Understanding the Meaning of Representation in a Deliberative Democratic Governance System

Abstract

The meaning and nature of athlete representation in sport governance is broad and goes beyond formalistic delegate models and voting rights accounts. This article explores the meaning and nature of representation in the context of intercollegiate sport governance. Interviews were conducted with intercollegiate athlete representatives and athlete representative administrative advisors to gain an understanding of how and why athlete representatives carried out their roles. Findings revealed that the meaning and motivations of athlete representation were based on the institutionalized deliberative democratic governance system. Representation meant standing and acting for the power of the athlete voice and having the capacity to generate the athlete voice into legislation and decision making. The performative role of representatives involved self-accountability, where they accepted responsibility to engage in a deliberative process of collective decision making. Implications for practice and future research on athlete representation in a deliberative democratic sport governance system are presented.

The meaning of democracy in an era of good governance: Views of representation and their implications for board composition

“…Valiente does so by showing how gender quotas not only increase the representation of women on board, but also stimulate awareness of gender inequality issues more broadly. Similarly, Kihl and Schull (2020) demonstrate how the rule-based inclusion of athlete representatives on councils fostered motivation act as representatives for this group as a whole.…”

“…In contrast to the studies referenced in the preceding, Kihl and Schull (2020), Thibault et al (2010), andValiente (2020) are unique in providing a more fine-grained understanding of the meaning and implications of representation in the context of sport governance. In particular, focusing on representation per se, Kihl and Schull (2020) and Valiente (2020) both draw attention to the constitutive effects of representational structures and practices. Valiente does so by showing how gender quotas not only increase the representation of women on board, but also stimulate awareness of gender inequality issues more broadly.…”

“…Valiente (2020) and Kihl and Schull (2020, see also Thibault et al 2010) are not focused on the more foundational issue of which representational views are at work in the context of elected sport-governing bodies. Nonetheless, these studies are insightful from the perspective of democratizing sport, but by virtue of their focus on two different social categories, they also illustrate two of potentially numerous representational categories that may come into play in considerations around board composition (see also Stenling et al, 2020).…”

“…Given the intimate connection between representation and power in governance, remarkably little attention has been given to this topic (see Schull, 2020, andThibault et al, 2010, for important exceptions). This is not to say that representation has not been ascribed significance in sport governance research, including in studies carried out in countries whose systems are moving towards appointed, independent boards (e.g.…”

The role and performance of supporter directors: A social exchange theory perspective

“…Some studies have investigated the role of individual board members, such as the chair (Zeimers & Shilbury, 2020) and athlete representatives (Kihl & Schull, 2020), but this kind of research has traditionally been scarce. As such, there remains a gap in the sports governance literature concerning our knowledge of the roles of different types of individual directors, including supporter directors.…”