Home Uncategorized writing assignment

Uncategorized

writing assignment

1000 words

MSA 670

Capstone Seminar in Sports

Administration

Belhaven University

Unit

Research

Design in Sport Management Part II

 Unit 4 addresses observation research, in which

sport management researchers conduct their

investigations by entering a sport setting in order

to observe and spend time with participants

 This unit also explores the value and

components of case study research, which is a

social science approach employing a variety of

methodologies

Introduction

 Observation Site



Data Collection

 Design and Implementation

 Data Analysis

 Methodological Foundations

Unit Topics

 Understand how observation research can be

conducted by sport management researchers and

applied to the practice of sport management

 Categorize the advantages, disadvantages, and

steps of observation methodology

 Understand the difference between research and

teaching case studies

 Categorize the five case study preparation topics as

applied to a sport management researcher

Unit Objectives

 This application illustrated through Scripture will

provide an understanding to the value of advanced

organized leadership in a sport organization and the

impact of sports finance and budgeting on the

success of a sport organization. This unit will also

illustrate observational and case study research.

 Scripture passages:

 Matthews 28:18-20

 Hebrews 6:9-10

Biblical Foundation

Observation Research

 Used to describe the research methodology

 Generally indicates a qualitative approach grounded

in traditional ethnography

 Understanding Ethnography:

 A naturalistic methodological process through which

social scientists use field research to investigate social

phenomena in order to understand human culture,

communities, and institutions

Observation Research, Scripture Passage

 Matthew 28:18-20

18. And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in

heaven and on earth has been given to me.

19. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations,

baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the

Son and of the Holy Spirit,

20. teaching them to observe all that I have

commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to

the end of the age.”

Ethnographic Research

 Relatively new involving sport management

 A few sport ethnographies were published in the

1990s, including seminal pieces examining sporting

events.

 Have a long, rich history in other disciplines

 Some scholars use traditional types of ethnography:

 Participant Observation

 Field Observation

 Direct Observation

 Natural Observation

Observation Research in Sports

Management
 Participant Observation:

 Similar to ethnography… involves various methodologies

 Interviews

 Focus Groups

 Observations

 Aimed at understanding human social phenomena and

answering research questions in a field setting

 Observation Research can be used in Sports Management to solve

a problem (applied research)…

 Or to improve understanding and contribute to the body of

knowledge in Sports Management (basic research)

Observation Research in Sports

Management, cont.

 The process of observation research involves

 Discovering a research problem

 Select a general research topic

 Develop a proposed research design (e.g., possible

observation times and locations)

 Perform casual observations (observing what is

happening in the sport setting of interest without any

definitive plans or approaches in mind)

Observation Research in Sports
Management, cont.

 Researchers in sport administration can also

use observation research to better understand

 Social interactions

 Political processes

 Power structures

 Historical forces

 This has shaped the social reality of sport and sport

organizations

Observation Research in Sports
Management, cont.

 Sport Administration research generally has a

exploratory, descriptive, or analytical predictive

purpose…

 Exploratory research is used to gain greater insight,

familiarity, or clarification regarding an issue

 Descriptive research provides answers to who, what,

when, and where questions

 Analytical research provides explanatory answers to the

why and how questions

Observation Research in Sports
Management, cont.

 Exploratory research is used in the sport industry to

understand how people:

 Behave

 Interrelate

 Are Influenced

 Communicate

 Make Purchasing Decisions

 Interact

 Engage in other related activities

Observer Roles

 Complete Observation

 where the researcher simply watches, listens, and records

the findings

 Combination of Observer and Participant

 the researcher can participate in some things, and then

observe reactions from others

 Complete Participation

 fully involved in the organization or fully engaged with the

participants of the study

Data Collection

 Observation process

 direct observation is the primary method of collecting data

in observation research

 Mixed-Methods Design

 a combination of observation research and quantitative

research

 Content Analysis

 observing and examining forms of communication in a

particular field

 Field Notes

 taking notes and recording observations is the primary

source of data in observation research

 A social science methodology used in a real-life setting

and generally drawing information from other

methodologies, such as:

 Interviewing

 Observation

 Historical research

 The most commonly used qualitative methodological

approaches in sport management

 Can contain some quantitative aspects (e.g., surveying,

census data, tabular evidence)

Case Study Research

Case Study Research, Scripture Passage

 Hebrews 6:9-10

9. Though we speak in this way, yet in your case,

beloved, we feel sure of better things—things that

belong to salvation.

10. For God is not unjust so as to overlook your work

and the love that you have shown for his name in

serving the saints, as you still do.

 Sport Administration research often focuses on

applied research, which makes case study research

particularly useful

 The end result of most case study inquiries is to help

sport administrative practitioners in their quest to

operate more effectively and efficiently

Case Studies in Sport Management

Research

Case Studies in Sport Management

Research, cont.

 Case study research is an important tool in sport

administration research since it allows researchers

to study:

 specific events,

 activities,

 settings,

 and phenomena

Case Studies in Sport Management
Research, cont.

 Case studies typically explore, describe, illuminate,

or explain a selected phenomenon in sport

administration…

 Case Study research comes in three types that

overlap sport administration:

1. Explanatory

2. Exploratory

3. Descriptive

Explanatory (Case Study

Research)

 The investigator seeks to answer

questions

about how and why…

 Most case studies in sport administration

research are focused on answering the:

 how and why research questions!

Exploratory and Descriptive (Case Study

Research)

 These specific types of case studies typically

answer the:

a. Who

b. What

c. When

d. and where

Research Versus Teaching Case Studies

1. A research case study contains many specific

features such as:

 primary source materials

 evidence

 data analysis

 and conclusions

2. A teaching case study’s purpose is to establish a

framework for discussion and debate

Four Key Tasks in Developing Case

Study Research

1. Design and Implementation- the researcher needs

to first develop a research strategy, formulate a

research design, and implement specific research

questions

2. Research Preparation- create the case study

protocol, screen the potential cases and

participants, and conduct a pilot study

Four Key Tasks in Developing Case

Study Research, cont.

3. Data Collection- carrying out the case study

research design and collecting the needed data to

secure specific answers

4. Data Analysis- analyzes the findings, examines the

data, and assesses how the findings help forward

the study’s research aims and objectives

 Complete reading assignments

 Complete writing assignments

 Answer discussion questions

 Complete unit quiz

What’s next?

Andrew, D., Pedersen, P., & McEvoy, C. (2011). Research methods

and design in sport management (11th ed.). Champaign, IL:

Human Kinetics.

Misener, K., & Doherty, A. (2009). A case study of organization

capacity in nonprofit community sport. Journal of Sports

Management, 23, 457-482. Retrieved from

http://www.humankinetics.com/AcuCustom/Sitename/DAM/067

/234_Misener_A_case_study_of

Misener, L., & Mason, D. (2009). Fostering community development

through sporting events strategies: An examination of urban

regime perceptions. Journal of Sports Management, 23, 770-

794. Retrieved from

http://www.humankinetics.com/AcuCustom/Sitename/DAM/067

/236_Misener_Fostering_commu

References

457

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

A Case Study of Organizational Capacity
in Nonprofit Community Sport

Katie Misener and Alison Doherty
University of Western Ontario

As a pivotal part of the nonprofit and voluntary sector, community sport organizations
provide opportunities for active participation, social engagement, and community
cohesion. This study examined the nature and impact of organizational capacity in
one nonprofit community sport club to identify factors that affect the ability of this
organization to fulfill its mandate and provide sport opportunities in the community.
Hall et al.’s (2003) multidimensional framework of human resources, financial, rela-
tionships/networks, infrastructure and process, and planning and development capac-
ity was used. The study incorporated interviews with board members and coaches as
well as active-member researcher observations (Adler & Adler, 1987). Key strengths
and challenges of each capacity dimension were uncovered, and connections among
the dimensions were revealed. The relatively greater importance of human resources
and planning and development capacity for goal achievement was identified. The
findings support the use of a multidimensional approach for generating a comprehen-
sive understanding of organizational capacity in community sport, and for identifying
where and how capacity may be enhanced.

Community sport organizations (CSOs) are nonprofit, voluntary organiza-
tions1 whose essential goal is to provide a range of opportunities for people of
various ages to participate in sport and physical activity (Allison, 2001). As the
basis of “grassroots” sport participation in many countries, community sport pro-
grams are expected to provide individual and social benefits, such as youth devel-
opment and community cohesion (Donnelly & Kidd, 2003). In Canada, sport and
recreation organizations are the most prevalent type of nonprofit and voluntary
organization, representing 21% of this sector (Gumulka, Barr, Lasby, & Brown-
lee, 2005). According to Hall et al. (2004), 71% of sport and recreation organiza-
tions operate at the community level. Further, according to the most recent data,
over one third of Canadians reported regular participation in organized sport and
76% of those were involved in a community-based sport club of some type (Cana-
dian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute, 2005). Similar statistics are reported
globally. For example, in Australia, 28% of the population reported participating
in organized sport and physical activity (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2007). In
New Zealand, 92% of the youth population takes part in sport and leisure activi-

Misener and Doherty are with the School of Kinesiology, University of Western Ontario, London,
Ontario, Canada N6A 3K7.

