Sport-For-Development Organizational Hybridity: From Differentiated to Dysfunctional

Abstract

Despite recent advances in sport-for-development (SFD) literature, few scholars have empirically examined organizational hybridity in SFD contexts. This is despite hybrid organizational approaches becoming increasingly common in the delivery of SFD initiatives. Opportunities exist for researchers to build knowledge regarding SFD hybrids, particularly those which operate in professional sport contexts. In this research, we examine an SFD organization, delivered by a professional sport team, which operates under a hybrid structure. A longitudinal qualitative case study design was employed, and findings demonstrate how the SFD organization, which presents a practical example of organizational hybridity, evolved over time. Drawing upon Svensson typologies of SFD hybrids, results illustrate how the organization transformed from a differentiated hybrid into a dysfunctional hybrid, under the influence of funding opportunities and institutional logics. Through the present study, we build upon theoretical understandings of SFD hybrids and offer practical insight into the nuances of SFD hybrids delivered in professional sport contexts.

Antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement in sport for development

“…Similar trends are found across other nonprofit fields (Maier et al, 2016). Trying to balance multiple and often conflicting institutional logics puts additional stress on SFD employees (Dixon & Svensson, 2019: Raw et al, 2019. The SFD field requires employees to expend social and emotional capital as they interact with diverse stakeholders including participants, community leaders, donors, funding agencies, and policymakers.…”

Sport for Social Change: Bridging the Theory–Practice Divide

“…Thus, the recommendations provided herein aim at informing the future design, management, and delivery of SFD projects, especially those that are faced with dealing with hybridity processes. Raw, Sherry, and Rowe's (2019) article makes a similar contribution to theoretical and practical understandings of organizational hybridity in SFD. Their study suggests how an SFD organization's hybridity can transform over time due to tensions between institutional priorities and logics.…”

“…Similarly, a sport development or SFD expert will bring yet another perspective toward social change projects. To some degree, researchers have started to investigate the opportunities and challenges-including hybrid approaches and role conflictsaround sport for social change programs and perspectives (see in this issue, e.g., Dixon & Svensson, 2019;Raw et al, 2019). However, more in-depth research is needed to establish a solid understanding of sport for social change perspectives and the associated managerial implications for training, development, leadership, program planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.…”

Sport for Sustainability? The Extractives Industry, Sport, and Sustainable Development

“…Furthermore, this study has not sought to explore or explain the partnerships between SFD programs and extractives funding, the complex motivations for accepting funding from the industry, or the benefits of having safe sport spaces in local communities. Rather, we have taken a wide-ranging approach to the study, to better understand the intersections of SFD, extractives CSR, and sustainable development, rather than on the institutional demands of specific SFD organization (see Dixon & Svensson, 2019; Raw et al, 2019; Svensson, 2017).…”