Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Understanding the non-financial benefits that intercollegiate athletics provides the university
(USC Thesis Other)
Understanding the non-financial benefits that intercollegiate athletics provides the university
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 1
UNDERSTANDING THE NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS THAT INTERCOLLEGIATE
ATHLETICS PROVIDES THE UNIVERSITY
by
Vincent L. Baldemor
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2019
Copyright 2019 Vincent L. Baldemor
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 2
DEDICATION
My first memorable experience in college athletics was in December 2002. It was an
interview for a fundraiser position at the University of Hawaii Athletics department. The
meeting was held in a high-profile attorney’s conference room surrounded by the athletics
director and some of the top community leaders in the state. The position had many candidates
from Hawaii and I was one of the few candidates from the mainland vying for the position. I
remember the knots in my stomach as I met the search committee, how tight the tie was around
my neck, and how out of place I looked wearing a suit surrounded by Aloha shirts and khakis. I
had never been to Hawaii, did not have any experience in college athletics, and never worked as
a fundraiser, but I felt this job was perfect for me and I wanted to move from a good, stable job
in Portland, OR to take this risk.
Seeing first-hand the power brokers at the table and learning about their level of
involvement showed me how important athletics was to the community. On the committee, an
attorney led the search process and with the athletics director, a bank CEO, television
broadcaster, and other high-profile donors and business people, they took the next hour to get to
know me and see if I would be a good fit. I left the interview unsure about my chances but
hopeful and grateful for the opportunity. After a month of waiting and some follow-up calls with
the search committee chair and the athletics director, my patience was rewarded and I was
offered the position. My life had just flipped 180 degrees and I was diving head first into the
world of intercollegiate athletics.
Through the next 15 years, I embraced the roller coaster ride of college athletics. Riding
the highs and lows of teams’ competition where everything we did was scrutinized by fans,
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 3
students, media, faculty, donors, alum and university leadership. We worked on evenings,
weekends and holidays and vacations and quality time with family were secondary needs.
Even with all of the challenges, it was worth it. We saw first-hand how support from the
university created a ripple effect of interest and connections from the community at large. Ticket
sales, donations, sponsorships and apparel sales all increased, teams won on the field and in the
classroom, media coverage was (mostly) positive and uplifting. The strong partnership between
athletics and the university helped not only the institution, it transformed the community.
I have also seen how little support and understanding of athletics isolated the university
from the community. The lack of investment into facilities, student-athlete scholarships, coaches
and staff created a separation from athletics and the institution. Teams faced challenges on the
field of play. Winning championships was replaced by competing hard. Student life and
retention suffered, donations were minimal, community engagement was poor. Athletics was not
the front porch for the university but more of a side entrance that was partially visible.
As a result of these experiences, both positive and negative, I dedicate this to all of the
college athletics coaches, staff and administrators I have worked with over the years. Your
commitment and dedication to our profession is admirable. You have shown me what being in
the trenches means and how important it is when teammates work toward a common goal.
More importantly, I dedicate this journey to Dad and Mom. Education was the priority
all our lives and you sacrificed much to make sure we had everything we needed to pursue our
own paths and have the resources for us to be successful. Your grandchildren will benefit from
the example you set and the legacy you have created. Immigrating from the Philippines over 50
years ago was a risk and adventure I could not imagine. Thank you for taking that risk and being
so supportive of us.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 4
Dad, even though I did not follow in your footsteps as an anesthesiologist, when I told
you I wanted to be a doctor, I probably should have been clearer. Bucket list achieved. I’m a
doctor now. Love to you and Mom. Mabuhay.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
List of Tables 7
Abstract 8
Chapter One: Introduction 9
Statement of the Problem 12
Purpose of the Study 13
Research Question 13
Significance of the Study 13
Limitations and Delimitation 14
Definitions 16
Conclusion 16
Chapter Two: Literature Review 18
History of Intercollegiate Athletics 18
Intercollegiate Athletics Governance Structure 20
Division I 21
Division II 22
Division III 23
Athletics Directors 24
National Scope and Reach of Athletics 26
Financial Benefits of Athletics 28
Sponsorship 28
Enrollment 29
Other Revenue 31
Non-Financial Benefits of Athletics 32
General Student Recruitment 33
School Spirit 34
Title IX 35
College Access for Under-represented Students 37
Student-Athlete Development 39
Student-Athlete Retention 42
Theoretical Framework 43
Conclusion 46
Chapter Three: Methodology 47
Site Selection 47
Population and Sample 48
Instrumentation 49
Data Collection 51
Data Analysis 53
Validity 54
Role of Researcher 55
Conclusion 56
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 6
Chapter Four: Results 57
Demographics of Athletics Directors 57
Demographics of Universities 58
Emergent Themes 60
Student Body Enrichment 60
Stronger Community Pride and Engagement 65
Greater Societal Impact 66
Conclusion 67
Chapter Five: Conclusion 69
Research Questions and Responses 69
Discussion of Findings 70
Student Body Enrichment 71
Increased Advertising and Visibility 72
Stronger Community Pride and Engagement 73
Greater Societal Impact 74
Recommendations for Practice 76
Implement Non-Financial Benefits Review of Athletics Department 76
Quantify the Non-Financial Benefits into Dollar Value 76
Communicate Results of Non-Financial Benefits Review to Stakeholders 76
Review Athletics’ Mission and Incorporate Benefits to Students, University, Community
and Society 77
Apply the Athletics Department Support Structure Model to the Larger Student Body 77
Recommendations for Future Research 77
Conclusion 78
References 80
Appendix A: Survey Questions 91
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 93
Appendix C: Consent Form 95
Appendix D: Draft Recruitment Email to athletics directors 97
Appendix E: NCAA Divisions 98
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Participants’ Background 58
Table 2: Athletics Directors and Complexity Leadership Theory 70
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 8
ABSTRACT
This study examined the non-financial benefits of intercollegiate athletics to the
university. Athletics departments across the country are undergoing major changes as
universities face increased pressure to maintain high enrollment levels and balance budgets due
to state funding decreases and a changing higher education model. This qualitative study
examined the perspectives of athletics directors from NCAA Division I, II, and III schools
through surveys and interviews. Findings suggest non-financial benefits in four areas: student
body enrichment, increased advertising and visibility, stronger community pride and
engagement, and greater societal impact. These findings may help university leadership
understand the value of intercollegiate athletics to the university, student body, community, and
society at large.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Across the country, the higher education business model is undergoing significant
changes. With state funding decreasing, and more options for students to pursue postsecondary
degrees, traditional 4-year colleges and universities face financial challenges (Chen, 2018; Jesse,
2018; King & Sen, 2013; Wong, 2017). As costs rise, college presidents closely examine
expenses to balance their budgets and have turned their focus to intercollegiate athletics
(Benford, 2007; Corlett, 2013; Fried, 2007; Geiger, 2013; Gerdy, 2002; Tsitsos & Nixon, 2012;
Weaver, 2015). Finding the value of intercollegiate athletics from a non-financial perspective
was not as important during times of financial stability.
The growth and popularity of college sports over the years made them an integral cultural
part of the student experience (Beyer & Hannah, 2000; Brand, 2006; Ko & Kim, 2014; Pope &
Pope, 2009; Rowell, 2016; Umbach, Palmer, Kuh, & Hannah, 2006). Sander (2008a) noted
Adrian University in Michigan as an example of intercollegiate athletics saving the university by
investing in teams, facilities and staff to raise enrollment through intense athletic recruiting.
While understanding and measuring the financial value of intercollegiate was important, the non-
financial value is often hidden and ignored.
Since before large television contracts and massive facilities growth, the purpose and
value of athletics have been a topic of debate (Cowley, 1999; Fried, 2007; Nollen, 1927; Penick,
1924; Renick, 1974; Sperber, 1990; Weaver, 2015; Williams, 1949). Since then, college
athletics has grown in terms of popularity, revenue, and exposure, crossing over into apparel,
television, facilities management and others areas. Athletics also became a factor in changing
federal law under Title IX. Today, universities offer undergraduate and graduate degrees in
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 10
sports management, marketing, and administration. College athletics are now inserted into the
higher education and American culture.
As intercollegiate athletics grew in size and popularity, concerns also grew regarding
decreases in state funding (Chen, 2018; Jesse, 2018; Wong, 2017) and the need for innovative
options to challenge the traditional college experience (King & Sen, 2013). These challenges
carried with them additional financial scrutiny throughout the university system, and college
athletics fell under the microscope due to its high visibility it received.
To address these challenges, cutting sports budgets allowed institutions to quickly
balance their finances. At the state level, Pennsylvania and Florida decreased funding at all of
their educational institutions, and, in the past two years, the University of Buffalo, Missouri
State, South Carolina State, University of North Dakota, Clemson, and Eastern Michigan
University all cut various sports teams from their universities (Chen, 2018; Jesse, 2018; Wong,
2017). Other wholesale cuts occurred at Temple, Richmond, Northeastern, James Madison,
Robert Morris, Maryland, Rutgers and California in recent years (Wong, 2017). Wong (2017)
stated that almost all of the programs dropped were non-revenue men’s and women’s programs.
As college presidents saw this trend occur, more began to use this strategy to balance revenues
and expenses.
One university eliminated all athletics programs. In October 2015, BYU-Hawaii
President John S. Tanner released a page-long statement about the decision to cut all
intercollegiate athletics. He expressed his love of Seasider athletics but said he was forced to
consider expenses and travel costs against the opportunity to admit 500 students (Toone, 2017).
The decision was made difficult by the fact that BYU-Hawaii had one of the most successful
athletics programs in the country, winning national championships, and student-athletes
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 11
consistently earned all-American status. The institution also held the facilities to host all of these
sports. Nonetheless, the university made the change not because of budget challenges but to
admit more students (Toone, 2017).
The second area of concern for university administrators was the growth of other options
to higher education. Since the number of high school graduates began to decline in 2008,
capturing the young adult student market has become more important. Two categories of
challenges in the traditional landscape of higher education were an increase in accredited
postsecondary institutions, and outside knowledge availability. Today, about 1,200 for-profit
colleges operate in the United States, and they comprise 26% of all colleges and universities
(King & Sen, 2013). The university with the highest enrollment is the University of Phoenix.
With half a million students, what started out as a small suburban commuter college is now
larger than the University of Arizona, Ohio State University, and the University of California
combined and about nine times as large as New York University, the largest mainstream private
university in the country. In addition, the University of Phoenix model did not have
intercollegiate athletics, nor a campus for students to congregate and socialize. If this model
gained momentum, college athletics would be at risk.
King and Sen (2013) referenced the availability of education on the internet. The first
attack on the traditional brick-and-mortar university came from the internet, which made
knowledge previously attainable only on college campuses available to all. Today, Khan
Academy, YouTube Edu, Academic Earth, and other outlets make educational videos available
for free, Many of these videos cover topics that would be standard in many college curricula,
particularly in mathematics, engineering, and science. The internet also made it possible for
people from all over the world to find practice exams, problem sets, visual examples and walk-
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 12
throughs, worksheets, lecture notes, academic presentations, interactive exercises, and webinars,
for free. In principle, anyone in any part of the world can read scholarly papers, practice
computer coding, witness scientific experiments, engage in original data gathering, practice
mathematics problems, ask follow-up questions in online chat rooms and forums, and solicit
feedback from experts and teachers. The internet created a community of learners without the
need to spend money and several years at an institution.
The change in state funding and the growth of alternate models for higher education
posed a serious challenge to the traditional college model and, relevant to this study, to
intercollegiate athletics. Schools dealt with financial difficulties by cutting expenses without
measuring the non-financial benefits that would also be lost.
Statement of the Problem
College athletics has historically been viewed as either a budgetary asset or drain, but
little is known about the non-monetary contributions of these programs. Programs across the
country are undergoing major changes as universities face increased pressure to maintain high
enrollment levels and balance budgets (James, 1983; Suggs, 2009a). The boon of athletics
facilities growth, increases in coaches’ salaries, and scholarships are the result of television
exposure and broadcast rights that enable larger schools to reap benefits. Smaller schools face
the challenge of competing at this level and chase these dollars to the detriment of their financial
stability. In addition, state funding decreases and a changing higher education model reduced the
demand for the traditional college model (Chen, 2018; Jesse, 2018; Wong, 2017). These events
led to athletics programs around the country experiencing budget cuts, sports cancellations, and
program closures. These universities looked at athletics programs as line items on a budget and
made decisions based on this premise.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 13
However, college athletics benefit more than just student-athletes. The effect of an
intercollegiate program spreads throughout the institution to its community and to its alumni. In
some cases, athletics provides financial benefit, but there is also a non-financial benefit that
should be evaluated. There is little research examining the non-monetary contributions of
athletics, which leaves costly programs and/or money-losing programs vulnerable to budget
fluctuations. The non-financial benefits cannot be found on an institution’s balance sheet.
Rather, it is within the fabric of the institution and difficult to quantify.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to explore how intercollegiate athletics may provide non-
financial value to institutions. In an era in which collegiate athletics and big business are
synonymous and much is known about its financial risks and benefits, this study examined often
overlooked benefits of athletics to institutions. The qualitative study examined the perspectives
of athletics directors from National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) Division I, II, and
III schools.
Research Question
This study was guided by a central research question: What non-financial benefit(s), if
any, does having intercollegiate athletics provide to the university?
Significance of the Study
Findings from this study to the broad literature may provide university presidents,
policymakers, and higher education researchers a more informed understanding of college
athletics and its potential benefits for students and the campus. At the presidential level, this
study provides foundational knowledge of how college athletics was integrated into the fabric of
the university and its work across departments. Athletics affected areas such as admissions,
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 14
student life, fundraising, alumni relations, community relations, and retention. Understanding
how these areas intersect is an important quality for the chief executive before making any
substantial and/or transformative changes.
At the policymaker’s level, universities are critical components in the state’s economy.
Both public and private institutions with college athletics provide visibility and funding when
opponents travel for competition. From a financial perspective, the purchases of hotel rooms,
ground transportation, restaurants, and spending at shopping malls and tourist attractions support
the local economy and bring in tax dollars. In addition, from a non-financial perspective, visitors
to the institution return home with memories that, if cultivated, provide positive impressions for
the university and state that encourage repeat visits.
Researchers concerned with higher education leadership may benefit from understanding
the vantage point of athletics directors, who comprise a population not often studied. While
athletics is a popular topic, research has primarily focused on faculty, student-athletes, coaches,
or university administration. Hearing from the athletics director provides balance in the research
and creates new topics of study for future researchers.
Limitations and Delimitation
There were four limitations in this study due to research design or methodology. The
first was that this study included only athletics directors. To fully grasp how athletics benefit the
institution, examining multiple viewpoints at the same institution would be preferred to yield
balances perspective. More importantly, athletics directors have a bias in protecting their
department, and, in their position, they are the spokespeople and voice of their departments. In
their role, they serve as the bridge between the institution and the community, the faculty and the
student-athletes, and the students and the athletic events.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 15
The second limitation was that the surveys were only distributed to the top 150 athletics
programs in NCAA Divisions I, II, and III. With over 1,100 schools, there may have been best
practices and examples that less successful schools could have provided but which were not
collected due to the sample size.
The third limitation pertained to the data. As athletics directors were highly visible and
their position was volatile due to presidential affinity, politics, and teams’ win/loss records,
answers could have been biased to appease administration, board members, media, or donors.
Instead of giving the truthful answer, athletics directors could have given the safe answer to
protect their livelihood.
The fourth limitation was researcher bias (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As the researcher is
a former athletics director and conducted the study with former peers, researcher bias may have
enter into the survey questions, interview questions, or interview field notes. Maxwell (2013)
recommended that, to avoid this bias, the researcher would need to be intentional in reflecting on
both personal and professional bias going into the study.
Delimitations were the parameters that the researcher chose to use in this study. As the
focus was on athletics directors, one of the delimitations was that no other voice was heard in
this research. There may be perspectives that other key stakeholders (faculty, college deans,
president, trustees, or donors) could offer to affirm or deny the value that athletics provides, but
this study did not include those.