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

458 Misener and Doherty

ties, and 33% of those participate within the sport club setting. For adults in New
Zealand, 83% reported active participation in sport and 36% of those were mem-
bers of a formal sport club (Sport and Recreation New Zealand, 2002). In Eng-
land, over 10 million adults or 19.6% of the population play sport within a club
environment (Sport England, 2008). Consequently, the new Sport England Strat-
egy 2008–2011 features a significant shift in focus and direction toward commu-
nity sport and seeks to address the fundamental challenges these sport clubs face,
to be a world leader in community sport infrastructure (Sport England, 2008).
Similarly, the most recent Canadian Sport Policy (2002) reflects the government
mandate to increase sport and physical activity participation, thus encouraging
healthy lifestyles, personal well-being, and more cohesive communities. The
policy emphasizes the critical role of CSOs and notes that “sport is best developed
at the local level where participation is provided by sport organizations” (Cana-
dian Sport Policy, 2002, p. 14).

As important providers of sport opportunities in our communities (Cuskelly,
Hoye, & Auld, 2006; Taylor, 2004), it is imperative to understand the factors that
impact goal achievement in community sport organizations. At the community
level, sport is under pressure due to declining volunteer rates, minimal govern-
ment support, inadequate facilities and youth trends toward inactivity and obesity
(Jurbala, 2006). Without strong capacity in these organizations (e.g., through ade-
quate volunteers, facilities, plans for the future), sport services that contribute to
further individual and societal benefits will be compromised.

The term capacity is broadly used in many contexts (Morgan, 2006). Accord-
ing to Horton et al. (2003), organizational capacity refers to an organization’s
potential to achieve its mission and objectives based on the extent to which it has
certain attributes that have been identified as critical to goal achievement. Further,
Eisinger (2002) emphasized that key attributes of organizational capacity influ-
ence organizational effectiveness, or mission fulfillment. Similarly, Hall et al.
(2003) noted that “the overall capacity of a nonprofit and voluntary organization
to produce the outputs and outcomes it desires is a function of its ability to draw
on or deploy a variety of types of organizational capital” (p. 4). They focused
specifically on human resources, finances, relationships and networks, infrastruc-
ture and processes, and planning and development (Hall et al., 2003). A common
thread throughout the literature is that organizational capacity is conceptualized
as multidimensional in nature (Eisinger, 2002; Hall et al., 2003; Hou, Moynihan,
& Ingraham, 2003).

There has been a recent movement in the nonprofit literature toward measures
of capacity as indicators of organizational effectiveness (Eisinger, 2002). Under-
standing the factors that contribute to effectiveness in terms of mission and goal
achievement has become increasingly important as nonprofit and voluntary orga-
nizations commonly face competing pressures from multiple stakeholders, lim-
ited resources, and vague goals (Sawhill & Williamson, 2001; Sowa, Seldon, &
Sandfort, 2004). Research advocates that nonprofit capacity be assessed along
multiple dimensions to capture all aspects of these complex organizations (e.g.,
Sawhill & Williamson, 2001). It has been argued that, by virtue of their multidi-
mensional nature, capacity-based studies hold the key to understanding organiza-
tional reforms more completely than traditional measures of effectiveness (Hou et
al., 2003). However, it should be noted that an organization’s capacity profile is

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Organizational Capacity 459

not necessarily indicative of organizational effectiveness (Sharpe, 2006), as capac-
ity attributes are latent unless used (Eisinger, 2002).

To date, research on CSOs has been limited to a focus primarily on aspects of
human resources capacity (e.g., Cuskelly, 2004; Cuskelly, Taylor, Hoye, & Darcy,
2006; Doherty, 2005a, 2005b; Shibli, Taylor, Nichols, Gratton, & Kokolakakis,
1999), with some consideration of relationship and network capacity (e.g., Cous-
ens, Barnes, Stevens, Mallen, & Bradish, 2006, Frisby, Thibault, & Kikulis, 2004;
Thibault, Frisby, & Kikulis, 1999). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to
develop an understanding of the perceived influence of multiple capacity dimen-
sions on CSO goal achievement by examining the nature of organizational capac-
ity in the context of one nonprofit community sport organization. As such, the
study aims to provide an empirical illustration of organizational capacity in one
CSO, while extending the use of the Hall et al. (2003) framework. The next sec-
tion presents a brief review of organizational capacity in the nonprofit and volun-
tary sector and an overview of capacity-related studies in sport. The theoretical
framework for the case study is then presented.

Organizational Capacity

Organizational Capacity in the Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector

Organizational capacity has emerged in the nonprofit literature as a framework for
referring to a set of organizational attributes that bears on organizational effective-
ness, or “the ability of an organization to accomplish its mission effectively” (Eis-
inger, 2002, p. 115). A number of conceptual frameworks related to capacity have
been developed and used in various nonprofit contexts, such as neighborhood
communities (e.g., Chaskin, 2001), international development organizations (e.g.,
Morgan, 2006), human service organizations (e.g., Eisinger, 2002), and other
community development organizations (e.g., Glickman & Servon, 1998). As well,
investigations of the degree to which various organizational practices and charac-
teristics are related to organizational effectiveness among nonprofit social service
agencies (e.g., Forbes, 1998) can certainly be linked to the concept of capacity.
Capacity frameworks vary in the number of dimensions they use, ranging from
three to seven (e.g., Chaskin, 2001; Eisinger, 2002; Glickman & Servon, 1998;
Hall et al., 2003; McKinsey & Company, 2001). The specific capacity dimensions
within these frameworks also tend to vary in name; however, there are many
common features or characteristics among them such as financial and/or capital
resources, human resources, formalization, and external linkages. Hall et al.’s
framework was developed specifically for the nonprofit and voluntary sector and
as such will be used as the framework for this study. It is reviewed in detail later
in the article.

Overall, research on nonprofit organizational capacity from a multidimen-
sional perspective has not identified consistently critical aspects. For example,
Chaskin (2001) found that engaged individuals and the strengthening of associa-
tional networks were required to have success in pursuing a community organiza-
tion’s objectives. Hall et al. (2003) noted that human resources capacity was the

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

460 Misener and Doherty

most critical factor for organizational goal achievement. Glickman and Servon
(1998) identified effective partnerships as particularly important for capacity-
building as they enabled community development organizations to improve plan-
ning and financial management as well as connecting with needed resources and
support. Meanwhile, McKinsey and Company (2001) found that the nonprofit
organizations that experienced the greatest gains in capacity were those that
undertook a reassessment of their aspirations and their strategy. However, they
also noted that effective capacity building is rarely confined to addressing only
one aspect of capacity in isolation (McKinsey & Company, 2001). Taken together,
the nonprofit and voluntary sector literature suggests that the nature and impact of
each dimension should be considered individually and the connections among
dimensions examined, while accounting for differences in organizational
context.

Organizational Capacity in Community Sport
Wing (2004, p. 154) emphasized the importance of context when considering
organizational capacity in the nonprofit sector:

The term nonprofit encompasses a huge diversity within itself, referring to
everything from a handful of volunteers in a neighborhood banding together
in their spare time to plant flowers to huge universities and health care sys-
tems. Whatever capacity building might be, it is not going to be the same
across such a diversity of kinds of organizations.

As CSOs comprise one of the largest subsectors of nonprofit and voluntary
organizations in many developed countries (Seippel, 2006), there is merit in
exploring their unique strengths and challenges, and how these influence their
ability to contribute to sport development in our communities. Several dimensions
of organizational capacity in sport have been examined independently in the lit-
erature. Aspects of human resource capacity have been the focus of much of the
research at the community sport level, providing a strong base of knowledge on
human resource management and, in particular, sport volunteerism (e.g., Cuskelly,
2004; Cuskelly, Taylor, et al., 2006; Doherty, 2005a, 2005b; Doherty & Carron,
2003; Kim, Chelladurai, & Trail, 2007; Shibli et al., 1999). Relationship and net-
work capacity has also been considered, and shown to be important to sport and
leisure organizations at the community or municipal level for the purposes of
acquiring needed resources, coordinating activities, increasing participation, and
maintaining and enhancing service quality, among others (e.g., Barnes, Cousens,
& MacLean, 2007; Cousens et al., 2006; Frisby et al., 2004; Thibault & Harvey,
1997; Thibault et al., 1999; Vail, 2007).

