error = .221

Results of ANOVA - Percent Emphasis Elite Sport

146 Source df F P n power

Gender 1 .623 .431 303 .123

Employer 3 ld 8 8 .315 .016 .317

SGB 1 3.001 385 .014 .407

Location 1 3.061 382 .014 .414

Gender*Employer 3 .519 370 .007 .155

Gender * SGB 1 Z312 .130 .011 328

Employer*SGB 3 2337 375 332 382

Gender * Employer 3 399 397 303 387 * SGB Gender * Location 1 1.740 388 308 359

Employer * Location 3 1.934 .125 326 495

Gender * Employer 3 ^93 364 .001 367 * Location SGB * Location 1 ^25 374 .000 353

Gender * SGB 1 .041 339 .000 355 * Location Employer * SGB 3 368 458 312 338 * Location Gender * Employer 3 358 381 .001 360 * SGB * Location

Error = .221

Results of ANOVA - Percent Emphasis of Commercial Sport

147