A second delimitation was that this study focused only on NCAA member organizations
at Division I, II, or III. There are college athletics at 2-year junior colleges as well as at National
Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) member schools, but this study only focused on
the NCAA schools.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 16
A third delimitation was defining the experience level and knowledge base of the
athletics directors. In this study, there was no pre-screening of which athletics directors could
participate in this study. If one was in the position for 6 months or 30 years, their input would be
equal in value to that of the others.
Definitions
For purposes of this study, the following were definitions of relevant terms.
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA): A governing body of small
athletics programs dedicated to character-driven intercollegiate athletics. Since 1937, the NAIA
has administered programs dedicated to championships in balance with the overall college
educational experience. Each year, more than 65,000 NAIA student-athletes have the opportunity
to play college sports, earn over $600 million in scholarships, and compete for a chance to
participate in 26 national championships (NAIA, 2018).
National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA): a member-led organization dedicated
to the well-being and lifelong success of student-athletes. There are 1,117 college and
universities, 100 athletics conferences, and 40 affiliated sports organizations that are a part of the
NCAA (NCAA, 2018).
Title IX: A federal civil rights law in passed as part of the education amendments of
1972. It was signed into law by President Richard Nixon in 1972 and was renamed the Patsy T.
Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act in 2002 after U.S. Representative Patsy Mink, who
co-authored and sponsored the bill (Galles, 2004)
Conclusion
This chapter presented an overview of the study, the statement of the problem, and the
study’s purpose, significance, limitations, and delimitations. Chapter Two synthesizes the
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 17
literature, provides a theoretical framework, and identifies the research gap. Chapter Three
addresses the methods used to collect data, which includes site selection, population and sample,
instrumentation, data collection, data analysis, validity and the role of researcher. Chapter Four
presents the results obtained through analysis of the data. Finally, Chapter Five summarizes the
findings, discusses what the findings mean by comparing the results to the literature, and
presents the conclusions and implications of this study.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 18
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter focuses on understanding intercollegiate athletics and its role at the
institution. While the financial and non-financial benefits are the primary focus for this study,
the history of the NCAA, the differences among the three athletics divisions, its reach and
national scope across the country, and critics of athletics are also discussed in this chapter.
The final section in this chapter outlines the theoretical framework for the research to aid
understanding athletics directors’ perceptions of the value intercollegiate athletics provides the
university. Although the research for this study reflected various stakeholders, such as university
administration, students, and faculty, little research was found pertaining directly to athletics
directors, which further delineated the need for this study.
History of Intercollegiate Athletics
College athletics has been a successful business at NCAA Division I schools. Television
broadcasts have shown large stadiums or arenas filled with fans cheering on their teams and
students wearing their school colors. Press releases and news media tout athletic facilities and
coaches’ salaries predominantly supported by large donations and corporate partnerships.
Prominent alumni are recognized during half-time celebrations for their contributions to their
school. School spirit is visible on campus as students and faculty congregate at events and wear
their colors with pride. The analogy of athletics being the front porch to the university is a
typical comparison to which many universities subscribe. Athletics bring outside funding to the
institution due to heightened visibility, but the challenge lies in maintaining this model while
differentiating the institution from others.
From the earliest period of American intercollegiate sport, there was pressure to recruit
athletes to secure victories for the home team. The earliest attempts to recruit star athletes began
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 19
with the practice of using graduates or students who were enrolled in the growing number of
professional schools (Flowers, 2009; Sanders, 2004). These perpetual athletes were often
provided modest financial considerations, room and board, or employment to defer their
expenses. Some colleges offered scholarships to promising undergraduate athletes as early as
1870. In 1873, Syracuse enlisted a few men to row for its crew after allowing them to take a
drafting course.
By the 1880s, colleges were hiring professional coaches and accumulating significant
funds with which to acquire prospective players. Many colleges had already established a special
student designation for students who enrolled in non-degree programs to build enrollment.
Coaches soon began to use this special student designation to hide athletes. As colleges became
increasingly sensitive to charges that they were elitist and exclusionary, they began to develop
charity funds as a source of financial aid for lower-income students. Coaches, with help from
admission staff, began funneling charity money to athletes who possessed little academic interest
or ability (Flowers, 2009).
In 1840, when Harvard University sought to gain an undue advantage over its academic
rival Yale by recruiting a coxswain for their intercollegiate regatta, the need to gain an advantage
and the commercialization of sport was established (Smith, 2000). According to Smith (2000),
“regulating athletics became the primary objective, which led to the National Collegiate Athletic
Association’s (NCAA) formation in 1910” (p.12). As college athletics grew in popularity and
size, the NCAA also expanded its scope of governance to promoting academic integrity, hosting
events such as NCAA championships, and negotiating television rights agreements.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 20
Intercollegiate Athletics Governance Structure
A nonprofit organization founded in 1905, the NCAA is dedicated to programming and
delivering national championships for intercollegiate athletics (NCAA, 2018). College presidents
formed the NCAA with the support of President Theodore Roosevelt, and it thereafter evolved
into the dual role of regulating and promoting college sports. In exchange, these institutions
abide by rules meant to maintain amateur ideals, including regulations on program structure,
competition and equipment, and the recruiting and eligibility of athletes (Suggs, 2009b).
Since its founding, the NCAA evolved in structure and overall philosophy to become the
most powerful organization in college sport (Baxter & Lambert, 1990; Estrada, 2016). The
NCAA sponsors 89 championships in 23 sports over three distinct divisions in which more than
1,000 college and university athletic departments compete (Burakowski, 2012). Additionally, the
organization’s purpose is to promote athletic competition and integrate intercollegiate athletics
into higher education in a fair, safe, equitable manner and provide rules and policies to its
member institutions (NCAA, 2018).
The NCAA governance structure consists of an executive committee, governance
substructures, a collection of association-wide committees, and three divisions comprised of
athletic departments depending on their size and financial ability (Burakowski, 2012). Athletic
conferences are formed by the member institutions and assist in scheduling, organizing league
championships, and negotiating broadcast rights for their conferences (Sanders, 2004; Suggs,
2009b). There is much coordination and collaboration from coaches and institutions in
managing their priorities and the NCAA to govern the integrity and responsibility of college
sports across the nation.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 21
Division I
Division I is the highest level of athletic competition in the NCAA. There are 335 public
and private colleges and universities at this level (Burakowski, 2012; Lumpkin, Achen, &
Hyland, 2015). Division I athletics budgets are much higher than those at Divisions II and III
and are used to invest in facilities and resources to help the institutions compete at a higher level.
Full athletic scholarships, or full grants-in-aid are offered to student-athletes based on athletic
ability to cover tuition, boarding, books, and fees.
Athletics at the Division I level is a major financial enterprise with revenue coming from
student fees, gate receipts, private donors, media contracts, and licensing. At these institutions
full grants-in-aid may be divided into smaller grants offered to student-athletes. Division I
athletics are highly competitive and typically considered entertainment for spectators at a
national level. Division I is split into three subdivisions. Member schools are assigned to the
subdivisions based on the scope of their football programs.
The first subdivision is the Football Bowl Subdivision, which has 120 members.
Programs in this subdivision use a bowl system, rather than a playoff system, for postseason play
and to determine a national champion. These schools are required to sponsor more sports than
members of the other subdivisions and have to meet higher standards for scheduling and overall
financial aid. Additionally, these schools have to meet minimum attendance standards in
football, which averages about 15,000 attendees per game. If attendance dips below that
number, the school risks being moved to a lower level. The second subdivision has 118 member
schools and is the Football Championship Subdivision, which has a postseason playoff system
(Baxter & Lambert, 1990; Burakowski, 2012). Lastly, 97 Division I schools comprise the third
subdivision, and these are the universities that do not sponsor football.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 22
Division II
Division II is the next level of athletic competition in the NCAA. Division II includes 302
member institutions that range in size from fewer than 2,500 to over 15,000 students (NCAA,
2018). Athletic scholarships are offered to student-athletes, but there are fewer per-capita as
compared to the Division I level. The Division II mission is to balance competitive athletic
environments with development of the student-athlete as a person (Burakowski, 2012). Division
II provides thousands of student-athletes the opportunity to compete at a high level of athletics
while excelling in the classroom and fully engaging in the broader campus experience (Rowell,
2016).
Orszag and Orszag (2005) identified differences between Divisions I and II. Division II
offers student-athletes partial scholarships for financial aid and features a higher championship-
participant ratio of 1:8. Division II conducts national championship festivals which feature
Olympic-style events held over several days and at a single site. Another feature is that Division
II national championships are almost all broadcast live or live-streamed online. On average,
student-athletes at Division II schools comprise a higher percentage of the student body, and,
collectively, Division II student-athletes participate in more community service than their
Division I counterparts (NCAA, 2018). Division II schools are also generally smaller institutions
that have a closer and more intimate college experience than the large state land-grant
universities of Division I. Division II is a niche for student-athletes who seek a balance between
competitive athletics and earning a degree. Division II brands itself as offering student-athletes
the complete collegiate experience.
While there are differences in Division II structure and finance when compared to the
other divisions, student-athletes still share similar regulations in terms of competition, practice,
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 23
and academics. Nite (2012) explained that the approximately 100,000 Division II student-
athletes across the nation faced similar time and energy requirements as their Division I siblings.
Also, both divisions adhere to the 20-hour rule in season and the 8-hour rule out of season
regarding allowed practice time.
Division III
Division III is the third level of athletic competition in the NCAA. Division III consists of
447 member institutions that are primarily private colleges and universities. Athletic scholarships
are not offered to student-athletes at this level, and the mission at this level is focused on
providing opportunities for participation with a balance of rigorous academics and the
opportunity to pursue other co-curricular and extracurricular involvement opportunities
(Burakowski, 2012; NCAA, 2018; Robinson, Peterson, Tedrick, & Carpenter, 2003). Also
emphasized at this level are the avenues through which the overall student experience conveys
lessons in teamwork, discipline, perseverance, and leadership.
The structure of Division III athletics is designed to allow student to embrace all aspects
of the student experience to results in their development as citizens of the world (NCAA, 2018).
At the Division III level, grants-in-aid are not offered based on athletic performance in an
attempt to minimize the sense of obligation to athletic programs. Competition typically takes
place in season at the conference level. Postseason play and championship opportunities exist,
but, unlike in Division I athletics, emphasis is on the student-athlete experience, rather than the
spectator experience (NCAA, 2018). Expenses and revenues associated with operating Division
III athletic programs are typically substantially less than those of Division I and Division II
departments (NCAA, 2018).
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 24
Athletics Directors
Across the NCAA’s 1,100 members institutions, athletics directors lead the athletics
department and set the direction for coaches, staff, and student-athletes. Both Schneider and
Stier (2005) and Huffman (2013) offered the university president’s perceptions of the athletics
director’s role and of intercollegiate athletics’ impact on the institution. Sanders (2004)
discussed the administrative structure the university in terms of whom athletics directors report
to. These studies illustrated the importance of determining university leaders’ perceptions of the
value of athletics. Other research concentrated on faculty and student-athlete perspectives of
athletics (Marco, 1960; Feezell, 2013; Ott, 2011) (Carrier, 2013, Miller, 2012, Weiss &
Robinson, 2013). These studies portray the university’s most important customer, the student-
athlete, and the value they see as a result of participating in intercollegiate athletics.
While actual duties and responsibilities vary depending on the size and goals of the
institution, there are some general obligations that come with the job for most athletics directors.
Kinder (1994) surveyed 97 athletics directors about their major job responsibilities and
concluded that there were 11 categories of work responsibilities: monitoring and maintaining
ethical standards of coaches and athletes as to eligibility and behavior; personnel; interpreting
programs to students, faculty, administration, and public; public relations, marketing, and
promotions; fundraising, budgeting, and accounting; equipment budgeting, accounting,
purchasing, and maintenance; facility planning, inspection for safety, scheduling, and
maintenance; long-range planning; providing communication avenues among coaches, athletics
director, and higher authorities; statistical recording of team and individual achievements; and
transportation and scheduling of contests and officials. While this is a comprehensive list, over
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 25
time, these duties evolve as compliance, social media, television contracts and student-athlete
mental health issues became dominant topics in college athletics.
Smith (2012) also examined the responsibility of hiring/firing coaches, supervision of
budgets, and, at many institutions, serving on the university leadership team. The hiring and
firing process require a significant amount of time for most athletic administrators. With high
turnover due to low starting salaries and an intense work environment, which includes working
athletic contests in the evening, on weekends, and during holidays, human resource management
is an important part of the job. Smith concluded that the role of the athletic director was ever-
changing and evolving in a world of decreased state funds. As such, athletic directors were
becoming more focused on fundraising and development.
Successful athletics directors also shared similar backgrounds. Williams (2011) found
that common characteristics for intercollegiate athletics directors was a graduate education as
most holding a master’s degree, experience in athletics operations, the ability to articulate ethical
principles, a high level of motivation to succeed, and good communication skills. No longer do
retired head football coaches move away from the football field and into the office of the
athletics director. Athletics departments are entrepreneurial operations that require years of
business skills and experience to keep up with the rapidly changing environment.
Among research on the position of athletics director, Kinder (2014) defined general
differences of the athletic director position among the three NCAA divisions. For Division I,
athletics directors utilize more managerial skills than the other divisions. For Division II, the
smaller budget and staff highlights athletics directors involved in a combination of managerial,
part-time coaching, and part-time teaching duties at the institution. Finally, Division III athletics
directors have primarily coaching and teaching duties and are more mid-level managers than
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 26
executive administrators. Hatfield, Wrenn, and Bretting, (1987) compared the job of athletics
directors to that of general manager of a professional sport club. While the title of athletics
director is common throughout intercollegiate athletics, each institution has different needs and
requires different skills.
National Scope and Reach of Athletics
In 1994, intercollegiate athletics was part of a $7.75 billion-dollar industry, which
included professional sport, recreational sport, health and fitness club management and facility
management (Hums, Barr, & Gullion, 1999). The NCAA portion of that amount was worth
$1.75 billion over eight years to broadcast the Final Four basketball tournament. This figure did
not include revenue the NCAA collected from ticket sales, merchandise, or sponsorship deals
connected with the basketball tournament.
By 2010, at public colleges and universities, Division I athletic programs were a $6
billion enterprise, with costs rapidly increasing in recent years (Desrochers, 2013). At the root of
these rising athletic costs were the multimillion-dollar coaching contracts, a demand for more
staff and better facilities, and increased scholarship commitments that needed to keep pace with
rising tuition. The high level of competition to keep pace with universities spending on their
programs contributed to this growth.
Salaries increased exponentially. Budig (2007) reported that, in 1999, only five coaches
earned a salary of $1 million or more. That is no longer the case, with at least 50 out of 119
NCAA Division I head coaches now annually earning $1 million or more (Budig, 2007).
Coaches at this level are making an average of more than $950,000 a year. University of
Alabama football coach Nick Saban raised the compensation bar to a significantly higher level
with his 2007 contract worth $32 million over eight years, plus a possible additional $800,000
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 27
per year in incentive payments (Tsitsos & Nixon II, 2012). Even Rutgers, in trying to elevate its
national profile, spent over $2 million dollars annually on football head coach Greg Schiano’s
salary and, in 2008 added $250,000 to it from an outside source without disclosing the
supplement to the general public (Weaver, 2010). Successful coaches are in high demand, and
the marketplace rewards these coaches with large compensation packages which further create
visibility, both positive and negative, at the university.
Over the last two decades, increases in television and related revenues increased
commercialization of intercollegiate athletics at a pace that places a significant strain on
institutions and the NCAA (Smith, 2000; Toma, 1999; Tsiotsou, 2004). These commercial
pressures, together with increased costs related to non-revenue producing sports, gender equity
requirements, and demands for new facilities, made it challenging to maintain a viable
enforcement process and a balanced playing field.