Several large-scale studies are also informative about the nature of various
forms of organizational capital in sport organizations. Drawing from a survey of
Canadian nonprofit voluntary organizations in general, Gumulka et al. (2005)
noted that sport organizations have fewer financial resources than many other
types of nonprofit organizations and thus report a variety of problems related to
finances and obtaining external funding. These particular organizations also rely
more heavily on volunteers and face difficulty obtaining the type of volunteers
they need. However, a consistent strength related to the capacity of sport organiza-

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Organizational Capacity 461

tions is the “dedication of their volunteers, their local community focus, and the
priority they place on serving their members” (Gumulka et al., 2005, p. 57).
Another large-scale study specifically investigated the nature of sport clubs in
Scotland (Allison, 2001). The results from this study identified that, regardless of
the size of the club, growth was difficult due to a shortage of facilities and a need
for better planning and management of the existing facilities. Their success was
attributed to factors such as a strong focus on the needs of members, the ability to
raise necessary finances from within the club, and a focus on short-term planning
and flexibility (Allison, 2001). Drawing on a large-scale study of CSOs in Eng-
land, Taylor (2004) identified what he described as a spectrum of sport organiza-
tions, ranging from “traditional/informal” to “contemporary/formal” in structure.
The CSOs could be classified according to several organizational dimensions,
including managerial skills, ability to react to pressure, culture, and receptivity to
external assistance. Taylor argued that contemporary/formal CSOs have greater
ability to enhance sport development because of these attributes. While these
large-scale studies did not use the theoretical tenets of organizational capacity,
their findings provide evidence of the multidimensional strengths and challenges
of sport organizations.

Research on sport organizations, as a unique subsector of nonprofit and vol-
untary organizations, has yet to engage a multidimensional framework to investi-
gate the impact of organizational capacity on goal achievement. One exception to
this is a study by Sharpe (2006), who examined how several capacity dimensions
affected the quality of participants’ experience in one grassroots recreation orga-
nization, as well as the ability of the organization to achieve its mission. Sharpe
found that certain dimensions of capacity were critical to goal achievement as
they inhibited or mobilized other forms of capacity. In particular, she found that a
lack of human resource capacity (volunteers with professional competencies) lim-
ited the ability of the organization to generate social capital (trust, reciprocity)
from networks and connections among individuals. This, in turn, hindered the
organization from meeting increasingly complex administrative demands and gar-
nering further organizational resources through social connections. She noted that
“social capital does not emerge without at least some input of human and even
financial capital to help establish the social networks that can then be used pro-
ductively” (Sharpe, 2006, p. 398). This notion is consistent with other work that
links participation in community sport organizations with the generation of social
ties that contribute to trust, commitment and the sense of connectivity within a
community (Doherty & Misener, 2008; Seippel, 2006). The current study builds
on Sharpe’s research by exploring the multidimensional nature of organizational
capacity in the context of one CSO according to the dimensions of capacity out-
lined by Hall et al. (2003).

Theoretical Framework

The Capacity to Serve (Hall et al., 2003) is the first report from the National
Survey of Nonprofit and Voluntary Organizations (NSNVO), a project designed to
build the body of knowledge about this sector as an important set of institutions in
Canadian society. To guide the research, a framework was developed based on the

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

462 Misener and Doherty

literature on nonprofit and voluntary organizational capacity; in particular, the
intangible or hidden assets that result from human capital and structural capital
(Edvinsson & Malone, 1997; Roos, Roos, Dragoneetti, & Edvinsson, 1998), and
the management of relations with external parties (Roos et al., 1998). Five dimen-
sions were derived from this literature: human resources, financial, relationships
and networks, infrastructure and process, and planning and development capacity
(Hall et al., 2003). These are consistent with what Eisinger (2002) summarized as
the most common dimensions in capacity research. The model further highlights
the potential connections among the capacity dimensions; for example, human
resource capacity may impact on planning and development capacity, while finan-
cial capacity may impact on relationships and network capacity. Hall et al. (2003)
used the model to assess the role that the five dimensions played in the ability of
organizations to achieve their missions and objectives, or constrained them from
doing so, through research based on data from 36 focus groups in 13 communities
across Canada, as well as key informant interviews. A description of each dimen-
sion and selected findings of Hall et al.’s (2003) study are presented below.

Human resources capacity is the ability to deploy human capital (i.e., paid
staff, volunteers) within the organization, and includes the competencies, knowl-
edge, attitudes, motivation, and behaviors of individuals in the organization. It is
purported to be the key element that impacts directly on all other capacities (Hall
et al., 2003). This dimension was reported to be the greatest strength in nonprofit
and voluntary organizations by an overwhelming majority of participants who
recognized volunteers and staff for their commitment, dedication, and ability to
work with limited resources. Recruitment of general volunteers, staff, and board
members was cited as the most significant issue affecting human resource capac-
ity. However, other issues such as the need for more specialized staff, need for
training for board members, and need for effective volunteer management strate-
gies were also identified. The connections among capacity dimensions were evi-
dent as adequate and competent human resources were linked to financial capac-
ity, where greater access to stable funding would enable nonprofit and voluntary
organizations to better develop human resources capacity.

Financial capacity is the ability of an organization to develop and deploy
financial capital (i.e., the revenues, expenses, assets, and liabilities of the organi-
zation). Based on Hall et al.’s (2003) findings, financial capacity issues included
revenue generation capacity and financial management and accountability issues.
It was also noted that human resource issues such as a lack of fundraising skills
and difficulty retaining qualified staff also negatively impacted financial capacity.
Financial issues posed the greatest capacity challenges as organizations in Hall et
al.’s (2003) study identified difficulties fulfilling their missions due to problems
associated with project funding and the lack of financial support for
infrastructure.

The third dimension identified by Hall et al. (2003) is relationship and net-
work capacity. The framework draws on Putnam’s conceptualization of social
capital, which refers to “features of social organizations such as networks, norms,
and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation of mutual benefit”

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Organizational Capacity 463

(Putnam, 1995, p. 17). As such, relationship and network capacity is the ability to
draw on relationships with clients, members, funding agencies, partners, govern-
ment, media, corporations, and public. This ability is purported to be an asset to
an organization as it enables access to shared resources, knowledge, and experi-
ence (Hall et al., 2003). Human resources and finances were reported to affect
relationship and network capacity as organizations lacked the resources necessary
to engage in these relationship-building activities. Specifically, a lack of qualified
staff with expertise in dealing with the media was identified as a significant chal-
lenge for this area (Hall et al., 2003).

Infrastructure and process capacity is the ability of an organization to deploy
or rely on organizational elements related to day-to-day operations (e.g., data-
bases, manuals, policies, procedures, information technology, culture). In this
area of capacity, the most important challenges that participants identified per-
tained directly to information technology. Specifically, internal technical capacity,
maintenance, and training were cited as barriers to building stronger organizations
(Hall et al., 2003). The need for improved collaboration was seen as a way to share
infrastructure and overcome deficiencies in physical infrastructure, such as a lack
of permanent facilities. Thus, lack of human resources, financial capacity, and
insufficient relationship and network capacity were all cited to impact infrastruc-
ture and process capacity.

Lastly, planning and development capacity represents the ability to develop
and draw on organizational strategic plans, program plans, policies, and propos-
als. The lack of core, stable, long-term funding posed the greatest challenge to the
development of organizational vision and strategic planning for many organiza-
tions in the Hall et al. (2003) study. Uncertainties about future funding and con-
straints on how current funds can be used appear to have a significant effect on the
ability of organizations to plan strategically. Planning and development capacity
was also directly impacted by insufficient human resource capacity. Specifically,
concerns in this area focused on the expertise of board members and the skills of
staff, as many organizations contracted help from external consultants to assist
them with research, planning, and organizational development.

According to Eisinger (2002), “there is a clear need to move beyond simply
logical lists of capacity characteristics to an empirical understanding of which of
these contribute to organizational mission fulfillment” (p. 118). Hall et al.’s (2003)
multidimensional model of organizational capacity in the nonprofit sector delin-
eates key areas of capacity that potentially influence the ability of nonprofit and
voluntary organizations to achieve their mission and goals. It also highlights the
importance of examining capacity dimensions in combination. Indeed, Hall et al.
(2003) found that problems with respect to financial capacity were identified as
posing the greatest challenges for the organizations; however, these issues were
only critical because they had implications for the other areas of capacity. The
framework has particular utility for exploring organizational capacity in nonprofit
community sport organizations because it was developed specifically for the non-
profit and voluntary sector. Further, it comprises broad dimensions that may be
adapted and refined to particular nonprofit contexts (Hall et al., 2003).

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

464 Misener and Doherty

Research Method
The use of case studies is advocated as an effective means of organizational analy-
sis in sport management (e.g., Caza, 2000, Sharpe, 2006; Stevens & Slack, 1998).
This study follows an instrumental case study methodology (Stake, 2003) as a
means of better understanding organizational capacity. Accordingly, the context
of the case is scrutinized and ordinary activities are detailed, as this helps the
researchers to pursue the focal interest (Stake, 2003); in this case, organizational
capacity. Case studies employ the theoretical assumptions underpinning the epis-
temology of bounded systems (Kemmis, 1980; Yin, 2003). Indeed, the value of
case studies is found in their ability to encourage insight, illustrate issues, and
generate broad understandings (Stake, 2003). It is not suggested that the findings
of the current study are generalizable across all community sport organizations.
Rather, this study is consistent with a constructivist perspective (Guba & Lincoln,
2004; Patton, 2002; Schwandt, 2001) which values multiple individual perspec-
tives to enhance understanding about the nature of capacity within one CSO.
Through a study of the singular, however, it may be possible to uncover concep-
tual and empirical patterns that are transferable to other settings given similar
contexts and conditions (Frisby, Crawford, & Dorer, 1997; Kemmis, 1980). When
contexts and conditions differ, important additional insights into organizational
capacity and its impact will be gained.

