Analyzing Collaborations Involving Nonprofit Youth Sport Organizations: A Resource-Dependency Perspective

Abstract

Interorganizational relationships are a well-established practice among nonprofit youth sport organizations seeking to acquire key resources and improve service efficiencies. However, less is known about how broader trends in the nonprofit sector influence their utilization. Guided by Austin’s collaborative continuum and resource dependency theory, this study analyzed how interorganizational relationships are utilized by different nonprofit youth sport organizations in one American context. The results indicate that high-resource organizations primarily utilize philanthropic and transactional forms of collaboration, whereas integrative collaboration is more likely among low-resource organizations. The discussion draws on resource dependency theory to provide theoretical insight into this association, as well as the implications for collaborative value generated through interorganizational relationships.

Strategic processes in Australian golf clubs: a dynamic capabilities view

“…Research on sport nonprofits' strategy is predominantly based on the resource dependency theory (Babiak et al, 2018;Jones et al, 2020;Misener & Doherty, 2013). In contrast, Harris et al (2020) utilised the dynamic capabilities view to investigate the ability of national sport organisations to create, extend and modify their internal resources and competences.…”

“…Doherty et al (2014) used organisational capacity to theorise goal achievement in sport nonprofits. Traditionally, sport organisation studies relied heavily on resource dependency theory to explain strategy as organisation-environment congruency (Babiak, 2007;Babiak et al, 2018;Jones et al, 2020;Misener & Doherty, 2013). The underlying premise of resource dependence theory is that organisations access resources through collaboration with other organisations (Babiak, 2007).…”

“…However, the literature on strategy formulation by sport clubs and associations normally combines the resource-based view with interorganisational relationship literature (i.e., resource dependency theory) (Babiak et al, 2018;Jones et al, 2020;Misener & Doherty, 2013). Contrary to the dynamic capabilities view, which postulates that organisations can develop internally the capability to adapt to environmental changes, the relationship literature argues that interorganisational partnerships are necessary to develop and implement strategies that allow them to achieve their organisational goals and purposes.…”

Great Expectations: A Critical Review of Interorganizational Relationships in Amateur Sport

“…RDT has become a popular framework guiding IOR research focused on amateur sport organizations across a multitude of study contexts (Babiak et al, 2018). Scholars describe operating environments as resource scarce and highly competitive (Jones et al, 2020), with IORs framed as essential to long-term sustainability (Wicker, et al, 2013). Chronic resource Interorganizational Relationships 13 deficiencies not only exacerbate dependence, but also create asymmetrical power relations with resource providers, policymakers, governmental agencies, and other external actors that influence IOR management (Jones et al, 2020).…”

“…While certain power imbalances are imposed by the hierarchy inherent in many sport governance structures (see Vos et al, 2011), there are also examples of amateur sport organizations selectively engaging in IORs that yield little return on investment and, in some instances, even compromise organizational missions (e.g., Hayhurst & Frisby, 2010). Recent research also suggests that the strategic intent of IORs may vary based on the size and capacity of amateur sport organizations, as larger organizations are less dependent on others for key resources and thus less likely to engage in IORs that might compromise their advantageous strategic position within the 'market' (Jones et al, 2020).…”