Most of the attention on intercollegiate athletics focuses on the large NCAA Division I
institutions that are regularly seen on television competing in football or basketball. While this
group is a small subset of the entire NCAA membership, these schools often receive the most
exposure and are usually the most highly funded. As a result of this visibility, the attention on
college athletics focuses on the characteristics of these large schools. Budig (2007) and
Alexander & Kern (2010) stated that members of the public rarely understand that fewer than 15
major intercollegiate athletic programs actually make money. Despite television income,
growing ticket revenues, and contributions from supporters, college athletics are a high-risk
business. Nonetheless, many institutions seek the revenue generated from college athletics
hoping to become one of the profitable few.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 28
To compare this situation with professional sports, Breech (2018) noted that the National
Football League raised $14 billion in 2018, but it was difficult to know the exact number since
the league did not provide financial documents because it was no longer a tax-exempt
organization. College athletics is comparable to one of the largest professional sports
organizations in the world. While the NCAA is considered a developmental league to the
National Football League and other sports organizations, college sports continue to be highly
lucrative to sponsors as well as to television, shoe and apparel companies.
Financial Benefits of Athletics
While this study is specific to intercollegiate athletics, it is important to frame the size of
the sports industry in the United States to understand the impact that college athletics has within
that industry. Humphreys and Ruseski (2008) estimated the size of the sports industry based on
aggregate demand and supply ranged from $44 to $73 billion in 2005. More recently,
intercollegiate athletics became a $6 billion industry, representing 14% to 8.2% of the entire
sports industry, which includes participation activities, attendance at sporting events, and media
covered sporting events (Desrochers, 2013). The financial benefits that college athletics
provides is a large driver not only to universities but to the U.S. economy as well.
Sponsorship
Sponsorship is an important source of revenue for college sports in the United States,
particularly for highly competitive varsity sport programs. As financial pressures mounted, the
NCAA sought to diversify its revenue sources after their 11-year, $6.1 billion CBS deal in 2012
(Ko & Kim, 2014). Currently, the bulk of universities and their athletic programs require multi-
million-dollar budgets. They share the burden of ever-increasing athletics expenditures with
significantly declining federal and state funding. According to a recent NCAA study, only 14 of
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 29
the 120 Football Bowl Subdivision schools reported that their cash flows were greater than
expenses. While highly visible at the NCAA Division I level, sponsorships are an important
element at all levels of the NCAA. Athletics provides the opportunity for corporations to engage
with the student body and build relationships with these individuals before they graduate to
establish familiarity with their products and services.
In addition to NCAA sponsorship dollars, athletic conferences also profit from their own
television deals. The Big Ten Conference secured a revenue stream of almost $9 million dollars
per year to each member. All told, Big Ten Conference members could earn a minimum of $2.8
billion over the next 20 years (Weaver, 2010). Having a successful athletics program provides
valuable funding to the athletics department to benefit both the institution and the sponsors.
Athletics departments are heavily reliant on corporate sponsorship and private support
from boosters. In return, by associating with varsity sport programs, corporate sponsors expect
image enhancement and sales opportunities through increased awareness and consumer loyalty
among target customers (Ko & Kim, 2014; Toma, 1999). For example, apparel companies spend
millions every year associating themselves with teams through agreements pertaining to practice
gear, uniforms, and travel. The university reciprocates by selling these products at bookstores, to
alumni, at athletic events and at camps and clinics to recoup their investment and solidify the
brand with the university community.
Enrollment
Interest in aligning enrollment strategies to athletics programs has recently become more
attractive due to the financial pressures universities face. Having a successful athletics program
increases the visibility of the institution, and major achievements in athletics lead to an improved
pool of entering students, in terms of aptitude tests, at selective universities. On the reverse side,
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 30
dropping a sport such as football could have a measurable negative impact on enrollment and
other indirect variables like giving, even for universities that do not have top-tier programs
(Goff, 2000). With the rise of the internet and the ease of information gathering about colleges,
being able to stand apart from other schools is an important selling point.
Perez (2012) added that success in football and men’s basketball at the Division I level
positively affects enrollment of local students at a university. The reason for this phenomenon is
that athletic success changes the opinion held by local students regarding the quality of an
institution. In addition, football and basketball success significantly affects the applicant pool
for a university, and private universities experience this more often than public schools (Perez,
2012). As private universities are more dependent on tuition revenue than the large public
schools with state funding, the prestige factor of a university’s success in athletics plays a role in
how many students apply.
Prominence in athletics attracts better students and faculty and athletics helps universities
achieve their goals (Beyer & Hannah, 2000; Feezell, 2013). One of the effects of a winning
basketball season at the College of Charleston was an estimated $3.3 million worth of publicity.
The school president, Alex Sanders, said, “We’re 227 years old and until we had a team in the
top 25, nobody had heard of us.” (Beyer & Hannah, 2000, p. 119). Research has shown that
winning in college football attracts students, while NCAA sanctions reduce first-year student
enrollment (Beyer & Hannah, 2000; Mixon & Trevino, 2005).
Another example of this effect at a small to medium size institution was at Adrian
College in Michigan. Jeffrey R. Docking, Adrian’s president and the chief architect of investing
in athletics stated, “I would not have started one of these sports if I didn’t think it was good for
enrollment and the future of the college” (Sander, 2008a, p.1). Since 2005, enrollment surged
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 31
57%, to 1,470 students, the highest number in at least two decades. More than half of those
students played varsity sports. The college also becomes more selective. In 2005, Adrian
accepted 93% of the 1,200 students who applied. In 2008, it accepted 72% of its 4,200
applicants. Faculty members, pleased with the trend, say the caliber of students in their
classrooms improved (Sander, 2008a). Attending a university that provides more than just
classroom instruction and allows for specialized talents such as athletics drives the student
experience for these smaller, regional schools.
Goff (2000) showed that having athletics provides an institution a profit by valuing grant-
in-aid expenses at their true incremental expense to the university. Most universities value
athletic grant-in-aid expenses at their full price of tuition, housing price, and books price. This
could account for $1 million to $5 million of athletic expenses, depending on tuition a. However,
the amount of money that a university actually spends to instruct and house 100 additional
football and basketball players is only a fraction of the full price (Goff, 2000). The incremental
instructional expense is nearly zero because, at universities with little excess capacity, few, if
any, additional faculty or staff must be employed to accommodate the additional student-athletes.
The return on investment, however, is greater than the student-athlete’s cost if they succeed on
the national level and attracted more students who up paying tuition, boarding, and other fees.
Other Revenue
Newer sources of revenue such as television rights and sponsorship agreements
contribute the largest amount of revenue to the athletics department now (Ko & Kim, 2014;
Tsiotsou, 2004). Specifically, the traditional sources of revenue of gate receipts, student fees and
alumni donations are becoming secondary to the business approach of marketing college
athletics. Educational institutions use intercollegiate athletics as a means for raising money from
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 32
alumni and friends that help pay for deficits or budget cuts. In addition, Tsiotsou (2004) reported
that fundraising will be “the most probable source for increasing athletics revenue in the next
decade” (p. 40).
The growth of athletics budgets over time was buoyed largely by increases in ticket sales
and game guarantees in the form of fees paid to visiting football and basketball teams (Suggs,
2009a). The growth and popularity of college athletics creates a revenue stream that universities
can take advantage of to both subsidize the teams and to benefit the institution.
Non-Financial Benefits of Athletics
The National Association of College and University Business Officers (1993) suggested
that, while a large number of college and university presidents recognized their institutions may
never realize profits from intercollegiate athletics, many choose to build up their programs or
selected teams for the visibility they believe major athletics programs can provide. Many college
and university leaders believe that, even if their athletics programs lose money, the exposure they
receive from a television appearance or occasional bowl game increases public recognition and
interest in their institutions. Underlying this idea is the belief that such recognition translates
into increased applications, enhanced fundraising opportunities, and a more receptive ear from
legislators and the local community.
Denhart, Villwock & Vedder (2010) illustrated this with the example of Northwestern
University. For many years, this Big 10 school ranked last in its football conference against
schools such as Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Michigan State, and Illinois. Northwestern
was consistently the academic school that had a football team. Tired of this label and with
support and investment from its president and board, Northwestern decided to became a
contender. After playing and winning the 1996 Rose Bowl, applications at Northwestern
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 33
University for the next year’s incoming class of freshmen rose by 30%. This allowed for greater
selectivity, and average SAT scores rose by nearly 20 points. Subsequently, the school rose four
places, from thirteenth to ninth, in US News and World Report ranking of colleges. For high
school seniors seeking high-profile colleges, having a successful football program with potential
to participate in a bowl game provides a slight advantage in admissions.
General Student Recruitment
Universities aggressively diversify their student body in hopes of being attractive to a
global audience. Admissions departments and marketing departments are active in reaching out
to potential college students locally, nationally, and internationally. On another level, the
athletics department and its coaches also assist the university as they recruit student-athletes to
their teams. They do this by personally reaching out to certain student-athletes, hosting camps
and clinics to evaluate potential student-athletes, and visiting high school athletics events. As the
athletics department invests in these methods, they also advertise the university to non-athlete
students who could be interested in enrolling there (Sander, 2008b).
Nearly half of the nation’s largest athletics programs doubled or tripled their recruitment
spending over the past decade. Forty-eight percent of NCAA Division I athletics departments
doubled their recruiting budgets from 1997 to 2007. Of the 300 Division I institutions for which
data were available, 21 spent more than $1-million in attempts to recruit talented players in the
2007 academic year. On the whole, the 65 largest athletics departments spent more than
$61 million in 2007, an 86% increase from 10 years before (Sander, 2008b). That amount did not
include salaries for recruiting coordinators or construction and operating costs of the
multimillion-dollar facilities that helped lure prospects.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 34
Perez (2012) stated that athletics success in football and basketball changed the opinion
held by local students regarding the quality of the institution. Universities were embracing the
recruiting strategies that athletics provided to not only attract top potential student-athletes, but
also reach the general student body (Sander, 2008b).
School Spirit
Intercollegiate athletics brings faculty, staff and students together in a way that class
work does not. Toma (1999) wrote that higher education in the United States has never been just
about the classroom or laboratory, but has embodied a romanticized collegiate ideal where
academic endeavors coexist with the pursuit of campus community through customs and rituals,
events and activities, and residence life and recreational facilities. Institutional life is often as
much about student activities and residence life as it is about the production and dissemination of
knowledge. Athletics can provide a common experience for students, alumni, and external
constituents, which is particularly difficult to achieve on a large campus and could be a strong
promotional tool for the university.
Another value that athletics provides is that success provides solidarity among the entire
university community (Denhart et al, 2010). Since television broadcasts reach a large audience,
athletics could help to connect alumni to their alma mater. This connection creates increased
loyalty and leads to higher alumni donations. These higher donations, in turn, earn institutions a
higher rating in prominent college rankings and likely yield more applicants.
Kansas State University President Jon Wefald suggested that, fair or not, football success
greatly affects the overall welfare of a university:
When I got here, there was a sense of futility…If the old administration had stayed on
here for three more years, I think football would have been dropped. We would have no
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 35
marching band, and we’d be at about 12,000 students today. (Mixon & Trevino, 2005,
p. 97)
Instead, since 1986, Kansas State’s enrollment increased from about 13,000 to 23,000, its annual
fundraising went from $7 million to $83 million, and the city of Manhattan’s economy grew
exponentially (Mixon & Trevino, 2005). Successful intercollegiate athletics, especially in areas
far from the big city or with professional sports teams bring a level of prestige and pride to the
institution.
School spirit is also manifested from outside the institution and stems from interactions
due to intercollegiate athletics. A reasonable assumption from the nature of intercollegiate
athletics is that these activities generally create an emotional attachment to the institution and
create prosocial behaviors among graduates (Rowell, 2016; Toma, 1999). Not only does this
provide a more enriching experience, it also provides a deeper connection to one’s institution,
school pride, and donations. Athletics acts as the host for the university and a window for
donors to connect with the institution.
NCAA Division II programs have smaller budgets and less television exposure (Rowell,
2016, p. 30). Despite these facts, Division II sports serve as a valuable asset for their respective
institutions, creating a campus culture and developing enduring relationships with students and
alumni. As a result of the limited community engagement at Division II institutions, athletics
provides an even more valuable bridge to the community while also building school spirit and
support.
Title IX
One of the most impactful laws to increase intercollegiate athletics participation in the
late 20th century was the enactment of Title IX in 1972. Its purpose was to make outlaw
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 36
discrimination on the basis of sex in federally financed programs in both private and public
schools. While most people associate Title IX with athletics, its coverage was intended to be far
broader (Cheslock, 2008; Galles, 2004; Lumpkin, 2012). It opened doors for admissions,
academic majors, classes, and vocational education. It also mandated equal access and equal
treatment once admitted. The law, simply, stated,
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation
in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education
program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. (Galles, 2004, p. 17)
The passage of Title IX opened the doors for women and minorities to attend college,
compete in intercollegiate athletics, and earn degrees in fields that were not previously open to
them, such as law, medicine, and science. This also held true for women in sports after college.
Donna Lopiano, executive director of the Women’s Sports Foundation, noted that the fruits of
this law have recently become apparent (Lopiano, 1999; Santovec, 2012). The 1996 Olympics
produced three gold medals for U.S. women’s teams in softball, soccer, and synchronized
swimming, television ratings and sponsorships for women’s sports has doubled in five years, and
women’s sports drawing an even number of women and men fans.
At the grassroots level, the role of women in sports has grown. With Title IX, the
number of high school girls in sports increased 90%, and the ratio of girls in varsity high school
sports has gone from 1 in 27 in 1972 to 2 in 5 in 2006 (Santovec, 2012). What was once an
exception, girls competing in athletics events, is now mainstream and their numbers have
flourished in college.
Increased enrollment at universities can, in part, be credited to Title IX and the growth of
women’s sports. The university’s investment over the years in scholarships, facilities and
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 37
staffing, coupled with visibility from television contracts provides an attractive option for
women to pursue intercollegiate athletics. McLaughlin (2014) studied women student-athletes at
a Division II university to measure academic success and retention. She studied women’s
volleyball, basketball, soccer, and softball, covering 349 records over a five-year period (2007–
2012). The research showed that sports that were better funded had student-athletes with higher
grade point averages and graduated within four years at a higher rate than programs that were not
fully funded. Women in college athletics provide value to the institution through their
participation in sports but also in graduating and becoming role models to younger students.
As the career of an athletics director evolved, women struggled to fill these positions and
other administrative leadership roles (Estrada, Lugo & Olmeda, 2016). To combat this
deficiency, the NCAA developed many programs, such as the NCAA Leadership Development,
NCAA Fellow Programs, Minorities Opportunities and Interest Committee, Senior Woman
Administrator, Institute for Administrative Advancement, and the Committee on Women’s
Athletics to enhance career opportunities for women and people of color to become athletics
directors (NCAA, 2018). However, even with all the NCAA efforts to increase women’s
participation in sports leadership, positions held by women are declining. Estrada et al (2016)
reported the representation of women in athletics leadership roles decreased from 17.5% to
17.0% in NCAA Division II, which included only 387 female administrators compared to 640
males. As universities were all held to Title IX standards of gender equity, there is a need to
include more women in leadership roles.
College Access for Under-represented Students
Intercollegiate athletics also offers a pathway for some minoritized students to attend
college. Since 1999, the NCAA has collected demographic research on student-athletes who
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 38
participate in Division I, II, and III sports (NCAA, 2017). The data was examined by year, sport
and ethnicity and showed how the demographics of student-athletes have changed over the years.
To illustrate these changes, out of 52 NCAA intercollegiate sports, three men’s sports
(football, basketball and baseball) and three women’s sports (basketball, soccer, and tennis)
between 1999 and 2016 were examined. The racial and ethnic categories reported were White,
Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander, two or more races, Nonresident Alien, and Other.
In the men’s sports, White men’s participation dropped over the course of the 17 years.
In football, White males constituted 63.1% in 1999 and 48.1% in 2016. In basketball, White
males made up 51.9% in 1999 and 40.3% in 2016. In baseball, White males made up 85.2% in
1999 and 81.4% in 2016 (NCAA, 2017). Black males made up the largest percentage of
minorities participating in intercollegiate athletics, and, by 2016, had a higher percentage of
participants than White men in basketball (40.3% versus 44.5%).