Research Context

The subject of the current case study is the Westbury Gymnastics Club (WGC). To
protect the anonymity of the organization and the participants, pseudonyms are
used throughout the case study. The WGC is situated in a midsized city in central
Canada, and provides recreational, precompetitive, interclub competitive, and
provincial-level sport programs for youth age 5 through 17. There were 33 ath-
letes (15 recreational, 10 precompetitive, and 8 competitive) registered at the time
of the study. The club operates within a lower-income area of the city and there
are several other gymnastics clubs within the city operating on a for-profit or non-
profit basis. The WGC’s mandate is to provide a nonprofit, supportive environ-
ment for the development of athletes, while recognizing that the club holds a
unique position based on its location for providing an accessible program at a
reasonable cost for the immediate community.

The club was established in 2004, yet two years later faced a critical juncture
because of a division among board members over whether to remain a nonprofit
club, or allow the previous head coach to purchase the club’s assets and operate it
as a for-profit business. This resulted in a situation where a new board was formed,
composed primarily of parents who desired the club to remain within the non-
profit sector. Others who had previously held leadership positions within the club
chose to leave and start their own for-profit club. The resulting board for the WGC
was composed primarily of parents who were previously involved at a minimal
level and were now taking on positions of leadership to help the club continue to
provide its sport service in the community. Two parents carried over from the
previous club’s board. As well, one of the assistant coaches from the previous club
took on the position of head coach for the WGC and another assistant coach

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Organizational Capacity 465

remained as the new recreation coach. The board positions of the WGC include:
president, vice-president, secretary, treasurer, member-at-large, and recreation
convenor. The head coach is an ex-officio board member. The treasurer position
was vacant at the time of the study. Further, while the club had yet to establish
formal goals, it was revealed during the study that participants perceived the main
goals of the club to be: (1) providing an excellent opportunity for athlete develop-
ment, and (2) providing stability for the organization—particularly, financial
stability.

In July 2006, the researchers were contacted by the WGC for assistance with
formalizing procedures in the club. It was determined that the CSO would not
have time for formal, long-range planning for several months, thus one of the
researchers would join the new board as a volunteer active-member researcher
(Adler & Adler, 1987). This would enable her to study the CSO as a case in orga-
nizational capacity and, in return, provide assistance on strategic planning and
formalizing procedures when the club was ready. This assistance was provided
once the club was ready, which coincided with the conclusion of the research
project. Approval to conduct the study was granted by the Ethics Review Board at
the researchers’ institution.

Data Collection

The research was conducted between July 2006 and February 2007. The study
design incorporated two main approaches to data gathering. Semi-structured,
audio-recorded interviews were conducted in person with all personnel who cur-
rently had primary involvement in the organization, including six board members
and the recreation coach (N = 7). There were six female participants and one male,
and all participants were parents of athletes in the club with the exception of the
recreation coach and recreation convenor. All board members held voluntary posi-
tions and coaches received a small wage. The interviews lasted approximately one
hour each and all participants were interviewed once. An interview guide was
developed based on the five dimensions of organizational capacity (Hall et al.,
2003). Participants were asked about the strengths and challenges of each capac-
ity dimension as well as what difference they thought each dimension made to the
club’s ability to fulfill its goals.

The second form of data collection was active-member researcher observa-
tions (Adler & Adler, 1987). The observations took place at monthly board meet-
ings and other events (registration evenings, end of session galas). According to
Adler and Adler (1987, p. 50), “with active membership, the researcher moves
clearly away from the marginally involved role of the traditional participant
observer and assumes a more central position in the setting.” This greater degree
of participation allowed the researcher to gain the trust of other board members
and resulted in closer, more accurate, and more in-depth insight into the capacity
of the organization. Board members were well-informed about the research in
advance and the active-member researcher perceived that participants were com-
fortable with her participation as she had many informal conversations with them,
thus enabling participant observation to play a prominent role in data collection
(Yin, 2003). Extensive field notes collected during all observations were typed
and further expanded upon after returning from the “field.” Further, the research-

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

466 Misener and Doherty

ers discussed the activities of the CSO biweekly. This was a useful technique to
periodically realign the perspectives of the active-member researcher with the
other researcher to analyze the setting critically (Adler & Adler, 1987). The data
from memos, interviews, and observations were managed by the computer-aided
data analysis software NVivo. To systematically reflect on her position in the
inquiry process, a research journal was maintained by the active-member
researcher. This helped ensure that her experience in the research process was
transparent within the research investigation (Kirby, Greaves, & Reid, 2006).

It has been noted that there is a need for a variety of “ways of seeing” in sport
management research and multifaceted approaches are one means of challenging
the limitations of traditional research practices (Amis & Silk, 2005). Active-mem-
ber researcher observations as a form of data collection, however, also have chal-
lenges and require consciousness, reflection, and integrity of the researcher (cf.
Frisby et al., 2005). The researcher must work together with a group of partici-
pants to co-construct knowledge and create a safe space in which participants can
speak openly about the challenges facing the organization. The researcher needs
to be accessible and respectful of the time frame of the group and careful not to
push her own agenda. In this case, extensive time commitment was required for
each meeting, which challenged the active-member researcher’s assumptions of
what “should take place” during board meetings. In addition, a large amount of
data were collected and researchers needed to take great care to analyze the find-
ings in a timely and accessible manner, while providing adequate representation
of the data.

Researcher Positionality
Researcher positionality acknowledges the impact of the researchers’ back-
grounds, assumptions, and relationships with research participants and subject
matter to provide more thoughtful and critical representation of ourselves within
our research. Qualitative researchers advocate high standards of reflexivity, open-
ness, and transparency about their “location” or positionality within their research
and the implications of this position on those involved in the research (Amis &
Silk, 2005; Frisby, 2005; Kirby et al., 2006). The researcher who entered directly
into an active membership role, was an outsider in collaboration with insiders
(Harrison, MacGibbon, & Morton, 2001). Initially, she experienced some frustra-
tion and disappointment as she perceived that the group viewed her as an “outside
expert” because of her affiliation with the University. However, over the time
frame of the study, relationships were formed and the researcher had a greater
level of participation in the activities of the organization, which caused some
transformation in her perceived status from “outside expert” to “insider/collabora-
tor.” This transformation highlighted the constant negotiation required between
positions of insider and outsider (Harrison et al., 2001). It should be noted, how-
ever, that while this negotiation was encountered, the active-member researcher
ultimately held her role as a researcher within the social science community as her
“most critical reference point and source of self-identity” (Adler & Adler, 1987,
p. 66).

The researchers were both Canadian-born, White, female academics who
identified strongly with participation in organized sport. As such, we acknowledge

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Organizational Capacity 467

that our assumptions are based on our own social experiences in sport and through
doing research on community sport. Further, the active-member researcher has a
background in gymnastics and while this was not the reason for her involvement
with the club, it provided a common ground of knowledge and interest between
the participants and herself. Kosygina (2005) suggested that, as female research-
ers, we experience discrepancies between interviews with men and women. While
we certainly agree that stages of social research are gendered, in this case, the
interactive style of board meetings enabled the active-member researcher to get to
know all board members, regardless of gender, for several months before the
research interviews. Thus, the inherent relationship-building within the study
design further enabled the transition from outside expert to insider/collaborator.

Data Analysis

Interview data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed in a multistep process.
Hall et al.’s (2003) model of organizational capacity provided a priori categories
by which to analyze the data (Patton, 2002). The observation data were coded and
analyzed simultaneously with the interview transcripts. Both researchers indepen-
dently read through the transcripts of each interview participant as well as the
active-member researcher observations. This generated an understanding of each
participant’s perspectives on capacity (Patton, 2002). An emergent coding scheme
was then developed based on the themes of organizational capacity referred to
most often by the board members, coaches, and the active-member researcher.

The analysis followed Guba and Lincoln’s (1989) criteria for authenticity,
which is consistent with constructivist epistemology (Schwandt, 2001). That is,
methods of triangulation, including member-checking by sending the transcripts
back to participants for verification and clarification as well as multiple data
sources, were used to clarify meaning and ensure fairness of interpretation (Guba
& Lincoln, 1989; Harrison et al., 2001) while providing converging lines of
inquiry within the case (Yin, 2003). Another means of triangulation was the
involvement of the second researcher in the generative phase of analysis (Patton,
2002). This involved discussion of the data and, when necessary, reconciliation of
the researchers’ interpretations to reach consensus on the meaning of the data. As
the active-member became more involved in the organization, this process was
increasingly important as it encouraged reflection and clear articulation about the
nature of capacity in the club, while enabling the second researcher to pose ques-
tions, challenge assumptions, and become engaged in the data herself.

