Sport Management Leadership - Literature Review Sample

Introduction

The main objective of the article is to give a detailed analysis of sport management leadership literature. Peachey et al. begin by identifying the period during which sport management studies started emerging; during the 1970s. There has never been a review of all completed studies about the subject. The review is the primary motive of this article. It seeks to highlight gaps in the proposed concept of leadership management and, in doing so, provide suggestions for further studies.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Scholarly Ventures

Before the 1970s, there were few scholarly ventures which made propositions on leadership styles. Carlyle (1907 assessed the characteristics of leaders. His views represented the individualistic perceptions of Western European philosophers. Stogdill (1948) concluded that a single trait is less likely to predict the universal qualities of effective leadership owing to the diversity of leaders’ backgrounds. This conclusion made scholars turn their attention to leaders’ behavior and its impact on their followers. Another significant change in the course of studies was made after Fiedler’s book (1967) following his first article (1964). Fiedler suggested a contingency model of leadership effectiveness. From that point onwards, leader legitimacy became the focal point of research. The pre-1970s era, however, barely invested in off-the-field studies. A review done by Chelladurai in 1990 expanded the framework of research in later years.

Dynamic Shifts

The latter years of the 20th century experienced dynamic shifts in specific areas of study. The first most notable one was transactional leadership in sports, which was raised by Burns (1978). As Peachey et al. say, this type of leadership involves a mutual leader-follower relationship. Here, the leader benefits from a completed task, and in exchange, he showers recognition, affiliation, and security to the follower. The focus on that area faded following Bourner and Weese’s (1995) publication. The scholars suggested that transformational leadership did not provide a profound impact on organizational effectiveness. A great deal of research was also conducted to weigh in gender-difference influence on sports leadership organizations. Other scholars investigated leaders’ preferred styles of leadership. Interestingly, leaders were more obsessed with the goal-and-task at hand than improving their relationship with their subordinates.

Peachey at al. also touched on studies related to ethical leadership and emerging themes in sports management. On ethical leadership, the review’s focal point was intercollegiate sport. All the reviewed articles were in agreement about the importance of sports leaders to acknowledge and take social and moral responsibility in their leadership. Peachey et al. noted servant leadership to be the dominant theme in sports management literature. The term was first coined by Greenleaf (1977), who defined it as the natural impulse to serve as a leader. Peachey at al. pointed out that the gaps in ethical leadership could be filled by servant leadership, that it was easier for leaders to take full moral responsibility if they practiced servant leadership. Besides servant leadership, emotional intelligence was also highlighted as a critical theme. Schneider (2012) particularly pointed out the importance of a sports leader having a high emotional quotient.

Leadership of Sports Teams

In all the reviewed articles, Peachey et al. noted that most of the studies had focused on on-the-field leadership of sports teams. The reviewers added that leadership in the larger organizations was an under-researched aspect. Peachey et al. also created a table analyzing the prevalence of research articles according to some topics. In their analysis, it was interesting to note that most research and cited articles focused on transactional leadership, gender issues in sport leadership, and LMX. Also, most of the research had borrowed theories and knowledge from other disciplines, such as business administration and social psychology. This factor made it easy for Peachey et al. to prove the authenticity of those reviews. From this framework, the reviewers proposed that more research could be carried out on how sports leadership is different from theories in other disciplines.

Peachey et al. construct a conceptual model illustrating an understanding of sports leadership. This model mainly portrays aspects of the field unique from other areas and disciplines. The model is buttressed by research propositions and suggestions for courses to take in the future that is meant to challenge future scholars. Peachey et al. understand that sports leadership is a dynamic and fluid-structure, thus difficult to capture all aspects involved in it. Therefore, they are open to revision and updates on their model.

This review by Peachey et al. is immensely significant in this scholarly field of study. Its value starts from the fact that it covers almost all reviews, research articles, and proposals related to sports management from the beginning of the 20th century in their entirety. This extensive database improves the authenticity of the review, thus increasing the amount of expected dependence on it as a reference point. Furthermore, Peachey et al. are consistent in their review approach. They begin by a period-by-period review analysis before they delve into the topic-by-topic analysis. This approach makes it easier for scholars to reference a particular article with the knowledge of when the article was published or what it covers. Besides, Peachey et al. provide analytical and evidential data to support the facts in their review. Besides this making their review more formal and authentic, it also increases the confidence a scholar or any other party could have while referring to the article. The table analysis covering the prevalence of articles based on the topics they cover is especially notable. The conceptual framework that the reviewers construct is even more so.

Conclusion

Perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of Peachey et al.’s review is the way they highlight under-researched segments. This aspect is especially crucial to aspiring scholars in the field. It provides a more straightforward course for future research and study. To this effect, the reviewers partition the whole last segment of their article to additional directions for further investigation. For future scholars, this segment can contend as the main highlight of the entire article. Succinctly put, this review is more than profound and extremely fundamental for sports leaders and scholars in the field.

Reference

Peachey, J. W., Zhou, Y., Damon, Z. J., Burton, L. J. (2015). Forty Years of Leadership Research in Sport Management: A Review, Synthesis, and Conceptual Framework. Journal of Sport Management. Vol.29 570-587. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jsm.2014-0126.