On the women’s side, the same trend was true. White women made up 67.7% in
basketball in 1999 and 52% in 2016. In 1999, soccer had an 86.5% rate of White women, which
fell to 75.7% in 2016. Tennis also showed a drop from 73.9% in 1999 to 57.4% in 2016. Black
women led all female minorities in terms of gross participation numbers, but international female
student-athletes were prominent in sports such as golf, ice hockey, skiing, squash, and tennis
(NCAA, 2017).
Based on the data collected by the NCAA, intercollegiate athletics became more diverse
between 1999 and 2016. With the added resources available to student-athletes, scholarship
opportunities, and visibility of non-White students succeeding in sports, intercollegiate athletics
has become more diverse and universities are benefitting from this growth. The visibility that a
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 39
diverse athletics program provides translates not only to increased participation by student-
athletes but by other students as well. When Colorado State Athletics conducted community
outreach with a local grade school with first-generation student-athletes, they broadened the
appeal of the university (Phifer, 2018). Many of the sixth graders who attended the event went
home with a better understanding of what it would take to go to college. While these students
were not athletes, they shared the connection of being first-generation college students and saw
how successful athletics programs improved the reputation of the school (Perez, 2012).
Student-Athlete Development
The role of intercollegiate athletics has been a topic of debate for years and, while
technology, facilities and budgets have all changed, one area that has stayed consistent is how
athletics affects student-athlete development. Baxter Magolda’s self-authorship theory (Patton,
Renn, Guido, & Quaye, 2016) recognizes the value of athletics. In this research, the path to self-
authorship includes four phases moving from external to internal self-definition. Those phases
were following formulas (phase I), crossroads (phase II), becoming the author of one’s life
(phase III), and internal foundation (phase IV). Athletics teams bring together diverse groups of
young people to work together to achieve a common goal (McLaughlin, 2014). Baxter
Magolda’s path is an extension of that journey, as the student-athletes quickly learns how to
adjust to the college experience of living away from home, becoming a member of a team,
studying, and even developing a social life.
It is this challenge that student-athletes face on a daily basis where Baxter Magolda’s
path was evident. Overcoming challenges and facing struggle is a part of college life, more so
for a student-athlete. Progressing from one’s high school years where food, shelter, and safety
were provided at home (phase I) to a new environment that could be uncomfortable, stressful and
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 40
different is the natural path (phase II) to self-authorship. Facing these challenges is key in
becoming the author of one’s life (phase III). Those succeeding in this phase move onto phase
IV where their life decisions are based on their internal foundation (Patton et al., 2016). Students
who did not face challenging situations or were sheltered from experiencing difficulty would
take a longer time to reach self-authorship. Student-athletes share this struggle as they adapt to
new environments, new teammates, new coaches, and new systems. Upon graduating, these
young adults are well prepared for life after college.
Another example from the literature of how intercollegiate athletics provide value to
student-athlete development is the analysis that Denhart, Villwock and Vedder (2010) shared in
highlighting the positive aspect of college sports. Their review discussed the benefits of athletics
to the institution and the community but focused primarily on the benefits to the student-athletes.
Among the traits they listed that were specific to participating in sports were leadership, a
competitive spirit, cooperation, and time management (Denhart et al., 2010). These traits aligned
with Baxter Magolda’s phases of self-authorship as they progressed from learning how to adapt
to new situations to building one’s internal foundation as they learned to trust their own feelings
and act on them rationally.
In addition, student-athletes reported that being a student-athlete helped them build
character (Nigro, 2012). Specific traits included recognition, patience, time management, self-
discipline, maturity, motivation, self-confidence, perseverance, leadership, and teamwork
(Denhart et al., 2010). These traits were developed from experiences associated with the playing
field and helped to affirm the concept that hard work paying off. For example, one study showed
that, when they were in college, chief executive officers of corporations were at least 12 times
more likely than other college students to have taken part in intercollegiate athletics (Boone,
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 41
Kurtz, & Fleenor, 1988). Also, males who participated in college athletics are estimated to have
a 4% higher income at around the age of 30 than similar non-athletes (Long & Caudill, 1991).
Athletes had an accepted and relatively high status in the student body and, for student-
athletes from less privileged social classes, athletics provided scholarships and a desirable social
status and identity (Beyer & Hannah, 2000; Nigro, 2012; Suggs, 2009). This social status of
being a student-athlete is reinforced as institutions invest in the prestige and prominence that
athletics brings (Suggs, 2009b). Beyer and Hannah (2000) added that the athletic bodies of male
and female athletes could also make them desirable sex objects and models for others to emulate
due to the rigors of training and exercise that keep them more physically fit than most of their
fellow students. Also, the values that student-athletes are taught in college athletics are so
consonant with business values that many go on to become leading business people after
graduation.
Penick (1924) highlighted the pros and cons of intercollegiate athletics from 1924, which
remain true today. Among the more common characteristics were the concepts of teamwork,
winning or losing graciously, a healthy respect for others, self-control, discipline, and loyalty
(Penick, 1924). These traits have been often repeated over the years and lead to the theory that
intercollegiate athletics does more than provide value in achieving the university’s mission of
developing young men and women of character, as “athletics was invaluable as an educational
adjunct but a serious liability when given the place of first importance” (Penick, 1924, p.82).
Even a century ago, athletics created challenges in its purpose to the institution, but student-
athlete development remains consistent to today’s standards.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 42
Student-Athlete Retention
Being on a team and representing one’s institution provides a strong sense of belonging
that translates to a positive view of the school and higher retention rates (Museus & Quaye,
2009; Strayhorn, 2010; Tinto, 2017). Retention is a challenge at most universities, and, for
minorities and other disadvantaged groups, this problem is heightened due to the additional
pressure of being a student-athlete (Jolly, 2008; Person & Lenoir, 1997; Weiss & Robinson,
2013). Student-athletes have the challenges of financing their education, fitting into the athletic
culture, balancing academic commitments and athletic obligations, maintaining their health and
fitness, and having a social life (Jolly, 2008; Gayles, 2009). Athletics provides a family and
support system that these student-athletes can depend on.
Tinto (2017) defined sense of belonging as a bond, often expressed as a commitment,
which serves to bind the individual to the group or community even when challenges arise
(p. 258). Student-athletes build this bond with their teammates, coaches, athletic staff and other
student-athletes since there are regular meetings and opportunities to interact with these groups.
Tinto added that it is not the engagement per se that drives the sense of belonging; instead, it is
students’ perceptions of their belonging that connects them. As student-athletes practice,
compete and travel, they build these connections with the institution which solidifies their
belongingness and common bond (Museus & Quaye, 2009; Strayhorn, 2010; Tinto, 2017).
Weiss and Robinson (2013) stated that most of a student-athlete’s life takes place outside
the classroom and, to a large extent, away from their studies. Whether or not these individuals
felt like they fit in socially at a college or university could influence their success and,
subsequently, their retention. Just as with their non-athletic classmates, social integration is
linked to academic success. The majority of student-athletes spend a great deal of time
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 43
socializing among themselves. To some extent, they can be referred to as a sub-culture on
campus whose associations are akin to that of a fraternity or sorority as they often eat, study, and
party together (Weiss & Robinson, 2013, p. 88). This subculture of athletics directly influences
student learning and personal development. Gayles (2009) noted that several studies focused on
the career maturity of athletes relative to their nonathlete peers, and evidence suggested that
athletes tend to have higher levels of career maturity and psychosocial development than their
non-athletic peers. The sense of belonging that being on a team provides extends beyond
friendship and social class. It keeps student-athletes on campus working together and supporting
each other to graduation.
Theoretical Framework
Complexity leadership is an emergent theory based on group cohesion and brokerage
(Arena & Uhl-Bien, 2016; Morrison, 2010; Northouse, 2018). Group cohesion refers to how
connected an individual is to others in a group. The athletics director needs to be involved with
each coach and team so that they work in harmony. Brokerage refers to being the bridge
between groups (Arena & Uhl-Bien, 2016, p. 22). The athletics director leads the department
and serves as the liaison among university administration, faculty, media, parents, sponsors, and
other universities. For individuals, being in a broker role has three specific competitive
advantages: wider access to diverse information, early access to new information, and control
over the diffusion on information (Arena & Uhl-Bien, 2016, p. 23).
Athletics has many layers as a department for the university, and managing internal and
external stakeholders is a critical mission that requires a special type of leadership. Complexity
leadership theory focuses on the strategies and behaviors that encourage learning, creativity, and
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 44
adaptation in complex organizational systems (Northouse, 2018, p.260). The following section
described how complexity leadership theory applies to the work of athletics directors.
Complexity leadership theory states that despite widespread belief that the role of the
leader is to manage conflict, the conflict experienced in the dynamic tension between the two
systems is actually the key to innovation and adaptability in organizations (Arena & Uhl-Bien,
2016). A common saying among athletic administrators is that the student-athletes get the
trophies, coaches get the credit, and athletics directors get the blame. Being an athletics director
is about managing stakeholders so that the institution wins.
Mendes, Gomes, Marques-Quinteiro, Lind, and Curral (2016) noted that complexity
leadership theory regards leadership as a shared emergent process where individuals and teams
interact and learn from each other to become novel and adaptive. One example of this is
attendance at athletics contests. When ticket sales are low, coaches and staff come together to
attract more fans to the games. Coaches go out into the community and use their status to build
interest by visiting local schools, hosting camps or clinics, or by giving interviews on radio and
television. Athletics staff would create promotions so that fans had opportunities to win prizes,
be a part of half-time events, sit in VIP seats, and other marketing tactics. Everyone needed to
work together to build a fan friendly experience that wins the customer over and has them
coming back for more. According to complexity leadership theory, leadership functions are not
considered to be restricted to one specific person. Instead, complexity leadership theory
emphasizes creating organizational conditions that enable effective, but largely unspecified,
future adaptive states. This means that formal leaders are not in full control of organizational
dynamics, and co-workers are empowered to collectively learn and implement new solutions.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 45
From an athletics director’s perspective, complexity leadership theory requires an
understanding of three different types of situational challenges. The first is technical in nature,
the second is technical with an adaptive dimension, and the third is adaptive in nature
(Northouse, 2018, p. 261). An example of a technical challenge is managing the budgets for the
various sports and making sure that the programs have appropriate funding for the year. These
problems are clearly defined and a regular part of the work responsibility. An example of the
second situation of technical with an adaptive dimension is how athletics programs handle
scholarships. Athletics directors provide the overall number of scholarships available, but it is
up to the coaches to recruit the students and make sure they can contribute to their teams.
Coaches and administrators need to work together to find the right mix of scholarship funding
while also building a good profile of students to represent the institution.
The third challenge is dealing with adaptive challenges. These concern situations that
include assumptions, perceptions, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors (Northouse, 2018, p. 262). An
example of this is dealing with an off-the-field matter, such as drug use. While there are policies
and procedures for drug use, the way in which one manages this situation often dictates the long-
term success of the student-athlete. Complexity leadership theory provides a lens for examining,
managing and leading change and schools (Morrison, 2010). This theory can be applied to
intercollegiate athletics since, in the example above, drug use among student-athletes is a one-
on-one issue. Faculty, parents, teammates, coaches, media, and other teams could be brought
into this incident and managing the situation for all stakeholders requires special training and
tools.
Complexity leadership theory provides the right framework for understanding athletics
directors and how they use their position to highlight the nonfinancial value to the institution.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 46
Interviews with athletics directors included questions related to complexity leadership theory to
understand how they used this theory in their daily tasks. There are many internal and external
stakeholders involved with athletics, and this theory provides a valuable perspective in
understanding how successful athletics directors manage all of them.
Conclusion
Chapter Two reviewed the history of intercollegiate athletics and the governance
structure of NCAA Division I, II, and III. The chapter also presented an overview of athletics
directors and women in athletics. This chapter explored the national scope of intercollegiate
athletics and its financial benefits. Non-financial benefits were discussed next, including
recruitment, school spirit, Title IX, and student-athlete development. The chapter concluded
with a discussion of the theoretical framework grounding this study. Chapter Three focuses on
the methodology for the study and describe in detail how the study was conducted.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 47
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
This chapter provides an overview for this qualitative study, based on interviews and
surveys of collegiate athletics directors in NCAA member schools from Divisions I, II and III.
Athletics directors provided a unique perspective that is not currently reflected in research about
collegiate athletics. Gaining first-hand knowledge from this source was an important step in
answering the research questions presented in this study. As Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
explained, qualitative research has four main characteristics: a focus on process, understanding
and meaning; the researcher as the primary instrument of data collection and analysis; an
inductive process; and a product that is richly descriptive.
This research was based on data collected from athletics directors. In addition, with the
wide cross section of universities across the country that sponsor college sports, there were best
practices and success stories that each had and which this study sought to illustrate. The research
question guiding this study asked, “What non-financial benefit, if any, does having
intercollegiate athletics provide to the university?”
Site Selection
This study did not focus on one particular site or location, but involved participation from
athletics directors at NCAA Division I, II and III universities. Examining the perspectives of a
broad range of athletics directors across all three NCAA divisions was appropriate due to the
diversity of colleges, locations, and athletics departments. Although each university is unique,
the aim was to identify similarities.
No specific institutions were included or excluded. Collecting data from NCAA
Divisions I, II, and III was important in providing a broad overview from the many different
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 48
types of programs in the nation. The survey included demographic information to help identify
potential interviewees, such as division, region of the country, and institutional size or type.
Population and Sample
The population studied included all current athletics directors at NCAA I, II, or III
institutions, which represented 1,100 individuals. There were no restrictions on the experience
level of the survey respondents; their perspectives were measured equally whether they had held
the position for a month or for 30 years, as years on the job does not equate to knowledge of the
job. The reasoning for this decision was that some athletics directors may have been in college
athletics for decades but never in the director role. Additionally, those who may have been an
athletics director for years may have been at only one institution and/or isolated from other
duties due to the size and scope of the institution. Incidentally, the same held true for geographic
restrictions of schools, size of athletics programs, or sports offered. This study reviewed all of
the variations of college athletics to highlight the differences and showcase the similarities with
the goal of providing a comprehensive analysis of this industry.
College athletics varies across the country in size, budget, and resources. The purpose of
this study was to examine this diversity to highlight the common traits that showcase the value it
brings to the institution. What worked for one institution may not work for another, but sharing
these commonalities was important for the industry.
The method used to recruit interview participants was purposive sampling (Maxwell,
2013). Due to the range and broad set of knowledge, the interviewees were selected deliberately
to provide information that was particular to the research questions and goals. Maxwell (2013)
stated that a purposeful selection had five important goals in research, so this study would
comprise a sample of athletics directors representing these factors. First, it achieved
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 49
representativeness of the population sample. As the population group was defined by their job
title, this was easy. Second, it captured the heterogeneity of the population. While noted above
that athletics directors had various degrees of scope, staff, and experience, the surveys helped to
narrow the population sample to a more heterogeneous group. Third was deliberately selecting
individuals who were critical in testing the theories for the study. While there are three distinct
divisions in the NCAA, there could be similarities across the collective that could be highlighted
through the interviews. The fourth goal was to establish particular comparisons to highlight
differences between individuals. Studying the perspective of selected individuals across a large
geographic area was a daunting task considering the many differences that exist. Finally, the
fifth goal was to select participants who would best enable the researcher to answer the research
questions. The survey results highlighted individuals who could help in this study through their
answers and the background information they provided.
The survey was sent to the athletics directors at the top 50 schools in NCAA Division I,
II, and III. The top 50 schools were determined by using the Learfield Director’s Cup standings
published every year. Participants for interviews were chosen based on the demographic and
institutional characteristics noted above. The goal was to interview 5-10 athletics directors, with
a balanced representation of gender, region of the country, division level, institutional type, and
with varying years of experience in the director role. Interviewing 12 to 15 participants was the
appropriate number because it would provide a good sample size to supplement the survey data
and arrive at findings to answer the research question.
Instrumentation
The first tool utilized in this study was a survey designed to collect data from each
respondent on how their athletics department provided non-financial benefits as well as to ensure
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 50
respondents met the study’s criteria (Appendix A). The pre-survey assisted the researcher in
determining which participants met the criteria for participation in the interview based on their
distinct experience and, in some cases, their expertise (Creswell, 2014). This was accomplished
by using a recruitment email with a pre-survey link. Snowball sampling was also used.