Findings and Discussion

Key elements of each dimension that emerged as perceived strengths or chal-
lenges for the organization, as well as the overall perceived impact of each dimen-
sion on goal achievement, are presented. The findings are discussed in light of the
existing literature, drawing comparisons and highlighting new insights. Several
connections among the various dimensions are also noted and then discussed at
the end of the article. A selected sample of quotations that best represent the
themes is provided throughout to further illustrate the findings.

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

468 Misener and Doherty

Human Resources Capacity

The board members and coaches in the WGC identified several strengths related
to human resources capacity, including group dynamics, mutual values, and skills,
knowledge, and attitudes. Overall, group dynamics within the board were very
positive in nature. While one member mentioned that they had only been working
together for approximately six months with the reformed club, and did not know
each other well, members generally trusted one another and had confidence in the
abilities within the group to effectively carry out the mission of the club. Doherty
and Carron (2003) similarly found that tenure or length of time with volunteer
sport executive committees was not a significant predictor of cohesion. Together,
these findings suggest that, in the nonprofit community sport context, factors other
than time together likely contribute to positive group dynamics.

Mutual values may be one such factor, and it emerged as a theme within
human resources capacity as board members spoke of the strengths of the human
resources in terms of their shared values, which included the club’s nonprofit
status, the athlete-focused mission, and dedication to the club and the community
in which it is situated. Upholding the club’s nonprofit status was a central factor
in its initial division from the original club and reformation during the previous
summer. According to several participants, the nonprofit status of the club was
critical for enabling it to offer a lower-cost program for families who could other-
wise not afford the membership fees for their children to participate. The WGC
was described as being dedicated to the part of the community in which it oper-
ates, which is considered a lower-income area of the city. As Nancy pointed out,
“We are always talking about the community there and ensuring that those stu-
dents have access.” Several other participants discussed how everyone in the club
was committed to the athletes. Rachel noted, “We don’t have a situation where
there’s one particular parent or board member working only towards their particu-
lar gymnast, and from what I’ve seen, it seems that everybody is concerned with
the club as a whole and the development of the athletes.” Notably, the mutual
values that emerged in this study are consistent with previous research on sport
organizations which has shown that altruistic reasons such as serving the organi-
zation’s members (specifically, “helping kids”) and contributing toward a need in
the community are significant factors in volunteer recruitment and satisfaction
(Doherty, 2005a; Gumulka et al., 2005; Shibli et al., 1999).

Whereas a low level of professional expertise is often characteristic of grass-
roots organizations (Sharpe, 2006), the findings from the WGC were somewhat
unusual, as the qualities that individuals bring to this organization in terms of
skills, knowledge, and attitudes were considered to be a strength for the WGC.
When asked to describe the strengths of the club in terms of human resources
capacity, Nancy noted:

I would say that they are very resourceful in terms of related knowledge
to what we’re doing. Knowledge of the sport, knowledge of other support
resources in the community, they have quite a few skills. To run something
like this, you need computer skills, all the organizational skills, so that would
be it.

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Organizational Capacity 469

Participants felt that the club was fortunate to have members with strong
skills in the areas of administration, leadership, and coaching. Other valued char-
acteristics included taking initiative, willingness to give time, being supportive,
and being well-educated. As Dave pointed out, “You know, we’re all university-
educated. It’s a very professional board that we have which is great. It just means
that they’re motivated to get things done.”

While human resources capacity was primarily discussed as a strength for the
WGC, the need for more volunteers was noted as a challenge for the club. All
interviewees felt that their positions take a considerable amount of effort and time.
Because of these demands, the need for more volunteers in general to help out at
events and be called upon for assistance with specific tasks was mentioned by
several board members. Yvonne verbalized that, “it doesn’t have to be the com-
mittee members doing it all. That’s something we can work on.” Dave also noted
that “we really can’t grow anymore until we build up some more people.” The
following quotation from Charlotte provides further evidence of this concern:

We need to involve other parents—not just us. We need some transitional
processes. We need to recognize that not all the girls are going to be staying
here, we’re not all going to be staying here so we need to think of some way
to integrate more involvement from more people, I think that’s really, really
important.

The need for more volunteers was identified as a critical human resources
capacity issue in the nonprofit and voluntary organization sector in general (Hall
et al., 2003) and has also been well-documented in the sport volunteer literature
(e.g., Allison, 2001; Cuskelly, Hoye, & Auld, 2006, Doherty, 2005b; Kim et al.,
2007; Leisure Industries Research Centre, 2003; Sharpe, 2006; Taylor, 2004).
Notably, community sport organizations are frequently challenged by a lack of
secondary volunteer involvement; individuals who are more casually involved and
assist with supplementary tasks and responsibilities, thus taking some of the load
off executive board members and coaches (Sharpe, 2006). Most of the work is
often done by a small group of overworked volunteers (Cuskelly, 2004; Doherty,
2005a, 2005b; Leisure Industries Research Centre, 2003; Taylor, 2004), as evi-
denced in the current CSO. Indeed, this group showed hesitation to take on more
responsibilities as the workload was already, in some cases, more than initially
expected. One further example of the impact of the shortage of volunteers was
seen in the unfilled treasurer position, resulting in a lack of necessary financial
management skills, and compromised financial capacity for the club.

A further challenge for the WGC in terms of human resources was the cen-
trality or concentration of critical resources in one or two people. While each
board member clearly had skills or knowledge to offer, most interviewees focused
on the critical mass of two people within the board who hold the centrality of
knowledge and access to other resources and networks. For example, these board
members had personal connections with other gymnastics clubs and coaches, and
were well-connected in the broader gymnastics community. As well, they tended
to have knowledge of different grants for which the club could apply that were
based on increasing physical activity and sport participation in the community.
This strong reliance on a few key personnel was noted as a challenge for the club

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

470 Misener and Doherty

since participants felt that this concentration of knowledge and resources could
limit future growth. The impact of this centrality on group dynamics was observed
by the active-member researcher at board meetings and other events:

The network that [she] brings to the club is of considerable importance and
her background knowledge in the sport is a tremendous asset to the club.
It seems that everyone recognizes that [she] is a huge asset to the club and
therefore, no one wants to suggest that we move forward or put timelines
on reports. The body language of some other board members suggests that
moving forward is necessary in order to respect everyone’s time, but I don’t
anticipate that anyone will verbalize this need because of this dynamic.

The idea that “much comes from a few” in terms of time and effort given is
noted throughout the literature on nonprofit sport organizations (e.g., Doherty,
2005a; Gumulka et al., 2005; Leisure Industries Research Centre, 2003; Taylor,
2004). Yet, the notion that knowledge and/or skills are concentrated in a few also
provides many challenges for organizations such as the WGC. In particular, this
may result in difficult transitions when central volunteers or coaches leave the
organization and need to be replaced (Cuskelly, Hoye, & Auld, 2006; Taylor,
Doherty, & McGraw, 2008).

Overall, human resources capacity was identified as one of the greatest
strengths related to goal achievement for the club. Positive group dynamics, or in
Dave’s words, “working well together,” as well as the skills and mutual values
people bring to the organization, were cited as primary factors in achieving the
goals of the club. These findings are consistent with Hall et al.’s (2003) research
showing that human resources capacity is the greatest strength in nonprofit and
voluntary organizations in general in terms of the commitment and dedication of
volunteers and staff, and their ability to work with limited resources.

Financial Capacity
The WGC’s sources of revenue were considered by all participants to be adequate
and stable, whereas athlete registration fees composed the majority of the club’s
revenue. Other revenue sources included financial support from a provincial grant-
ing foundation and fundraising through merchandise sales. Gumulka et al. (2005)
noted that sport and recreation organizations receive more of their revenues from
earned income such as registration fees and gifts and donations, and less from
government than is the case in the Canadian nonprofit and voluntary sector as a
whole. According to Allison (2001), this relative lack of dependence on govern-
ment for direct financial support makes sport clubs much more autonomous than
other organizations in the voluntary sector.

When asked about the challenges related to financial capacity, participants
identified several issues surrounding financial planning, management, and
accountability. Several board members discussed the lack of, and need for, a long-
range financial plan; both for basic operations, and as part of a long-range strate-
gic plan.

I think if we’re going to project what the future is going to look like, we have
to project our revenues . . . having a financial plan in place, a plan for growth

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Organizational Capacity 471

. . . we haven’t established, at least that I’ve seen, what our base costs are that
we have to meet and determined whether the registration fees are going to
cover that. (Rachel)

This theme parallels Allison’s (2001) finding that “clubs are generally quite
under-developed in terms of their finances and operate on a very basic income and
expenditure account. Few have cash reserves or other assets that could be used for
matching funding or longer-term investment and development of the club” (p. 7).
Bowman (2007) suggested that an appropriate cushion of potential resources held
in reserve is necessary for nonprofit organizations. Planning for these resources
would allow organizations to adapt to internal pressures as well as initiate change
in strategy—essential elements of nonprofit financial capacity (Bowman, 2007).

