Discursive resistance to gender diversity in sport governance: sport as a unique field?

Abstract

Although diversity is an often cited organisational value, its support is often muted when it pertains to boards of governance. The aim of this study is to identify discursive practices that may prevent or limit the implementation of measures to increase gender balance in sport governance at the national and international levels. Drawing on a total of 60 qualitative, semi-structured interviews with board members, we explore both the content of and reasons for discursive opposition to implementing gender balance in the governing boards of international and national sport organisations that purport to value diversity. The results demonstrate that board members justify their resistance to gender balance by drawing on discourses of meritocracy, neoliberalism, silence/passivity, and diversity. Resistance to gender balance in sport governance may in part have roots in the sport capital and habitus of board members, and their ability to utilise that in normalising judgment that may keep women out.

The Paradox of Gender Diversity, Organizational Outcomes, and Recruitment in the Boards of National Governing Bodies of Sport

“…Previous research has shown that, when recruiting new members to sports boards, only certain types of people possessing certain traits are seen as what Claringbould and Knoppers (2007) conceptualize a proper 'fit'. The perceived proper fit consists of gendered and socially constructed ideas of qualifications, skills, traits, knowledge, characteristics, and needs, which are often not based on systematic identification of the board's needs, but rather on the ways the present board members (i.e., men) have qualified themselves for board membership (Adriaanse and Schofield 2014;Claringbould and Knoppers 2007;Hovden 2000Hovden , 2010Knoppers et al 2021). However, sports boards' selection and recruitment processes are assumed to be gender neutral and of good quality, which removes a gender balance as an objective in these processes (Claringbould and Knoppers 2007;Sotiriadou and De Haan 2019).…”

“…Because only individuals (women and men) who fit this profile are included in male networks and selected as candidates for leadership positions, the board's existing values are guaranteed and reproduced, which leads to the board staying homogenous (Hovden 2000(Hovden , 2010Sotiriadou et al 2017). Men as the majority can frame the recruitment and selection processes of the board members, and thus maintain the male-dominated culture, into which their own habitus better fits (Knoppers et al 2021;Piggott et al 2019). Women aiming for board membership then tend to distance themselves from their gender and prove their 'fit' in order to be seen as possible candidates (Claringbould and Knoppers 2007;cf.…”

“…Research has often argued that men's dominance in sports leadership exists because women lack specific and necessary substantial experience (i.e., experience from men's elite sports). Former male athletes also possess more symbolic capital that legitimizes their role as leaders, which former female athletes lack (Knoppers et al 2021). However, as more attention is given to increasing the number of girls and women in sports, naturally, with the same argument, one could assume that the need for individuals with specific substantial knowledge of women's sports would also increase.…”

“…However, as previous research has shown, several different factors affect gender inequality in sports leadership (see, e.g., Burton and Leberman 2017). For instance, Knoppers et al (2021) evidenced that diversity as a value on sports organization boards may not be internalized. Women on boards are not seen as adding value to board work, while increasing the number of women as participants in sports is considered a valid means of increasing economic and human capital.…”

“…Discussions and debates on gender equality and under-representation of women in sport leadership have increasingly included the diversity perspective. Diversity has become a desired value in sports organizations (Knoppers et al 2021;Spaaij et al 2020), and previous research has also shown that gender diversity on organization boards brings better organizational outcomes (e.g., Lee and Cunningham 2019). Regardless of the growing appreciation of (gender) diversity, women leaders in sports remain under-represented (Adriaanse 2016;Council of Europe 2020).…”