The second tool implemented in this study was interviews. Interviews were used to
collect data as the most direct method of learning about the athletic director’s perspective
(Maxwell, 2013, p. 103). Direct questions were asked to determine how the athletics department
created value for their university and probe into participants’ feelings, observations, and past to
collect multiple layers of data to create an accurate depiction of the athletics environment. In
addition, with numerous athletic programs in the country, interviews provided a method to
collect data from a large number of people who had a broad range of ideas.
The rationale for the structure of the interview protocol was to understand the perspective
of the interviewee. Merriam (2009) suggested interviews as a research tool when the behaviors,
feelings, or how people interpret the world around them cannot be observed. Interviews were
appropriate for this study because collegiate athletics is a highly opinionated industry, as
determined by sports reporters, radio talk shows, and any sports fan the day after their team
loses. Collecting data from the athletics director’s perspective provided valuable insight.
The approach used to analyze the interviews was based on ethnographic research.
Lichtman (2014) explained that, in this type of approach, the focus is on understanding the
culture. In the case of this study, the culture was intercollegiate athletics. The data used to study
this culture was based on interviews of athletics directors and data collected through the survey.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 51
Since the NCAA membership is close to 1,100 schools, and each school employs one
primary athletics director, receiving a large response was hoped for but not expected. The goal
was to collect a sample size of 150 surveys and 12 to 15 follow-up interviews.
Data Collection
Data were collected via surveys and follow-up interviews conducted with a sample from
the participant group. Pseudonyms were used to protect the institutions and the interviewees. To
attract athletics directors to complete the survey, they were sent a personal email which included
background information on the study, the researcher’s history in collegiate athletics and
reassurance that the information collected would be anonymous. The email message also
explained the purpose of the study and provided a link to an online survey. The recruitment
email was sent three times.
The survey consisted of open-ended questions and questions for which multiple answers
were provided. The survey also served as the catalyst for an intentional criterion-based selection
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) of participants that allowed for maximum variation and the possibility
of gaining insight into respondents’ essential shared experiences.
The survey was sent in February 2019. The survey included direct questions about
geographic location, types of sports offered, relationship with administration, budget, and other
factors. Approximately two weeks were allocated for the potential participants to respond to the
survey. The researcher sent reminder emails before the survey’s closing date. Once the closing
date passed, a thank you email was sent to the participants who responded to the survey.
After the survey, a separate email was sent to potential interview participants to select 8
to 15 per division who met the study criteria and wanted to participate in a follow-up interview.
Each survey included a question requesting their participation in the interview. If they selected
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 52
yes, they were contacted separately. Only five athletics directors stated they would like to
participate. The email included the purpose of the study, the role of the researcher, the
participant’s role, a discussion of confidentiality, and the timeframe of the study. Follow-up
emails were sent by the researcher to schedule time and date of the interview
To conduct the interviews, a date, time, and location were suggested by the researcher to
contact the respondent by phone. Since the researcher was not on the mainland during the
interview period, phone interviews were conducted. Confirmation emails were sent to confirm
the date, time, and location and to thank the participants for their willingness to take part in the
study. On the day of the interview, the researcher provided background information to the
participant before beginning. The information included guidelines of how the interview was
conducted, how anonymity would be ensured by assigning a pseudonym to the campus and to the
participant, that the interview would be recorded, that they had the option to answer or not
answer any of the questions presented, and that they could end the interview at any time.
Interviews were conducted with individuals who met the criteria established by the
researcher, determined by the survey, and who were willing to participate in the study. The
researcher conducted semi-structured interviews to capture common experiences and points of
view. Semi-structured interviews allowed the researcher to combine structured interview
questions with the freedom to determine the order of the questions that were asked and the
wording that were used to ask the questions (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This
style of interview question allowed the researcher to focus on active listening through the use of
open-ended questions (Creswell, 2014). The researcher guided the conversations but also
allowed the discussions to naturally take the direction that was comfortable for the respondents.
The interviews consisted of 13 open-ended questions structured to encourage the participants to
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 53
engage in detailed explanation and storytelling. The respondents had 50- to 60-minute
conversations regarding their perceptions of the non-financial benefits of intercollegiate athletics.
Data from the interviews were collected on the researcher’s personal cell phone and lap
top as audio files. Notes taken during the interviews were also stored on the researcher’s
personal computer. Only the researcher and the transcription service had access to the audio-
recordings. All data collected were only used for educational purposes. Personal identities were
shielded through the use of pseudonyms and audio-recordings were scheduled to be destroyed in
June 2019. All personal information, research data, and related records were stored on the
researcher’s password protected personal computer.
Data Analysis
Merriam (2009) stated that, for data analysis to be successful, organized management of
the data is key. In addition, analysis should be conducted during the data collection process as
well (Merriam, 2009). After interview, the researcher analyzed the collected information and
created general categories or codes to organize the data and identify emerging themes. It was
important to simultaneously categorize and make connections from the interviews while the data
were still fresh (Maxwell, 2013). After the codes were identified, transcripts from the interviews
were reviewed and scrutinized for potential patterns or themes. Through this process, Merriam
(2009) contends that the interpretations from the data consolidation help to answer the research
question.
In the process of coding, the material was organized into chunks before developing
meaning from it (Creswell, 2009). The three types of coding used to analyze that data were open
coding, selective coding, and axial coding. Open coding is the act of analyzing data with the
intent of gaining knowledge about the experience and to create general themes. Axial coding
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 54
assisted in explaining links between categories. It was used to identify significant categories
within data (Creswell, 2009). Selective coding is the process of identifying one category that
creates a general explanation and creates a theory about the experience. Through the interviews,
codes emerged based on different types of benefits that athletics provided the institution and
affected what successful athletics programs did for students. Other categories emerged as the
respondents provided deeper answers.
It was the researcher’s task to identify discrete ideas, concepts, events and experiences
incorporated into respondents’ descriptions. The purpose was to explain how, in their
experience, their programs provided support to the institution they served. In addition, data were
coded that reflected or refuted the literature and past studies (Creswell, 2009).
The themes and patterns discovered emerged from the constant comparison method,
which was used to develop concepts from the data by coding and analyzing at the same time
(Kolb, 2012). The data were organized and analyzed using substantive categories where
information was descriptive and included respondents’ beliefs and concepts. The data analysis
began after each interview session and continued with interpretive analysis until the completion
of the study. It was the responsibility of this researcher to continually sort through data while
analyzing and coding information in search of integrating categories, common themes, and key
experiences of the respondents (Kolb, 2012).
Validity
To create trustworthiness in the design of the study, Stringer (2007) suggested that the
reliability of the study be based on the simplistic analyses of the issues being investigated. In
addition, the study referred to the tactics presented by Miles, Huberman, and Saldana (2014) to
increase confidence that the data were not subject to bias that could weaken or invalidate the
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 55
findings. Also, to ensure the stability or consistency of the responses, triangulation was
incorporated in the different data sources to build themes (Creswell, 2009). In addition, semi-
structured interviews were utilized because they allowed the researcher to have a set of
structured questions to direct the flow of the interview while also allowing the respondents to
add to the questions and share experiences and narratives without being required to answer only
the question that was asked (Creswell, 2009).
To conduct a reliable and valid study, the researcher followed ethical guidelines
presented by Merriam and Tisdell (2016) regarding the protection of subjects from harm, the
right to privacy, the notion of informed consent, and the issue of deception. In addition, due to
the possibility of existing relationships with the interview subjects, a relational ethic was
established so that the respondents did not receive special treatment during the interviews or
have the perception of a friendly, casual approach. In addition, member checking was used
(Maxwell, 2013) which allowed for triangulation through two data sources.
Role of Researcher
Maxwell (2013) suggested that researcher bias can occur when data selection matches
existing assumptions held by the researcher. As the researcher had the same title as respondents
and has served in both Division I and II athletics programs, there was a possibility that the views
of the researcher may match the data collected. In addition, since it is human nature to protect
one’s livelihood, interviewing athletics directors and asking them to justify their department’s
value had an inherent bias on its own.
In addition to researcher bias, reactivity was another potential threat to validity (Maxwell,
2013). Reactivity is the researcher’s influence on participants. Maxwell (2013) argued that it is
impossible to eliminate reactivity completely, so it was important to recognize it and use it
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 56
appropriately. Questions were specific and not general, while eliminating any leading or follow-
up questions. In this study, the researcher had strong bias due to the position the researcher held
at the institution and the experiences that had been collected over the 15 years in the industry.
The researcher had extensive knowledge in the industry and participated in industry conventions
and NCAA committees which provided a broad network and an emotional tie to providing value
to the institution. To remain impartial, the researcher checked these biases throughout the
interviews to make sure the data were objective and not subjective in nature. Personal reflection
was removed through the process which allowed the researcher to maintain professional
standards. Ethical standards were also used as outlined by the institutional review board at the
University of Southern California.
Conclusion
Chapter Three discussed site selection, population and sample, instrumentation, data
collection, data analysis, validity, and the role of researcher. The methodology that was used to
conduct this study assisted in answering the research question and identify the non-financial
benefits of intercollegiate athletics.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 57
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
Eighteen surveys from athletics directors at NCAA Division I, II and III institutions were
collected, and five interviews were conducted. From the data gathered, four emergent themes
evolved: student body enrichment, increased advertising and visibility, stronger community pride
and engagement, and greater societal impact as a result of lessons learned from athletics.
Demographics of Athletics Directors
Qualtrics surveys were sent to 150 of the approximately 1,200 athletics directors across
the NCAA Division I, II, and III membership. Purposive sampling was used to determine this
population by selecting the top 50 schools from NCAA Division I, II, and III during the 2017–
2018 academic year as determined by the Learfield Director’s Cup standings. Of the 150
surveys sent via email, 18 were completed. There were eight surveys completed from NCAA
Division III, seven surveys from NCAA Division II, and three surveys from NCAA Division I.
Surveys came from 11 states in the Northeast, South, Midwest, and West. Three surveys
came from New York. Two came from Pennsylvania and two from Colorado. Other states
represented were Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Illinois, Iowa, California, and
Alaska.
According to the survey, 11 of the 18 respondents had at least 11 years of experience as
athletics directors. Six held their position at least 16 years. Five had 11 to 15 years in the
position. Four had experience of six to ten years. Three respondents had one to five years of
experience. All 18 of the participants had been employed in intercollegiate athletics at least 11
years, which suggests that, for those between 1 and 5 years had worked their way up from
another athletics position into the director role. Of all the survey respondents, only one was a
woman. In determining the background of athletics directors in relation to the job, 11 of the 18
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 58
had experience as a student-athlete in college, and seven had no experience as athletes in college.
Lastly, respondents were highly educated. Eleven had a graduate degree and six earned a
doctorate. Only two athletics directors had only an undergraduate degree.
Five athletics directors were interviewed over the phone between February 25 and March
13, 2019. The pseudonyms for the interviewees were Alan, Brian, Connor, David, and Ethan.
All five interviewees were male. Two were from NCAA Division II and three were from NCAA
Division III institutions. No athletics directors from NCAA Division I institutions participated in
the interviews.
Table 1
Participants’ Background
Demographics of Universities
This section presents an overview of the characteristics of the universities represented by
the athletics directors who participated in the survey and interview. This is important because it
provides background on the diverse athletics programs that each university sponsored. While
universities varied in categories such as geographic location, student population, financial
support, or public versus private, intercollegiate athletics provided some common themes, which
this study sought to highlight.
One visible difference between intercollegiate athletics programs was how many people
attended their contests. This was an important criterion because schools at NCAA Division I, II
and III used this metric in different ways. Schools evaluate the success of the athletics programs
Gender Division Region
Athletics Director
Experience (Years)
Overall Athletics
Experience (Years)
Alan Male III Midwest 12 22
Brian Male III Northeast 8 34
Connor Male II Northwest 1 15
David Male II Southwest 8 35
Ethan Male III East 6 15
Participants Background
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 59
based on attendance by fans, students, alumni, faculty, and staff. In reviewing fan participation
at the various universities, the data varied. Fourteen schools had under 50,000 fans attend all of
their ticketed events through the year. Three schools had between 50,000 and 500,000 fans and
one school had over 500,000 fans attend all of its events.
Title IX requires schools to match its student body ratio of men to women to that of its
athletics department. Question 8 asked for an estimate on the number of females participating in
athletics. Each school had a different makeup but collectively, the survey results showed that the
18 schools had an average of 46% females participating in their athletics programs.
In addition to measuring female participation, schools were asked about the percentage of
minorities in the athletics program (question 13) and those from a low socioeconomic
background (question 14). For minorities, the average among the schools surveyed was 19%.
Fourteen of the 18 respondents also estimated that 24% of their student-athletes came from low
socioeconomic backgrounds.
Another criterion evaluated was student-athlete retention. Student-athlete retention refers
to student-athletes remaining at the institution and not transferring out due to injury, playing
time, or disciplinary action. This was important because recruiting student-athletes to enroll and
compete at the institution takes considerable time, effort, and money. High retention rates
symbolize a stable, successful program. Four respondents reported a 51% to 70% retention rate,
nine reported a 71% to 89% retention rate, and five reported greater than 90% retention rate year
over year.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 60
Emergent Themes
Student Body Enrichment
Of the many benefits that athletics directors mentioned, student body enrichment was the
most consistently discussed. As student-athletes exhibited the values of dedication, commitment,
teamwork and sportsmanship on the field of play, they also brought that onto campus and
classroom life with the general student body. Nearly all of the respondents shared that students
benefited when they interacted with their fellow student-athletes. As Alan explained, “successful
student-athletes develop character and skill sets as a part of a team that help them become better
adults. All students benefit when they live, study, and socialize with these student-athletes.”
From a NCAA Division III institution, Brian stated, “Intercollegiate athletics was not focused on
selling tickets and making revenue. It was more of an educational experience model. College
athletics was integrated into the fabric of the university and was an integral part of the student
experience.”
Athletic competition is only one part of being a student-athlete. Time management,
discipline, and focus are character traits that student-athletes learn by being on a team, and these
are applied when they collaborate with other students over group projects and class assignments.
Conner echoed this sentiment when he stated, “Athletics was tied to the university’s overall
mission even for those who did not compete in athletics. Skills that were learned by competing
in athletics, whether that’s in individual sport to team sports for the student-athlete, were shared
with the overall campus community.”
Peer-to-peer development. The interviews revealed that student-athletes were important
in peer-to-peer character development. Data supported this idea, as 56% of interview
participants highlighted that students learned important lessons of discipline, teamwork, self-
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 61
motivation and character when they interacted with student-athletes. These responses were
collected from answers to Question 3, which asked what benefit intercollegiate athletics had to
the student body. In the interview, Ethan he shared that athletics provide a significant
opportunity for athletes and students to participate in “learned failure, hard work, and time
management which were critical traits that athletes experienced often and shared with their non-
athletics peers.” Ethan also added that students’ engagement to their university was from outside
of the classroom: “College provided opportunities for students to live and learn from different
classmates they might not otherwise work with.”
School spirit. A second way that the student body benefited from intercollegiate athletics
was through school spirit. Interview data supported this position, as half of participants reported
this as one of their main benefits to the students. School spirit was visible in the form of
attendance at sporting events, wearing apparel with school logos, and receiving donations.
Through the survey, school spirit was highlighted as a benefit not only to students but
also throughout the university and the local community. Question 9 asked what benefit athletics
provided to the student body, and school spirit had a 50% frequency. Question 10, about what
benefit athletics provided to the university and school spirit, had a 28% frequency. Question 11
asked what benefit athletics provided to the local community, and athletics directors responded
with school spirit 39% of the time. In the interviews, Alan added, “Athletics was a part of the
vibrancy on campus. Athletics was part of the collegiate experience of young adults learning
how to work and play with one another and find common interests that deepened their
relationship with the school.” Connor stated that, without intercollegiate athletics, the university
would be less emotional, less rewarding, and have less entertainment options for campus and
community.”