While there was a strong sense from five of the seven participants that the
club had been very successful in its fundraising endeavors, several further noted
that the club had not explicitly established a purpose for fundraising. The active-
member researcher also noted that, “the group seemed to lack purpose and vision
for fundraising. With the exception of the admission that they can always use
more money, no target numbers have been set, and there has been no discussion
about what the money will be used for.” The desire to recruit corporate sponsors
for the club was also mentioned by several participants; however, no plans or
vision were discussed. The literature highlights the importance of a strategic
approach to revenue generation, including fundraising and corporate sponsorship
(e.g., Misener & Paraschak, 2006) which, in this case, was a neglected aspect of
financial capacity.

Financial management and accountability capacity also emerged as a theme
when participants were asked about the challenges related to the finances of the
club. In particular, the treasurer position, which was unfilled since the establish-
ment of the reformed club, was raised by participants as an issue affecting finan-
cial capacity for the WGC. While the various tasks of this position were being
covered by two board members, and the group trusted those individuals, there was
a strong sense that this was organizationally inappropriate as well as ineffective
for club growth. Board members recognized the need for responsible and account-
able practices in the area of financial reporting. However, financial capacity was
limited because of the lack of volunteer human resources, particularly, the lack of
specialized knowledge required for this role. The need for specific financial man-
agement competencies or accounting skills for volunteer board members, which
was lacking in this CSO, has been well-documented as a financial capacity issue
affecting smaller nonprofit organizations (Hall et al., 2003; Hou et al., 2003; Scott,
2003; Sharpe, 2006).

The most pressing challenges reported for nonprofit and voluntary organiza-
tions in Hall et al.’s (2003) research were in the area of financial capacity. They
found that many registered charities depended heavily on external funding from
government and thus identified the need for “better,” more flexible, and less
restricted funding. In contrast, findings from the WGC showed that while there
were several apparent challenges related to financial capacity in this study, board
members and coaches of this club did not perceive financial capacity to be a criti-
cal factor in goal attainment. This may be because, in part, to the revenue base for
the WGC which primarily consisted of membership registrations or athlete fees.

Journal of Sport Management, 2009, 23, 457-482
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.

472 Misener and Doherty

Elsewhere it has been noted that reliable revenue generated from athlete fees gen-
erally enables clubs to cover their main expenditures, including registration fees
to their affiliated provincial or state sport organizations, coaching salaries, facility
rental fees, and training equipment (e.g., Allison, 2001; Sharpe, 2006). It is further
due to the fact that the club was at a critical juncture and was not well-established
and thus did not have many expenses to date. Nonetheless, WGC growth may be
impeded if expenditures were to increase (e.g., due to development work).

Relationship and Network Capacity

Relationship and network connections between the CSO and external stakehold-
ers or partners were very evident in this case and discussed as a strength for the
WGC. It should be noted that the focus of this capacity dimension was on external
relationships between the club and various parties in the community (i.e., outside
of the relationships that exist among volunteers within the organization; cf.
Doherty & Misener, 2008). Relationship and network connections identified by
participants included those with the media, funding agencies, the local sport coun-
cil, a lawyer, university researchers, equipment and merchandise suppliers, school
principal, facility providers and other gymnastics clubs. Vail (2007) suggested
that community-based sport programs can be enhanced by involving nontradi-
tional partners and community leaders, who may not be recognized as part of the
sport system but understand the needs of the community. This was an effective
approach for the WGC, as one board member commented that, “the relationship
with [the principal] is pretty good too, since he knows a lot of parents in that com-
munity and the difficulties they are facing. I know he promotes the club as well”
(Lyndsay).

Benefits of partnerships and interorganizational linkages for sport and leisure
organizations have historically centered on the exchange of services and facilities
(Thibault et al., 1999). While these resources were an important basis of the club’s
partnerships, further social capital benefits were also mentioned by several par-
ticipants in this case, including social support, reputation in the community, and
reciprocity among partners:

When we are talking about relationships with the gymnastics community, we
help each other all the time, we wash each others hands . . . we do references
for each other. And it’s just amazing, because it’s so nice and so pleasant
when you come to that competition and everybody hugs you, and says, “Hi,
how’s it going? What’s happening in your club?” (Natalie)

I think they know us and know our club and tell everybody and maybe more
kids will come to our club. (Yvonne)

I think it helps increase the appearance of stability in the club when you have
certain logos and affiliations. People look at that and say “they may be around
a bit longer” or “they must have some sort of credentials to get that funding”.
(Rachel)

The notion that social capital can be (re)produced in and through sport orga-
nizations has attracted recent attention in the sport literature (Doherty & Misener,

Organizational Capacity 473

2008; Seippel, 2006; Sharpe, 2006). The central idea of social capital theory is
that social networks have value (Putnam, 1995). However, while there appears to
be potential for the generation of social capital in and through a CSO’s network of
stakeholders, evidence suggests the necessary type of relationship is not actually
realized to any great extent in the sport system (e.g., Allison, 2001; Barnes et al.,
2007; Cousens et al., 2006). The case of the WGC offers an example of a club
where social capital has taken on an essential role in relationship and network
capacity, perhaps helping to build other forms of capital such as human and finan-
cial resources (cf. Sharpe, 2006). This could be due to the shared values and
beliefs underpinning these relationships (e.g., Cousens et al., 2006). Respect,
trust, and openness were cited by several participants as key factors in building
relationship and network capacity. The values of the club were thus shown to be a
foundation from which the club builds external relationships.

Human resources were identified as having a strong influence on developing
relationship and network capacity. One of the board members had strong profes-
sional competencies in this area and her efforts were noted by four other mem-
bers. The active-member researcher also observed that,

In terms of partnerships, [she] sent one of the club’s calendars to the execu-
tive director of the provincial sport organization as well as one to the program
manager who has been a contact for the club. She continues to emphasize that
“good” partnerships will be a huge asset to the club over time.

The emphasis that the WGC has invested in maintaining positive relations
with community partners was believed to have strengthened this capacity
dimension.

The main challenge of relationship and network capacity was the time
required to form and maintain relationships. Participants were conscious of the
extensive commitment that was required for strategic relationships and thus chose
to be selective about which relationships the club would pursue. The lack of a
strategic plan was also noted as a weakness with regard to establishing and main-
taining relationship and network capacity. While participants considered relation-
ships to be beneficial for the club, there was an overall lack of strategic direction
for this capacity dimension.

Several representatives of the WGC considered this dimension of capacity to
be critical to goal achievement, impacting the overall stability, success, and impact
of the club in the community. All participants viewed relationships with other
organizations and stakeholders in the community to be beneficial for attaining
required resources, whether human, technical, or material. There was evidence
that members of the club had reflected on the limitations of the previous club and
purposefully sought out partners and relationships that would be advantageous to,
and compatible with, the new club.

Prior to this year, I would say that we didn’t really think strategically at all
about having partnerships—they didn’t even exist. It only started this summer
when we realized it was very important for growth to do that. (Charlotte)

The findings of this case are a sharp contrast to previous research, which
found that clubs operate quite autonomously with only about one quarter having

474 Misener and Doherty

links with such stakeholders as schools and other community organizations, while
less than one fifth had relationships with commercial companies such as corporate
sponsors (Allison, 2001). While there has been a growing recognition of the
importance of developing and managing strategic partnerships in sport and recre-
ation (e.g., Cousens et al., 2006; Thibault et al., 1999; Thibault & Harvey, 1997),
establishing linkages is difficult and often not actually achieved (Cousens et al.,
2006). Relationships were a priority for this club, were frequently established, and
deemed to be critical to its success. The findings of the current case provide evi-
dence of the positive impact of this dimension in one CSO.

Infrastructure and Process Capacity

The internal, operational aspects of an organization are represented within infra-
structure and process capacity (Hall et al., 2003). Several themes emerged when
participants were asked to describe the strengths of the day-to-day operations, or
“how work is done around here.” One theme that emerged as a strength for the
WGC was the frequent and open communication among board members. Com-
munication within the club was primarily done through e-mail, at board meetings,
and on an informal basis when parents were picking their children up from train-
ing sessions. The nature of communication among board members and coaches
was described by Yvonne: “We keep using the internet and everybody gets the
letters, not just me writing to you. If somebody sees something or writes some-
thing, all the board gets it. This is very good because everybody can answer when
they want and they want everybody’s opinion.”

Another aspect that emerged as a strength was the strong desire for more
formalized operations and processes within the club. This was evident through
many participants’ comments on the need to overcome their lack of formalized
procedures and develop official club documents (e.g., policies, procedures, job
descriptions, and contracts). While Allison (2001) found that management in sport
clubs was typically based on trust and experience, rather than formal contracts and
codes of practice, the participants in the current study felt that these documents
needed to be developed to ensure consistency and reputability. The desire for
more formal documentation was one indicator of a positive, forward-looking
organizational culture where board members wanted to see the club grow. Taylor
(2004) suggested that developing a culture that is consistent with a contemporary,
formal organization will increase capacity and promote overall club development.
The WGC appears to be moving in this direction.

