Abstract des Autors

Aim of research project
In order to realize a sustainable development of the football pyramid, European grassroots football clubs depend on their capacity to fulfill their roles, functions and missions. This involves the ability to deploy resources from different capacity dimensions including human, financial and structural resources. The clubs’ problem solving capacity is critical for survival as macro changes in the global economy have gathered pace and economic and cultural shifts and discontinuities are impacting the participation in – and consumption of – football in new and often unclear ways. Stakeholders within the European football pyramid need to know which resources contribute to minimizing organizational problems and maximizing organizational success. A better understanding of the relationship between capacities, problems and public welfare effects allows a better development of the sport. While previous academic research on European
football has mainly focused on the professional level, this research paper aims at comparing the organizational capacity at the bottom of the European football pyramid. This leads to a two-step approach:
• Differences in organizational capacity and problems, as well as in the public welfare effects of football clubs across Europe are assessed.
• The influence of organizational capacity on the severity of organizational problems of football clubs, and on public welfare effects is analyzed. In particular, the effect of various capacities on problem minimization and public welfare maximization are central.
Theoretical background
Organizational capacity is understood as the ability of organizations to perform functions effectively, efficiently, and sustainable. The concept received an increasing amount of attention within the community sport context as it provides a meaningful understanding of the challenges and strengths that exist within these organizations. Despite the growing body of literature in this area, significant gaps remain when the analysis shifts to the determinants of that capacity. The continued reconfiguration of broad capacity suggests that context-specific frameworks may be more pertinent. The framework of Doherty, Misener, and Cuskelly (2014) is used as a foundation for the research project as its dimensions – human resources, finance, infrastructure, planning and development, and external relationships and networks – align with several of the distinguishing features of grassroots football clubs; specifically, the critical reliance on human resources in the form of volunteers, relatively fewer economic resources, a more informal structure, a focus on member benefit goals and activities that address those goals, and relatively fewer external linkages. Each of the capacity dimensions is expected to have varying influence on the ability of an organization to fulfill its mission and achieve its objectives.
Methodology
This research project conducts an empirical comparison between football clubs in Europe. It is designed as a cross-section study which draws primary data from a population of European football clubs in six countries (N=36,166) through an online survey consisting of roughly 30 questions. The statistical data analysis consists of descriptive statistics to portray mean differences for the respective variables in the national associations as well as 60 regression models to determine the effect of different dimensions of organizational capacity on a) organizational problems and b) public welfare effects – in general, and for each country in particular. Appropriate control variables are included in the regression models to account for size- and country specific effects.
Results and conclusions
Over n=5,110 clubs participated in the study and indicated that attracting/retaining volunteers and referees and the cost of operation are the biggest organizational problems. The investigated clubs demonstrated differences in ranking 20 organizational problems and the respective magnitude. Clubs also vary in size and composition of their members (e.g., age, gender), organizational structure (e.g., paid/female staff), and infrastructural capacities. For example, only 20% of the investigated Italian clubs can make use of their own facilities while this share amounts to 80% in Norway. Although differences within the financial dimension exist, the share of clubs breaking even is relatively similar across the countries, indicating similar levels of financial performance. The analytical results show that there is clear evidence of the effect of specific capacities on
organizational problems and public welfare effects. For example, following a strategic concept is beneficial for almost two thirds of all considered organizational problems, while imitating the supply of commercial sports providers is harmful with respect to 40% of the problems. Moreover, a higher share of female staff can be linked with higher public welfare effects. While financial capacity is generally important, it is not specifically beneficial for higher public welfare effects. The problem dimension shadow of the game (i.e. discrimination, violence and manipulation) is barely determined by organizational capacities and needs to be addressed in future research to sustain the integrity of the game.