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 62
Diversity. A third example of how the student body is enriched is in the diversity that
intercollegiate athletics bring to campus. Participants were asked how the student body benefits
from intercollegiate athletics (Question 9). Of all the answers provided, diversity was cited 33%
of the time. Athletics brought students with a common athletic purpose but who came from
various geographic, financial, ethnic, and social backgrounds. This diversity component was a
common challenge for coaches in trying to blend everyone’s skills together on the field of play,
but, in the overall landscape of the student community, athletics directors believed it was a
strength.
Two interviewees addressed how diversity affected their campus. Connor, who was from
one of the more geographically isolated colleges in the country, stated,
We are a training ground for real life. Members of our teams are among the most diverse
group, culturally, socioeconomically, and geographically. When they interact with local
students who may have never left their hometown, they bring a unique perspective. The
value of that is that the students here learn how to think, act, and live differently than how
they used to.
David, who came from a faith-based institution, saw diversity positively affecting them
as well: “At a faith-based, private school, enrollment favors a social economic clientele.
Athletics scholarships allow the university to bring in student-athletes from a different
background and add to the diversity on campus.” David suggested that being a private school
with high tuition, and special faith-based culture, contributed to a more homogenous student
demographic. Intercollegiate athletics allowed their university to become more diverse as they
recruited based on athletic talent.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 63
Other themes that participants highlighted, but were not as common, included increasing
retention rates, a higher academic profile due to higher student-athlete grade point averages and a
focus on community service. All of these affected the student body experience in a positive
manner.
Increased Advertising and Visibility
The second theme that emerged from the data was that intercollegiate athletics provided
valuable advertising and visibility. Question 10 asked participants what value athletics provided
to the university, and advertising and visibility was listed 61% of the time. Question 11 focused
on what value athletics provided to the local community, and, similarly, advertising and visibility
was listed 72% of the time.
Examining this topic during the interviews, Brian suggested,
University rankings are once a year. On the other hand, athletics is continually ranked in
team standings, polls, and through sports media. A successful athletic program provides
constant visibility of the university’s image and brand which is an advantage in attracting
students for enrollment.
This sentiment was also shared by Alan, Connor, David, and Ethan through the interviews and
was reinforced in Questions 10 and 11 of the survey.
The analogy of athletics as the front porch was often cited, but Connor added, “athletics
represented the institutional brand more than any other unit on campus. Athletics was never the
most important thing but we were the most visible. And with that visibility came responsibility.”
The female respondent noted how athletics’ visibility benefited the institution. She wrote that
athletics provided valuable marketing due to the number of televised events they produced, and
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 64
athletics increased the quality of life of the community because of the economic impact it
brought.
Prospective students are affected by the consistent visibility that athletics brings to the
university. Students choose from thousands of schools across the country, so differentiating
one’s institution provides an advantage in recruiting. Having intercollegiate athletics is one
element in a successful advertising campaign for the institution. David stated, “enrollment
increased as a result of athletics success. The academic reputation was directly related when our
teams won. Prospective students were attracted to schools that won and this allowed increased
applications which made for a more competitive class.” Brian reaffirmed this as he stated,
“Athletics helped in the admissions process. Student-athletes in general had higher GPAs than
the student body and this translated to a higher academic profile.” Surveys revealed that an
attractive college experience was as important as the academic reputation in enrolling high-
quality students. Question 9 focused on how the student body was impacted by athletics, and
61% of the responses stated that students had a better collegiate experience due to having
athletics. Question 10 focused on how the university was impacted by athletics, and 61% also
reported that students have a better collegiate experience due to having athletics. Participants
felt that this was the most important non-financial benefit to the institution. An attractive college
experience includes areas in which intercollegiate athletics are strong, such as building school
spirit, diversity, community service, and retention.
Alan suggested that student-athlete community service also supports the university’s
profile. He stated, “when our teams raised $50,000 for cancer research, gave back to Alzheimer
research, participated in sustainability goals, or other non-profit causes, that became news in the
community and increased the reputation of the teams and university.” David added, “these
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 65
functions” allowed for community engagement which created a landing spot for the community
to come to campus and built affinity to the university through athletics.
Stronger Community Pride and Engagement
A third theme that emerged was that intercollegiate athletics created community pride
and engagement. Intercollegiate athletics’ exposure provides increased opportunities for the
local community and the university to engage with one another. Connor observed that “athletics
assisted in creating unity and pride on campus as well as the broader community.” David added,
“football provides an opportunity for staff and community to gather and socialize under a
common bond.” Brian’s example of engagement was, “when hosting the conference
championship for men’s hockey, we sold out our tickets and half of the fans were from the
community. We recognized that athletics provided reasonable entertainment options for those
colleges located outside of large cities.” David added, “Due to our athletics facilities, we were
able to host community events like concerts, motivational speakers and special interest events
that couldn’t be done if we didn’t have athletics.”
Ethan stated,
“At larger NCAA Division I institutions, community pride was generally a function of
the wins and championships that they brought to the institution. For NCAA Division II
and III schools, it was more of the connection they built with the alumni and local fans.”
Connor related how the popularity of their hall of fame dinner brought the alumni and university
together. This, in turn, created school pride and increased donations. David stated,
“Homecoming was one of our signature events throughout the year because it
reconnected our community and alumni over a football game. Multiple departments at
the institution were involved in the planning process and we got lots of support from the
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 66
restaurants, hotels, and stores to welcome everyone back. Homecoming became the
university’s outreach event, not just a football game.”
Another way the local community appreciates athletics is in how sporting events help
local businesses like hotels, restaurants, retail, and other companies make money through
economic development. Question 11 asked what athletics provided the community, and 56% of
respondents stated that athletics drive revenue to local businesses. While selling tickets, parking,
concessions and apparel were a direct financial benefit to athletics, it was the visiting team and
their families’ hotel stays, restaurant, rental car, and other purchases that proved how different
athletics is to other departments on campus. Connor summed it up when he stated,
“Without athletics, you wouldn’t have as many visitors on campus which reduced your
connections to the community and made the institution less inclusive and less vibrant.
Athletics was the front porch that invited its neighbors to come visit. Without it, you
were a home with the lights out and a lock on the front door.”
Greater Societal Impact
The fourth theme that emerged from the surveys and interviews was that intercollegiate
athletics provides a societal impact to the world it serves. Two major components on which
respondents focused regarding social impact were that athletics teaches valuable life skills and
athletics provides educational opportunities for those from challenged backgrounds. Society
benefits when young adults learn the values and skills that help them succeed in the real world.
Question 12 focused on how athletics benefited society. Over half of the responses were
that athletics teaches values leaders need. Athletics is a team-oriented program. Even in sports
where one competes individually, like golf and gymnastics, teamwork is still ingrained into the
student-athletes. Alan stated, “Teamwork was essential. It was about humans getting to know
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 67
humans on the field of play, during practice, while travelling and in class. Students learned how
to put aside differences and work together on a common objective.” David used the movie
Bryan’s Song as a metaphor for life: “Sports created a common bond and taught us how to
negate hurdles and issues because we were all on the same team and those differences
disappeared when we strove for the same goal.” Brian added, “Coaches were trying to find top
student-athletes. It did not matter what one’s background was. What mattered was if you could
perform. Athletics was about learning how to succeed on your own merits.” Ethan added,
“Athletics provided a positive educational experience that prepared them for life. Working with
others provided heterogeneity versus homogeneity. Team environment encouraged inclusivity.
These were all skills that would prepare them for life after college.”
The second societal impact was that intercollegiate athletics allow students an
opportunity to afford college due to athletics scholarships. One survey question asked how
athletics benefited society, and 39% respondents noted that athletics allows students from
financially challenged backgrounds, first-generation college students, and minorities to attend
college. Alan stated, “athletics provided first-generation student-athletes an opportunity to
attend its institution. With high tuition and other challenges facing these students, athletics
provided an opportunity to break the cycle.” Brian added that athletics also supports those from
a low socioeconomic background while Connor’s institution provided financial aid and academic
promise to help them get an education.
Conclusion
This chapter provided an overview of the survey and interview responses regarding
participants’ perspectives of the non-financial benefit of intercollegiate athletics. Demographics
of the participants and universities were reported to provide a perspective on how diverse
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 68
athletics programs are across the country. In addition, background on the differences among
NCAA Division I, II, and III were highlighted and similarities were explored.
Four main themes emerged from the data: student body enrichment, increased advertising
and visibility, stronger community pride and engagement, and greater societal impact as a result
of lessons learned from athletics. Chapter Five relates these emerging theories to the theoretical
framework, answer the research question, and discuss implications as well as future research.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 69
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION
This final chapter provides discussion of the findings in context of the theoretical
framework and research questions. In addition, this chapter also offers recommendations for
practice and implications for research.
As discussed in Chapter One, the change in state funding and the growth of alternate
models for higher education pose a serious challenge to the traditional college model and to
intercollegiate athletics. Some universities have dealt with the financial challenges by cutting
expenses without measuring the non-financial benefits that would also be lost. The problem
stems from college athletics being historically viewed as either a budgetary asset or drain and
less as a value proposition for the institution. Most universities looked at athletics programs as
line items on a budget and made decisions based on this premise. The purpose of this study was
to explore how intercollegiate athletics may provide non-financial value to institutions. In an era
in which collegiate athletics and big business are synonymous, and much is known about its
financial risks and benefits, this study examined often overlooked impacts of athletics. This
qualitative study examined the perspectives of athletics directors from NCAA I, II, and III
universities.
Research Questions and Responses
The research question that formed the basis for the study asked, “What non-financial
benefit(s), if any, does having intercollegiate athletics provide to the university?” The data were
collected from athletics directors at NCAA Division I, II, and III institutions through surveys and
interviews and revealed four specific answers to this research question: student body enrichment,
increased advertising and visibility, stronger community pride and engagement, and greater
societal impact as a result of lessons learned from athletics.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 70
Discussion of Findings
The data yielded four clear findings as noted above. Athletics directors across NCAA
Division I, II, and III collectively agreed that intercollegiate athletics provides important value to
the institution. These four findings are discussed below through the lens of complexity
leadership theory.
Table 2 outlines the four main nonfinancial benefits that intercollegiate athletics provides
in comparison to leadership styles of group cohesion, brokerage, and situational challenges.
Northouse (2018) adds that complexity leadership theory is managed through three types of
situational challenges: technical, technical with an adaptive dimension, and adaptive. Student
enrichment is an adaptive challenge because it is centered around assumptions, perceptions,
beliefs, attitudes and behaviors (Northouse, 2018). Two of the three types of situational
challenges are included in this comparison.
Table 2
Athletics Directors and Complexity Leadership Theory
Non Financial Values
of Athletics
Group Cohesion -
athletics directors
connection to the
group
Brokerage - being the bridge from
group to group
Situational
Challenges
Student Enrichment
School spirit, diversity, higher
quality pool Adaptive
Advertising and
Visibility
Free publicity
from media
coverage Adaptive
Community Pride and
Engagement
Alumni
connection Entertainment value
Technical &
Adaptive
Societal Impact
Leadership skills, educational
opportunities
Technical &
Adaptive
Athletics Directors and Complexity Leadership Theory
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 71
Student Body Enrichment
According to the interviews and surveys, school spirit was regularly cited as a major
factor in how athletics benefits the student body. Toma (1999) stated that institutional life is
often as much about student activities and residence life as it is about the production and
dissemination of knowledge. Data gathered from the interview participants supported Toma’s
assertion because, in their daily duties, their role is to connect athletics to the university and
subsequently connect the university to the community and beyond.
Another factor that added to student body enrichment was the added diversity that
intercollegiate athletes brings to the institution. Weiss and Robinson (2013) stated that most of a
student-athlete’s life takes place outside the classroom away from their studies. Comingling
student-athletes and students in residence halls, classes, and social functions was beneficial to
both the student-athlete and to the student body.
Published literature also noted that intercollegiate athletics attracts students and faculty,
and athletics helps universities achieve their goals as a result of increased applications and a
higher-quality pool of students (Beyer & Hannah, 2000; Denhart et al, 2010; Feezell, 2013),
which also aligns with findings from this study.
In addition to a higher-quality pool, intercollegiate athletics expands the pool of
applicants with the influx of female student-athletes added to campuses. Title IX open doors for
women to admissions, academic majors, classes, and vocational education. It also mandated
equal access and equal treatment once they were admitted (Cheslock, 2008; Galles, 2004;
Lumpkin, 2012). This combination of high achieving student-athletes and equally high
achieving women into colleges elevated the student body profile and enriched the student
experience.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 72
Complexity leadership theory. The theme of student body enrichment can be examined
through the lens of complexity leadership theory. Athletics directors act from a brokerage
position (Table 2) because they bring together various groups to accomplish the goal. Athletics
brokerage is about making connections. Arena and Uhl-Bien (2016) define brokerage as being
the bridge between groups. Examples of athletics directors brokering student body enrichment is
by fostering relationships between the student body and athletics contests by giving away
promotional items at games, hosting pep rallies on campus to encourage school spirit, or
providing special student section seating to allow closer access to the game floor.
Increased Advertising and Visibility
Intercollegiate athletics puts universities in the news daily, and one only has to scan the
newspapers, radio, websites, or television to see how much attention intercollegiate athletics
programs receive. Two university presidents stated athletics helped save their institutions by
increasing their visibility and increasing enrollment (Mixon & Trevino, 2002; Sander, 2008a).
Their investment in athletics helped to unify the faculty and students around a common cause
while also increasing enrollment.
When teams do well and achieve great accomplishments, this success translates to an
increased reputation for the student-athletes and the rest of the university. The increased
attention that athletics bring to universities is valuable air time that helps differentiate the
university. As the participants noted, they are in the center of the web where they connect
externally with prospective students, alum, donors, and corporations and internally with faculty,
staff, university administration, and trustees. When athletics is in the news, managing the
message and navigating among groups is a difficult task athletics directors are required to
handle.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 73
Complexity leadership theory. Complexity leadership theory connects to increased
advertising and visibility when the athletics director acts through a group cohesion lens.
Athletics programs generally receive free publicity and promotion from the media. The
relationship between media and athletics is a daily partnership that is visible through print,
television, and radio coverage and can be collaborative, combative, non-existent, or apathetic. It
is the responsibility of the athletics director to manage these relationships in a way that best
serves the institution (Table 2). Arena and Uhl-Bien (2016) suggested that the conflict
experienced in the dynamic tension between athletics and the media is actually the key to
innovation and adaptability. When athletics directors successfully manage the media
relationship, institutions are seen in a favorable light.
Stronger Community Pride and Engagement
The third non-financial benefit of athletics is the pride and engagement it brings to the
community. For small schools or schools located in rural areas, participants said that their events
provide the community valuable entertainment options. For larger schools or schools that have
televised contracts, these events also connect the university to alumni. Interviewees suggested
that events on campus provide revenue not only for the institution, but also for the local
community. When apparel, food, and beverages are sold at events, they are normally procured
from local companies, and, when fans visit, they are paying for hotels, restaurants, and other
attractions during their stay. When the community partners with intercollegiate athletics through
sponsorships and advertising, a natural tie-in forms through increased awareness and consumer
loyalty among target customers (Ko & Kim, 2014; Toma, 1999). Athletics directors are engaged
in fostering the relationships between athletics and the external community and alumni base.
From large state schools in metropolitan areas to small schools in rural areas, athletics directors
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 74
all share the same goal of connecting fans to athletics and providing school solidarity (Denhart,
2010).
Complexity leadership theory. For this nonfinancial benefit, athletics directors manage
community pride and engagement from both a group cohesion and brokerage perspective (Table
2). In connecting with alumni, group cohesion is relevant as a relationship with a defined set of
external stakeholders. From an entertainment value benefit, athletics directors should implement
a brokerage leadership style, since there are multiple, non-related entities. This leadership theory
is suited to athletics since it is a shared emergent process wherein individuals and teams need to
learn and adapt consistently (Mendes et al., 2016).
Encouraging community pride and engagement requires a technical and adaptive nature.
This refers to a team approach where athletics directors, coaches, student-athletes, and staff work
together to build and maintain the relationships with the community. The athletics director
cannot do this alone, and the most successful programs accomplish this through a wide network
that is inclusive of other university departments, such as development, alumni relations, and
university communications.