Many other descriptions of the culture within the WGC centered on an inclu-
sive, supportive environment for athletes and parents. For example, as Charlotte
noted:

It’s competitive but also a fairly friendly atmosphere between each other .
. . they’ll all help each other out, they care about each other. That’s a very
important thing to foster. Whereas if they were in hockey or some other sport,
I find it’s not necessarily the same.

Participants were proud of this caring atmosphere and shared stories during
board meetings about how this culture was observed and admired at competitions
by parents and coaches from other clubs. These findings parallel the work of

Organizational Capacity 475

McKinsey and Company (2001) who claimed that culture is the “connective
tissue” that brings together the capacity elements of an organization.

Several challenges within this dimension were also noted. The active-mem-
ber researcher observed that the purpose and content of meetings was heavily
focused on the day-to-day operations, with little attention and time given to
broader concerns and direction for the club. Inglis, Alexander, and Weaver (1999)
cautioned that when a nonprofit board continually focuses on the operational
aspects of the organization, strategic activities and resource planning can be over-
looked. They further suggested that to govern effectively, boards should assess the
importance of these activities for their various constituent groups. Some partici-
pants also felt that the detail provided in reports was too lengthy and it was
observed that this information would be more appropriate for a “parents’ night”
meeting, rather than the monthly board meeting. Some concerns about the exten-
sive number of agenda items and the resultant length of meetings were
expressed.

I think that the biggest one would be time management. Let’s get to the
point and stick to the agenda. It’s not that I don’t want to be social. I’m just
stretched everywhere. I would say we need to stick to the decision that was
made at the previous meeting. (Nancy)

Another challenge for the WGC was consistent access to facilities. This was
notably a source of frustration for most board members and coaches. While some
members felt that the club should be looking toward building its own facility,
others felt that this would be too much of a financial burden and that the current
pay-for-use arrangements with schools and other facilities in the city were ade-
quate. Finding an appropriate training facility, where equipment could be stored,
was a challenge that required human resources as well as relationship and network
capacity. This issue has been previously identified in literature on community
sport organizations (Allison, 2001; Sharpe, 2006). Access to facilities was the
single greatest issue in ensuring both the sustainability and growth of sport clubs
in Scotland (Allison, 2001). The lack of permanence that was evident in the per-
ceptions of board members and coaches in this study is consistent among other
CSOs: “A facility base that ‘feels like a home’ is a central element of how clubs
define themselves and small features such as a storage cupboard or a noticeboard
can make a major difference to a clubs’ sense of ownership” (Allison, 2001, p. 6).
Notably, information technology, which was the most pressing issue in Hall et
al.’s (2003) research, did not emerge as an issue in this study. This could be due,
in part, to the small, informal nature of the reformed club and resulting lack of
sophisticated technology, as well as the recognition that basic operations were
essential at the critical juncture of the club, but sophisticated technology was not
yet needed. While many issues related to infrastructure and processes were dis-
cussed, this capacity dimension was not noted by participants as having a strong
impact on overall goal achievement for the club.

Planning and Development Capacity

When participants were asked if they were aware of any planning that had been
done in the club, most board members and coaches perceived that there had been

476 Misener and Doherty

some short-term planning done regarding coach training and transitions. It was
evident to the researchers, upon initial contact, that the club had no formal strate-
gic plan but did have a strong desire to develop a new mission statement and core
values, within a formal strategic plan. A further strength for the WGC was the
recognition from all research participants of the need for, and purpose of, plan-
ning, which was consistently described in terms of stability for the club and future
growth.

We need to plan for the future of the club—the growth of the club. What’s
supposed to happen in the club and what do we want for the club? Do we want
to increase recreational or are we looking at having a high class competitive
team? And then we need the framework to put that all into place. (Rachel)

Another board member added:

[Planning] just makes us more prepared to deal with anything. And if we
want the club to last at all . . . it’s going to last if we plan. If not, it will just
fall apart. (Yvonne)

Challenges in terms of planning and development were also present in the
WGC. Consistent with the previous club, the nature of planning was considered
by research participants to be reactionary and informal. With the exception of
improving coaching credentials, no organizational development had been for-
mally addressed (e.g., increasing the volunteer base, long-term facility planning).
Further, while athlete fees and fundraising efforts were covering the basic expenses
of the club, no financial provisions were being made, or funds set aside, for club
development. Allison (2001) claimed that the willingness to consider the financial
implications of planning and development is an important indicator of success for
sport clubs. Participants recognized this as a weakness and, in response, spoke of
planning needs in three areas: human resources (e.g., coaches, general volunteers,
board members), business and financial planning (e.g., financial goals and man-
agement), and program planning (e.g., national-level program, training facilities).
It was observed that a coherent strategic plan that has the support of the entire
group was needed as there were many different opinions expressed among partici-
pants regarding how the various planning needs would be prioritized.

Planning and development capacity was one of the biggest factors influenc-
ing the achievement of the goals of the WGC. The findings of this case are consis-
tent with previous literature which states that 58% of sport and recreation organi-
zations had difficulty planning for the future (Gumulka et al., 2005). Community
sport organizations tend to be informal in nature (Doherty, 2005b; Sharpe, 2006),
and long-term success generally depends on how the day-to-day operations of the
club are carried out (Allison, 2001). However, the findings of this study show that,
given the need for community sport programs that are integrated within a broader
sport system (Barnes et al., 2007), reactionary planning processes will no longer
ensure that programs are meeting complex expectations of multiple stakeholders
such as facility providers, suppliers, parents, and sport governing bodies (e.g.,
Sowa et al., 2004). Strategic planning is a common way to overcome these chal-
lenges (Eisinger, 2002) through minimizing uncertainty, while promoting stability
and future growth (Thibault, Slack, & Hinings, 1993). McKinsey and Company

Organizational Capacity 477

(2001) further emphasized that a new aspiration or strategy can only be transfor-
mative if it is then used to align the other elements of organizational capacity.

Connections Among the Capacity Dimensions
Hall et al. (2003) suggested that there are many connections among the capacity
dimensions, further highlighting the multidimensionality of organizational capac-
ity. Evidence of connections among the dimensions is consistently noted through-
out the findings. It was apparent that challenges related to insufficient human
resources plus a lack of a long-range strategic plan influenced the ability of the
organization to engage in financial planning and to strengthen its financial capac-
ity. For example, opportunities to apply for grants were continually being brought
to the attention of the board by those few members who were familiar with vari-
ous agencies through their own occupations. The WGC devoted some time during
each board meeting to review funding opportunities, yet most application pro-
cesses for grants were seen as too extensive and, consistent with other research
(Hall et al., 2003; Scott, 2003), the WGC did not have the personnel, skills, or
strategic priorities established to pursue many of these opportunities. In addition,
the vacant treasurer position resulted in a lack of necessary financial management
competencies that compromised the financial capacity of the club.

Several of the club’s capacity strengths were found to impact other dimen-
sions. Relational skills, as a competency evident within the club’s human resources
capacity, enabled further development of relationship and network capacity. In
Hall et al.’s (2003) research, the biggest challenges for nonprofit and voluntary
organizations in the area of relationship and network capacity appeared to be with
human resources in terms of lack of qualified staff with the skills required to build
and maintain relationships (also Sharpe, 2006). This was not the case for the WGC
board. It was helped by a board member with strong relational competencies who
also encouraged the other members to invest in relationships and develop personal
contacts as a key way to achieving the mission. However, the noted lack of plan-
ning limited the club’s ability to further develop relationship and network capac-
ity, as the findings showed a lack of strategic direction regarding which relation-
ships were most critical for investment of limited time and resources.

Hall et al. (2003) noted that it is much easier for organizations that have
access to staff, volunteers, and board members with the right skills to undertake
strategic planning processes. Where insufficient relationship and network capac-
ity has limited the ability of many nonprofit organizations to pursue organizational
development, the WGC recognized the need for specialized knowledge on plan-
ning and development and approached the researchers to acquire these resources,
thus using a stronger area of capacity (relationship and network capacity) to
develop another area (planning and development capacity).

Conclusions and Future Research
The multidimensional examination of organizational capacity in the WGC pro-
vides a comprehensive picture of the nature of each dimension and their relative
importance to goal achievement. The current study extends the body of research
on CSOs from its predominant consideration of human resource issues and rela-

478 Misener and Doherty

tionship and network capacity to a broader focus where multiple dimensions are
considered. Hall et al.’s (2003) framework contends that human resources is the
most important dimension of nonprofit organizational capacity, and that the vari-
ous dimensions interact to impact goal achievement. These contentions were veri-
fied in the context of the CSO examined here, thus providing support for the
framework and its use in future research on organizational capacity in other non-
profit settings. Differences in capacity by organizational context may be expected,
and several findings that appear to be unique to the community sport setting of the
current study were revealed. Further, the findings provide additional insight into
the nature and impact of the interactions among the dimensions in this particular
nonprofit context.