Greater Societal Impact
The fourth finding reveals the importance of athletics to society through developing
leaders and providing educational opportunities for disadvantaged students. Interviewees shared
college is a training ground for life, and intercollegiate athletics helps to develop and prepare
student-athletes for leadership positions. Boone, Kurtz and Fleenor (1988) reported that chief
executive officers were 12 times more likely to have taken part in intercollegiate athletics than
their counterparts and Gayles (2009) added that student-athletes have a higher maturity level
than those who are not student-athletes.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 75
The findings suggest that student-athletes work with teammates from different
personalities and backgrounds; balance the rigors of schoolwork, practice, travel, competition,
and a social life; and have self-motivation and discipline until graduation. The habits that
student-athletes learn in college will give them an advantage with many employers. Athletics
directors play a key role in that development process by managing the coaches to whom student-
athletes report. Finding the right balance among school, athletics, and personal growth is a team
effort that the athletics department strives to achieve.
The other main idea that shows how athletics impacts society is by providing educational
opportunities for disadvantaged students. Intercollegiate athletics removes financial and social
barriers and allows student-athletes to compete on an even level. From an institutional
perspective, grooming students into well-rounded adults is the primary mission for colleges and
universities. Penick (1924) recognized the benefits of intercollegiate athletics, which included
teamwork, sportsmanship, respect, self-control, and discipline one hundred years ago. These
traits stay true today, and having intercollegiate athletics provides a “fast forward” approach to
this goal and for those students from disadvantaged backgrounds and challenges, they can reap
those rewards.
Complexity leadership theory. Athletics directors manage societal impact through a
brokerage approach. They foster and steward leadership skills and educational opportunities
from a team approach when they coordinate support for student-athlete goals in academics,
athletics, and social development with a myriad of coaches, counselors, peers, and mentors. It is
this type of leadership style that Morrison (2010) suggested provides a lens for examining,
managing and leading change at schools (Table 2).
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 76
Recommendations for Practice
The data collected from surveys and interviews involved participants from NCAA
Division II and III institutions, with no participants from Division I. As a result, these
recommendations may be most applicable to NCAA Division II and II environments.
Implement Non-Financial Benefits Review of Athletics Department
Findings from this study suggest that intercollegiate athletics provides value not only to
the student-athletes, coaches, and staff in the department, but also to many other departments and
groups as well. Schools vary in size, scope, and funding across the NCAA landscape, but
participants noted common benefits in the survey and the interviews. The National Association
of College and University Business Officers (1993) recognized that athletics has additional value
outside of ticket sales, and this could lead to increased enrollment among other benefits.
Evaluating these non-financial benefits would be a first step in establishing an athletics
department’s true value to the institution.
Quantify the Non-Financial Benefits into Dollar Value
The second step would be to quantify the non-financial benefits, so that they can be
compared to the current financial benefits that athletics provides. In the surveys, 72% of
athletics directors noted that intercollegiate athletics provides valuable advertising and visibility.
With such a high percentage across the participants, it would be important to place a value on
what the advertising brings to the institution in this case.
Communicate Results of Non-Financial Benefits Review to Stakeholders
Once non-financial benefits are identified and quantified, the next step would be to
communicate those results to all stakeholder partners. Athletics directors would need to utilize
complexity leadership theory to maintain the bridges where they exist and to build bridges where
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 77
they do not. Northouse (2018) noted that this theory focuses on the strategies and behaviors that
encourage learning, creativity, and adaptation in complex organizational systems. When all the
stakeholders are aware and understand athletics’ value, a higher level of collaboration is
possible. Athletics directors are key members in getting this information shared.
Review Athletics’ Mission and Incorporate Benefits to Students, University, Community
and Society
The final recommendation is for athletics directors to review their department’s mission
statement. With the rise of multi-million-dollar salaries, facilities, and television contracts
(Desrochers, 2010), intercollegiate athletics has become a big business. Focusing on the dollars
is important, but the non-financial value athletics brings to the institution needs to be recognized.
Once the non-financial value is quantified and explained to the stakeholders, athletics
justification to university administration, faculty, and students can be aligned.
Apply the Athletics Department Support Structure Model to the Larger Student Body
Intercollegiate athletics has shown that minoritized student-athletes adapt and succeed at
the college level as a result of the resources that athletics offers. They receive social and
emotional support from fellow teammates (McLaughlin, 2014), have academic resources to keep
them on track to graduation, and are kept on task towards their goals with their coaches (Denhart
et al., 2010). As a result, student-athlete retention is increased (NCAA, 2017) and they have a
more rewarding college experience which benefits all student-athletes. Adapting this structure to
benefit the larger, general student body population would have a positive impact on the entire
institution.
Recommendations for Future Research
Intercollegiate athletics has been the target of much scrutiny due to increased spending
over the years. Schools compete against each other in terms of facilities and coaches’ salaries as
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 78
the popularity of college sports increases. What is lost in the public debate regarding
intercollegiate athletics is the purpose and value of having these teams compete and represent the
institution. This study recommends two areas for research to aid in future study in this area.
The first is creating a non-financial athletics model to assist universities and athletics
directors understand the impact of their programs on the institution. Some universities conduct
economic development studies of the direct impact of a college football bowl game or bringing
visiting teams to campus. This study would be different in that it would focus on the less
obvious non-financial benefits of student body connection to athletics and the impact of school
spirit on retention, enrollment, and community support. Measuring these factors could help
justify intercollegiate athletics’ role as integral to the college experience at both small and large
institutions.
The second research opportunity is in creating a model specifically focused on athletic-
alum success. Research from Denhart et al. (2010) found that student-athletes learn leadership
skills, a competitive spirit, and the importance of cooperation and time management. A study of
former student-athletes would be important in verifying the accuracy of these claims.
Conclusion
The study centered on athletics directors at NCAA Division I, II and III institutions.
Surveys and interviews were conducted to collect perceptions and knowledge of these leaders on
what they felt were important traits that athletics brought to the institution. This study gave
voice to the athletics directors to discuss what intercollegiate athletics means to their institutions.
This study outlined the non-financial benefits that athletics provides the institution and raised
four main findings of student body enrichment, increased advertising and visibility, community
engagement, and societal impact.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 79
Intercollegiate athletics has been a part of the college experience for over 100 years
(Smith, 2000) but has gone through major changes recently due to increased spending on
coaches’ salaries, facilities, and student-athlete recruitment. Some colleges are not able to keep
pace with the spending and have shut down or canceled their athletics programs. Through all of
the changes, intercollegiate athletics continues to face challenges justifying its value.
Intercollegiate athletics influences admissions, student life, advertising, fundraising, alumni
relations, sales, parking, concessions, and apparel sales. When university leaders understand
how to manage athletics, athletics can be a strong investment in the institution’s future, and
recognizing non-financial benefits is the key to unlocking the true potential of athletics at an
institution.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 80
REFERENCES
Alexander, D. L., & Kern, W. (2010). Does athletic success generate legislative largess from
sports-crazed representatives? The impact of athletic success on state appropriations to
colleges and universities. International Journal of Sport Finance, 5(4), 253.
Arena, M. J., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2016). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting from human capital
to social capital. People and Strategy, 39(2), 22.
Baxter, V., & Lambert, C. (1990). The national collegiate athletic association and the governance
of higher education. The Sociological Quarterly, 31(3), 403–421.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1990.tb00336.x
Beyer, J. M., & Hannah, D. R. (2000). The cultural significance of athletics in US higher
education. Journal of Sport Management, 14(2), 105–132.
https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.14.2.105
Boone, L. E., Kurtz, D. L., & Fleenor, C. P. (1988). CEOs: Early signs of a business career.
Business Horizons, 31(5), 20-24.
Brand, M. (2006). The role and value of intercollegiate athletics in universities. Journal of the
Philosophy of Sport, 33(1), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2006.9714687
Breech, J. (2018). Packers Financials show that NFL made billions despite national anthem
controversy. CBS Sports. Retrieved from https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/packers-
financials-show-that-nfl-made-billions-despite-national-anthem-controversy/
Budig, G. A. (2007). An athletic arms race. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(4), 283–284.
https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170708900410
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 81
Burakowski, K. A. (2012). Organizational commitment of NCAA Division II assistant coaches:
Exploring issues of retention (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3550321)
Carrier, B. L. (2013). Student athlete success: Impact of sport participation on student
engagement among NAIA and NCAA institutions. Jackson, TN: Union University.
Chen, G. (2018, March 7). Hello budget cuts, goodbye sports: the threat to athletics. Public
School Review. Retrieved from https://publicschoolreview.com
Cheslock, J. (2008). Who’s playing college sports? Money, race and gender. New York, NY:
Women’s Sports Foundation.
Corlett, J. A. (2013). On the role and value of intercollegiate athletics in universities. Journal of
Academic Ethics, 11(3), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-013-9188-5
Cowley, W. H. (1999) Athletics in American colleges. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(5),
494–503, https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1999.1178078
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Denhart, M., Villwock, R., & Vedder, R. (2010). The academics–athletics trade-off: Universities
and intercollegiate athletics. In J. C. Hall (Ed.), Doing more with less (pp. 95–136). New
York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5960-7_5
Desrochers, D. M. (2013). Academic spending versus athletic spending: Who wins? Washington,
DC: Delta Cost Project at American Institutes for Research.
Estrada, L. G., Lugo, S., & Olmeda, R. (2016). Women in NCAA athletic administration
positions after title IX. International Journal of Physical Education, Sports and Health,
3(1), 209–212.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 82
Feezell, T. (2013). Faculty Attitudes Toward Athletics at NCAA Division II Institutions. Journal
of Applied Sport Management, 5(2).
Flowers, R. D. (2009). Institutionalized hypocrisy: The myth of intercollegiate athletics.
American Educational History Journal, 36(1/2), 343.
Fried, B. (2007). Punting our future: College athletics and admissions. Change: The Magazine of
Higher Learning, 39(3), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.3200/CHNG.39.3.8-15
Galles, K. (2004). Filling the gaps: Women, civil rights, and Title IX. Human Rights (Chicago,
Ill.), 31(3), 16–18.
Gayles, J. G. (2009). The student athlete experience. New Directions for Institutional
Research,2009(144), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.311
Geiger, N. M. (2013). Intercollegiate athletics in Canada and the United States: Differences in
access, quality, and funding. College Quarterly, 16(3), n3.
Gerdy, J. R. (2002). Athletic victories educational defeats. Academe, 88(1), 32–36.
Goff, B. (2000). Effects of university athletics on the university: A review and extension of
empirical assessment. Journal of Sport Management, 14(2), 85–104.
https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.14.2.85
Hatfield, B., Wrenn, J. P., & Bretting, M. M. (1987). Comparison of Job Responsibilities of
Intercollegiate Athletic Directors And Professional Sport General Managers. Journal of
Sport Management, 1(2), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.1.2.129
Huffman, A. C. (2013). A description and comparison of the perceptions of NCAA Division II
and Division III college presidents regarding the impacts of intercollegiate athletics at
their institutions. Morgantown: West Virginia University.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 83
Humphreys, B. R., & Ruseski, J. (2008, July). The size and scope of the sports industry in the
United States. In IASE Conference Papers (Vol. 833). International Association of Sports
Economists.
Hums, M. A., Barr, C. A., & Gullion, L. (1999). The ethical issues confronting managers in the
sport industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(1), 51–66.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005951720456
James, V. K. (1983). Intercollegiate athletics: An economic explanation. Social Science
Quarterly, 64(2), 360.
Jesse, D. (2018, March 21). Eastern Michigan University cuts four sports, leaves football alone.
Detroit Free Press. Retrieved from https://www.freep.com
Jolly, J .C. (2008). Raising the question# 9 is the student-athlete population unique? And why
should we care? Communication Education, 57(1), 145–151.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520701613676
Kinder, T. M. (1994). Qualifications, responsibilities, and duties of athletics directors at selected
NCAA Division I, II, and III institutions in 11 southeastern states. Retrieved from
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 9503451)
King, G., & Sen, M. (2013). The troubled future of colleges and universities. PS, Political
Science & Politics, 46(1), 83–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096512001606
Ko, Y. J., & Kim, Y. K. (2014). Determinants of consumers’ attitudes toward a sport
sponsorship: A tale from college athletics. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector
Marketing,26(3), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2014.899811
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 84
Kolb, S. (2012). Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: Valid research
strategies for educators. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy
Studies, 3(1), 83–86.
Lichtman, M. (2014). Drawing meaning from the data. Qualitative research for the social
sciences (pp. 335–340). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781544307756
Litan, R. E., Orszag, J. M., & Orszag, P. R. (2003). The empirical effects of collegiate athletics:
An interim report. Washington, DC: Sebago Associates.
Long, J. E., & Caudill, S. B. (1991). The impact of participation in intercollegiate athletics on
income and graduation. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 525-531.
Lopiano, D. (1999). Women’s sports are a business slamdunk. Brandweek, 40(39), 26.
Lumpkin, A. (2012). Title IX and Financing Intercollegiate Athletics. Journal for the Study of
Sports and Athletes in Education, 6(3), 275-292.
Lumpkin, A., Achen, R. M., & Hyland, S. (2015). Education, experiences, and advancement of
athletic directors in NCAA member institutions. Journal of Contemporary Athletics, 9(4),
249.
Marco, S. M. (1960). The place of intercollegiate athletics in higher education. The Journal of
Higher Education, 31(8), 422–427. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1960.11777612
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Los
Angeles: SAGE.
McLaughlin, L. (2014). Student athlete academic success/retention and athletic scholarships in
Division II women’s collegiate athletics. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 85
Mendes, M., Gomes, C., Marques-Quinteiro, P., Lind, P., & Curral, L. (2016). Promoting
learning and innovation in organizations through complexity leadership theory. Team
Performance Management, 22(5/6), 301–309. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-02-2016-
0004
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook (3rd ed.). London, England: SAGE.
Miller, M. G. (2012). The NCAA and the student-athlete: Reform is on the horizon. University of
Richmond Law Review, 46, 1141.
Mixon F. G., Jr., & Trevino, L. J. (2005). From kickoff to commencement: The positive role of
intercollegiate athletics in higher education. Economics of Education Review, 24(1), 97-
102.
Morrison, K. (2010). Complexity theory, school leadership and management: Questions for
theory and practice. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(3), 374–
393. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143209359711
Museus, S. D., & Quaye, S. J. (2009). Toward an intercultural perspective of racial and ethnic
minority college student persistence. The Review of Higher Education, 33(1), 67–94.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.0107
National Association of College and University Business Officers. (1993). The financial
management of intercollegiate athletics programs. Washington, DC: Author.
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics. (2018). About the NAIA. Retrieved from
http://www.naia.org.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 86
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2018). About the NCAA. Retrieved from
http://www.ncaa.org
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2017). Sport Sponsorship, Participation and
Demographics Search [Data file]. Retrieved from
http://web1.ncaa.org/rgdSearch/exec/main
Nigro, M. T. (2012). Leadership Ability and achieving styles among student-athletes at a NCAA-
II university in the Northeast United States (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved from
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3528270)
Nite, C. (2012). Challenges for supporting student-athlete development: Perspectives from an
NCAA Division II athletic department. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics,
5(1), 1–14.
Nollen, J. S. (1927). College athletics: An opinion. Bulletin of the American Association of
University Professors, 13(6), 424–426.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Odenkirk, J. (1981). Intercollegiate athletics: Big business or sport? Academe, 67(2), 62–66.
https://doi.org/10.2307/40249267
Orszag, J. M., & Orszag, P. R. (2005). Empirical effects of Division II intercollegiate athletics.
Kansas City, MO: National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics.
Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Student development in college:
Theory, research, and practice. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Penick, D. (1924). The place of athletics in the scheme of education: A brief for discussion.
Southwest Review, 10(1), 75–82.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 87
Perez, S. J. (2012). Does intercollegiate athletics draw local students to a university? Journal of
Sports Economics, 13(2), 198–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002511404509
Person, D. R., & LeNoir, K. M. (1997). Retention issues and models for African American male
athletes. New Directions for Student Services, 1997(80), 79–91.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.8007
Phifer, T. (2018, February 26). CSU student-athletes, first-generation students share their story.
Retrieved from https://source.colostate.edu/csu-student-athletes-first-generation-students-
share-story/
Pope, D. G., & Pope, J. C. (2009). The impact of college sports success on the quantity and
quality of student applications. Southern Economic Journal, 75(3), 750–780.
Renick, J. (1974). The use and misuse of college athletics. The Journal of Higher
Education,45(7), 545–552. https://doi.org/10.2307/1980793
Robinson, M. J., Peterson, M., Tedrick, T., & Carpenter, J. R. (2003). Job satisfaction on NCAA
division III athletic directors: Impact of job design and time on task. International Sports
Journal, 7(2), 46.
Rowell, G. E. (2016). Impact of intercollegiate athletics in relationship to the prosocial behavior
of giving or volunteering among alumni of NCAA Division II institutions (Doctoral
dissertation) Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No.
10127934)
Sander, L. (2008a). Athletics raises a college from the ground up. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 55(4).
Sander, L. (2008b). Have money, will travel: The quest for top athletes. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 54(47), A1.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 88
Sanders, C. T. (2004). The administrative reporting structure of athletics directors in NCAA
divisions I, II and III intercollegiate athletics (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
Montana State University.
Santovec, M. (2012). Ali Cites Title IX: 40 Years of Transforming Women’s Lives. Women in
Higher Education, 21(10), 26. https://doi.org/10.1002/whe.10381
Schneider, R. C., & Stier, W. F. (2005). Necessary education for the success of athletics
directors: NCAA presidents’ perceptions. (2005). Kinesiology, Sport Studies and
Physical Education Faculty Publications, 50.
Smith, D. R. (2012). College sports’ corporate arena. Contexts, 11(4), 68-69.
Smith, R. K. (2000). A brief history of the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s role in
regulating intercollegiate athletics. Marquette Sports Law Review, 11, 9.
Sperber, M. (1990). College Sports Inc.: The athletic department vs. the university. Phi Delta
Kappan, 72(2), K1–K12.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2010). When race and gender collide: Social and cultural capital’s influence on
the academic achievement of African American and Latino males. The Review of Higher
Education, 33(3), 307–332. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.0147
Stringer, E. T. (2007). Action research (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Suggs, W. (2009a). Making money—or not—on college sports. New Directions for Institutional
Research, 2009(144), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.310
Suggs, W. (2009b). Old challenges and new opportunities for studying the financial aspects of
intercollegiate athletics. New Directions for Higher Education, 2009(148), 11–22.
https://doi.org/10.1002/he.364
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 89
Tinto, V. (2017). Through the eyes of students. Journal of College Student Retention, 19(3),
254–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025115621917
Toma, J. D. (1999). The collegiate ideal and the tools of external relations: The uses of high‐
profile intercollegiate athletics. New Directions for Higher Education, 1999(105), 81–90.
https://doi.org/10.1002/he.10507
Toone, T. (2017, March). BYU-Hawaii ends intercollegiate athletics era. Athletic Business.
Retrieved from https://athleticbusiness.com
Tsiotsou, R. (2004). The role of involvement and income in predicting large and small donations
to college athletics. International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 6(2), 40–
46. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-06-02-2004-B006
Tsitsos, W., & Nixon, H. L., II. (2012). The Star Wars arms race in college athletics: Coaches’
pay and athletic program status. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 36(1), 68–88.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723511433867
Umbach, P. D., Palmer, M. M., Kuh, G. D., & Hannah, S. J. (2006). Intercollegiate athletes and
effective educational practices: Winning combination or losing effort? Research in
Higher Education, 47(6), 709–733. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-006-9012-9
Weaver, K. (2010). A game change: Paying for big-time college sports. Change: The Magazine
of Higher Learning, 43(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2011.533099
Weaver, K. (2015). Trophies, treasure, and turmoil: College athletics at a tipping point. Change:
The Magazine of Higher Learning, 47(1), 36–45.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2015.996090
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 90
Weiss, S. M., & Robinson, T. L. (2013). An investigation of factors relating to retention of
student–athletes participating in NCAA Division II athletics. Interchange, 44(1-2), 83–
104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-013-9198-7
Williams, J. F. (1949). The crucial issue in American college athletics. The Journal of Higher
Education, 20(1), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.2307/1976158
Williams, J. (2011). The academic-athletic divide in NCAA Division II: A phenomenological
study of intercollegiate athletics directors’ experiences, (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved
from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3486897)
Wong, G. (2017, April. 24). Viewpoint: Why cutting college sports programs hurts students.
USA Today. Retrieved from https://college.usatoday.com
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 91
APPENDIX A
Survey Questions
1. What school are you currently employed at?
_________________________
2. What NCAA division do you participate in?
DI DII DIII
3. How many years have you served as a Director of Athletics?
A: 1-5 years
B: 6-10 years
C: 11-15 years
D: 16-20 years
E: More than 21 years
4. What is your highest level of education completed?
A: No college degree
B: Undergraduate degree
C: Master’s Degree
D: Doctorate Degree
5. Were you a student-athlete in college?
YES NO
6. How many years have you been employed in college athletics?
A: 1-5 years
B: 6-10 years
C: 11-15 years
D: 16-20 years
E: More than 21 years
7. Approximately how many fans attend all of your athletics contests every year?
A: Less than 20,000
B: From 20,001 – 50,000
C: From 50,001 – 100,000
D: From 100,001 – 500,000
E: More than 500,001
8. What is your ratio of men’s sports to women’s sports participation? (i.e.; 45/55, 49/51,
men’s sports ratio listed first, please)
____________
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 92
9. List up to 3 benefits that you believe intercollegiate athletics provides to society as a
whole. (i.e., developing role models)
10. Approximately, what percentage of racial or ethnic minorities do you have as student-
athletes in your department? (please exclude international student-athletes)
11. Approximately, what percentage of first-generation college student-athletes are in your
department?
12. Approximately, what percentage of low socioeconomic students are in your department?
13. What are some of the non-financial benefits that having intercollegiate athletics provides
on your campus? List up to three. (i.e., advertising the university when teams travel).
14. What are some of the non-financial benefits that intercollegiate athletics provides to the
local community? List up to three. (i.e., community service outreach).
15. In what ways do student-athletes benefit the general student population?
16. What is the retention rate of student-athletes on your campus?
A: 40% or lower
B: 41 – 50%
C: 51 – 70%
D: 71 – 90%
E: Higher than 91%
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 93
APPENDIX B
Interview Protocol
Main research question:
What non-financial benefit(s), if any, does having intercollegiate athletics provide to the
university?
Introduction
“Hi (name of interviewee), thank you so much for taking the time to talk with me. Just to remind
you, the interview may take up to an hour or so, as to be respectful of your time. The purpose of
this interview is to understand your experiences as a Director of Athletics at a NCAA Division I,
II, or III university and what your experience has been how they have led you to decide to
remain in the profession. The information that you share with me today will be a contribution to
my work as a doctoral candidate in the University of Southern California EdD program. The
interview will be recorded as previously mentioned and your identity will be kept confidential.
You may opt to discontinue the recording at any time and you may also refuse to answer any
questions that I ask. Do you have any questions? – address any questions—Before we begin,
please fill out this consent form.”
1. I would like to begin by to confirming the following information:
a) What university are you employed?
b) How many years have you been an athletics director in the NCAA?
c) How many years have you been working in intercollegiate athletics?
Knowledge,
Experience
I will now ask you about your current role(s) and what impact you feel your
department has inside and outside the university.
Transition
2. Describe your current role(s) at your institution. Knowledge
3. Why do you think athletics is important to the institution?
Opinion
4. How would your institution look if there was no longer any
intercollegiate athletics?
5. This study focuses on athletics directors’ perspective of
intercollegiate athletics. In your experience, what ways have you
seen athletics positively affect the entire university?
6. One of the main purposes of having intercollegiate athletics is to
connect the university to the community. Traditionally, this has
been done through attendance at athletic contests and sports hosting
camps and clinics on its campus. Based on your experience, what
other ways does athletics bridge the community and institution?
7. Intercollegiate athletics provides an opportunity for student-athletes
to come from various backgrounds, become teammates and
Knowledge,
Opinion
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 94
represent the institution. In your experience, what effect does this
have for society in general when diverse socio-economic, ethnic and
geographic backgrounds are brought together?
8. What impact does having first generation student-athletes play in the
overall mission to your institution?
9. What impact does having student-athletes from a low
socioeconomic background play in the overall mission to your
institution?
10. Based on your experience, what affect does a successful athletics
program have on the morale of the institution?
I will now ask you non-athletics related questions Transition
11. What other responsibilities do you have that help the institution but
not necessarily athletics?
Experience
12. Is there any other department or program on campus that you think
is similar to athletics in terms of mission and exposure?
Opinion
13.
Is there anything else that you would like to share with me that I did not
address?
14.
“Thank you (name of interviewee) again for taking the time to speak to me. I may contact you in
the future to follow up with more questions. What is the best way to get in touch with you?”
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 95
APPENDIX C
Consent Form
University of Southern California
Information Sheet for Research
UNDERSTANDING THE NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF INTERCOLLEGIATE
ATHLETICS
You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Vince Baldemor at the University
of Southern California. Please read through this form and ask any questions you might have before
deciding whether or not you want to participate.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This research study aims to understand the non-financial benefits that intercollegiate athletics
provides its institution.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to take a pre-survey and possibly
participate in an online interview. The research project is based on survey data and 12-15
interviews with Athletics Directors from NCAA Division I, II and III. Interviews will be
conducted online and last 1 hour. Participants who take the survey may indicate whether or not
they would like to be interviewed. Not all participants who indicate a willingness to be
interviewed may be selected due to a limited sample size. Surveys will be developed by the
web-based tool, Qualtrics.
I will be the only one who has access to these transcriptions. While it is understood that no
computer transmission can be perfectly secure, reasonable efforts will be made to protect the
confidentiality of your information. If at any time during the interview you choose to withdraw
from the project, survey and interview data will be destroyed immediately. Your participation is
voluntary. Although there are no unforeseeable risks in participation of this study, you may
withdraw from the study at any time and for any reason. There is no penalty for not participating
or withdrawing. Research data will be collected between September and December of 2018.
Participation and records of participation will be confidential. To ensure that data collected
cannot be linked back to participants, data will be kept in a secure location. In addition, names
and identifiable information will not be included in the dissertation.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not receive any compensation for participating in this study but those who take the survey
and/or interview are able to receive a copy of the final dissertation if they choose.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 96
CONFIDENTIALITY
There will be no identifiable information obtained in connection with this study. At the completion
of the study, the anonymous data may be used for future research studies. If you do not want your
data used in future studies, you should not participate.
If data are coded or identifiable:
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential. At
the completion of the study, direct identifiers will be destroyed and the de-identified data may be
used for future research studies. If you do not want your data used in future studies, you should
not participate.
Required language for either condition:
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies
to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Vince
Baldemor at vince.baldemor@gmail.com or at 808-391-0723.
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu.
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 97
APPENDIX D
Draft Recruitment Email to Athletics Directors
Dear Directors of Athletics,
This email is to request your participation in a research project that explores what the non-
financial benefits are that intercollegiate athletics provides its university. The ultimate goal
of this research is to provide university presidents, trustees and other leaders on campus more in-
depth knowledge of the department of athletics from its leader; the Athletics Director. You have
been selected because this study is based on schools that placed in the top 50 in the Learfield
Director’s Cup for 2017-18 for NCAA Division I, II, and III.
With close to 20 years in the industry as a former student-athlete, athletics administrator at a
NCAA Division I school and a former Director of Athletics at a NCAA II school, I’ve seen first-
hand the benefits that intercollegiate athletics provides at our institutions. Now more than ever,
with shrinking state budgets, increased scrutiny on coaches’ salaries and decreases in enrollment,
universities are looking at athletics departments as a cost that can be easily cut or eliminated.
I invite you to participate in this 10 minute survey which will help me build our case that
intercollegiate athletics provides value to the institution that goes beyond the more commonly
seen financial benefits such as ticket sales, apparel, broadcasting rights, corporate sponsors and
philanthropic support.
The research project is based on survey data and follow up interviews with 12-15 athletic
directors. Interviews will be conducted online and last 30 minutes. Participants who take the
survey may indicate whether or not they would like to be interviewed.
As a doctoral student at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, California
pursuing my Doctorate in Educational Leadership, this research is part of my dissertation. I am
working under the direction of my advisor, Dr. Tracy Tambascia at the Rossier School of
Education. If you have questions regarding this project, please contact me at 808-391-0723 or at
vlb2@hawaii.edu. This project has been reviewed according to the University of Southern
California procedures governing your participation in this research.
Thank you for your consideration and support. For those that take the survey and are interested
in the results of my research, please let me know and I’ll be happy to share this with you.
Please click the link below to begin the survey.
Sincerely,
Vince
https://usc.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_efEanjf36IRrzpz
--
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 98
APPENDIX E
NCAA Divisions
Division III
NCAA Division II
NON-FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF ATHLETICS 99
NCAA Division I
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This study examined the non-financial benefits of intercollegiate athletics to the university. Athletics departments across the country are undergoing major changes as universities face increased pressure to maintain high enrollment levels and balance budgets due to state funding decreases and a changing higher education model. This qualitative study examined the perspectives of athletics directors from NCAA Division I, II, and III schools through surveys and interviews. Findings suggest non-financial benefits in four areas: student body enrichment, increased advertising and visibility, stronger community pride and engagement, and greater societal impact. These findings may help university leadership understand the value of intercollegiate athletics to the university, student body, community, and society at large.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Latino/a college student-athletes: Influences on recruitment, enrollment and degree completion
PDF
Student-athletes and leadership: a case study of the impact of collegiate athletics on social change behavior and leadership development
PDF
Examining the experiences of high school counselors when advising student athletes on the NCAA college going process
PDF
Center court: exploration of access to mental health services by female university athletes
PDF
Career development of Black male revenue generating student-athletes within an environment of anti-Black racism
PDF
Athlete activism: improving the effectiveness an innovation model
PDF
An examination of outsourcing student services for online graduate students
PDF
The impact of academic support services on Division I student-athletes' college degree completion
PDF
A qualitative analysis of student-athletes' engagement in synchronous, virtual learning environments at the secondary level
PDF
Diversification for financial sustainability: a postsecondary improvement model
PDF
Closing the achievement gap for marginalized students using the college-going culture: a promising practices study
PDF
Honorary mention: the untold stories of minoritized community college honors students
PDF
Understanding indigenous ʻike: the impact on sense of belonging and local identity on Hawaiʻi’s students
PDF
Asian American college student well-being: racial identity consciousness as model minorities at an elite university
PDF
Utilization of accommodations for learning or other non-apparent disabilities: the influence of ableism on student behavior
PDF
Decolonizing independent schools in Hawaii
PDF
Effective services provided to community college student-athletes: a gap analysis
PDF
Walking away from the game: a phenomenological study on student-athletes career transition
PDF
Decisions under influence: college presidents' athletics-related decision-making behavior at NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision institutions
PDF
Federal loan borrowing in community colleges: examining the decision making processes of non‐traditional community college students
Asset Metadata
Creator
Baldemor, Vincent Lacson
(author)
Core Title
Understanding the non-financial benefits that intercollegiate athletics provides the university
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
06/17/2019
Defense Date
06/14/2019
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
athletics directors,intercollegiate athletics,NCAA,non-financial benefits,OAI-PMH Harvest
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Tambascia, Tracy (
committee chair
), Garfio, Alex (
committee member
), Green, Alan (
committee member
)
Creator Email
vince.baldemor@gmail.com,vince.baldemor@yahoo.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-173339
Unique identifier
UC11659957
Identifier
etd-BaldemorVi-7483.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-173339 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-BaldemorVi-7483.pdf
Dmrecord
173339
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Baldemor, Vincent Lacson
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
athletics directors
intercollegiate athletics
NCAA
non-financial benefits