Human resources capacity was perceived by participants to be the most criti-
cal factor influencing goal attainment for the club. This is consistent with the work
of Hall et al. (2003) and Sharpe (2006). This dimension was characterized by
positive group dynamics, mutual values, and skills and knowledge, yet was lim-
ited by a lack of sufficient volunteers. In contrast to Hall et al. (2003), the partici-
pants in the current study reported that financial capacity was not a significant
issue related to goal attainment. However, challenges with regard to financial
planning and management may become more critical and require more attention
as the club grows and more people become involved. While the club was limited
by the amount of time that board members could devote to developing relation-
ship and network capacity, the impact of this dimension was reported to be critical
to overall goal achievement as it enabled further development of resources. Plan-
ning and development capacity was also found to have a strong impact on goal
achievement as the club recognized the importance of a long-range strategic plan.
Contrastingly, infrastructure and process capacity was not perceived to have a
strong impact on overall goal achievement for the club. In addition, several con-
nections among the capacity dimensions were noted. Specifically, the impact of
financial capacity and relationship and network capacity on goal achievement was
reportedly influenced by human resources, whereas a lack of planning was shown
to affect both the club’s financial capacity and relationship and network capacity.

The findings have several strategic implications for the WGC, centered on the
use of organizational capacity as a framework for holistic organizational develop-
ment. Specifically, expanding the volunteer base for the club and implementing a
succession plan will ensure that the quality of the program does not decline with
the departure of key volunteers, who have carried excessive loads. A succession
plan that is framed by the club’s strategic goals and human resource needs should
enable smooth transitions of leadership positions (Taylor et al., 2008). The WGC
can also learn from, and implement, strategies based on the connections among
capacity dimensions evidenced in this study. The club can develop its finances
through fundraising by building on its existing relationship and network capacity
to engage in purposeful approaches to donor and sponsor identification and devel-
opment (e.g., Misener & Paraschak, 2006). Further, identifying financial objec-
tives, and developing a long-range strategic plan will give purpose and direction
to further development of other capacity areas of the club.

The present study represents an initial examination of multidimensional
capacity in the context of one community sport organization. As such, this research
can be located in the broader nonprofit organizational capacity literature which

Organizational Capacity 479

has argued for the use of holistic, capacity-based studies as an effective means of
organizational analysis (Hou et al., 2003). The use of an active-member researcher
approach, alongside interviews, revealed greater insight into the factors that
impact goal achievement than a single data source would allow. This method also
revealed important insights into researcher positionality and transparency when
studying organizational issues. Being cognizant of our assumptions as researchers
and our position in relation to research participants is essential in building trust as
well as critically examining data from multiple viewpoints.

While case-specific examples have been highlighted in this study, a broader
investigation would help to identify the nature and impact of organizational capac-
ity in the population of CSOs. By continuing to move away from generating
merely descriptive lists of capacity characteristics (Eisinger, 2002), and investi-
gating capacity through various research methods (Wing, 2004), future research
can continue to explore the relationship between various dimensions of organiza-
tional capacity and goal achievement in sport organizations.

Notes

1. The terms nonprofit organizations and nonprofit and voluntary organizations are used
throughout this paper to collectively refer to service-providing organizations that are nongov-
ernmental, nonprofit distributing, self-governing, voluntary (i.e., benefit to some degree from
voluntary contributions of time or money), and may or may not be formally incorporated or
registered under specific legislation (Hall et al., 2004).

References
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2007). Participation in Sports and Physical Recreation.

Canberra, AUS: Author.
Adler, P.A., & Adler, P. (1987). Membership roles in field research. Beverly Hills, CA:

Sage.
Allison, M. (2001). Sports clubs in Scotland. Edinburgh, UK: SportScotland.
Amis, J., & Silk, M. (2005). Rupture: Promoting critical and innovative approaches to the

study of sport management. Journal of Sport Management, 19, 335–366.
Barnes, M., Cousens, L., & MacLean, J. (2007). From silos to synergies: A network per-

spective of the Canadian sport system. International Journal of Sport Management
and Marketing, 2, 555–571.

Bowman, W. (2007). Organizational slack (or Goldilocks and the three budgets). Nonprofit
Quarterly, 14(1), 16–22.

Canadian Sport Policy. (2002). Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada. Retrieved February
10, 2008, from http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/sc/pol/pcs-csp/index_e.cfm

Caza, A. (2000). Context receptivity: Innovation in an amateur sport organization. Journal
of Sport Management, 14, 227–242.

Canadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute. (2005). Local opportunities for physical
activity and sport: Trends from 1999-2004. Ottawa, ON: Author.

Chaskin, R. (2001). Building community capacity: A definitional framework and case stud-
ies from a comprehensive community initiative. Urban Affairs Review, 36, 291–323.

Cousens, L., Barnes, M., Stevens, J., Mallen, C., & Bradish, C. (2006). “Who’s your part-
ner? Who’s your ally?” Exploring the characteristics of public, private, and voluntary
recreation linkages. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 24, 32–55.

480 Misener and Doherty

Cuskelly, G. (2004). Volunteer retention in community sport organizations. European Sport
Management Quarterly, 4, 59–76.

Cuskelly, G., Hoye, R., & Auld, C. (2006). Working with volunteers in sport. London:
Routledge.

Cuskelly, G., Taylor, T., Hoye, R., & Darcy, S. (2006). Volunteer management practices
and volunteer retention: A human resource management approach. Sport Manage-
ment Review, 9, 141–163.

Doherty, A. (2005a). A profile of community sport volunteers. Toronto, ON: Parks and
Recreation Ontario. Retrieved January 10, 2008, from http://www.prontario.org/PDF/
reports/FinalReport_ExecutiveSummary_PhaseOne

Doherty, A. (2005b). Volunteer management in community sport clubs: A study of volunteers’
perceptions. Toronto, ON: Parks and Recreation Ontario. Retrieved January 10, 2008,
from http://www.prontario.org/PDF/SportVolunteerPhseIIExecutiveSummary

Doherty, A., & Carron, A. (2003). Cohesion in volunteer sport executive committees. Jour-
nal of Sport Management, 17, 116–141.

Doherty, A., & Misener, K. (2008). Community sport networks. In M. Nicholson & R.
Hoye (Eds.), Sport and social capital (pp. 113–141). London: Elsevier Butterworth
Heinemann.

Donnelly, P., & Kidd, B. (2003). Realizing the expectations: Youth, character, and com-
munity in Canadian sport. The sport we want: Essays on current issues in community
sport (pp. 25–44). Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport.

Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M. (1997). Intellectual capital. New York: Harper Collins.
Eisinger, P. (2002). Organizational capacity and organizational effectiveness among street-

level food assistance programs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31, 115–
130.

Forbes, D.P. (1998). Measuring the unmeasurable: Empirical studies of nonprofit effective-
ness from 1977 to 1997. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 27, 183–202.

Frisby, W. (2005). The good, the bad, and the ugly: Critical sport management research.
Journal of Sport Management, 19, 1–12.

Frisby, W., Crawford, S., & Dorer, T. (1997). Reflections on participatory action research:
The case of low-income women accessing local physical activity services. Journal of
Sport Management, 11, 8–28.

Frisby, W., Reid, C.J., Millar, S., & Hoeber, L. (2005). Putting “participatory” into partici-
patory forms of action research. Journal of Sport Management, 19, 367–386.

Frisby, W., Thibault, L., & Kikulis, L. (2004). The organizational dynamics of under-man-
aged partnerships in leisure service departments. Leisure Studies, 23, 109–126.

Glickman, N.J., & Servon, L.J. (1998). More than bricks and sticks: Five components of
community development corporation capacity. Housing Policy Debate, 9, 497–513.

Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.

Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2004). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In S.
Wagy Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research: A reader
on theory and practice (pp. 17–38). New York: Oxford University Press.

Gumulka, G., Barr, C., Lasby, D., & Brownlee, B. (2005). Understanding the capacity
of sports & recreation organizations. Retrieved September 10, 2007, from http://
www.sportmatters.ca//Images/Voluntary%20sector/2Understanding_Capacity_of_
Sports_&_Rec%20Report

Hall, M.H., Andrukow, A., Barr, C., Brock, K., de Wit, M., Embuldeniya, D., et al. (2003).
The capacity to serve: A qualitative study of the challenges facing Canada’s nonprofit
and voluntary organizations. Toronto, ON: Canadian Centre for Philanthropy.

Hall, M.H., de Wit, M.L., Lasby, D., McIver, D., Evers, T., Johnston, C., et al. (2004).
Cornerstones of community: Highlights from the National Survey of Nonprofit and
Voluntary Organizations. Ottawa, ON: Minister of Industry.

Organizational Capacity 481

Harrison, J., MacGibbon, L., & Morton, M. (2001). Regimes of trustworthiness in qualita-
tive research: The rigors of reciprocity. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 323–345.

Horton, D., Alexaki, A., Bennett-Lartey, S., Brice, K., Campilan, D., Carden, F., et al.
(2003). Evaluating capacity development: experiences from research and develop-
ment organizations around the world. The Hague, NL: International Service for
National Agricultural Research.

Hou, Y., Moynihan, D., & Ingraham, P. (2003). Capacity, management, and performance:
Exploring the links. American Review of Public Administration, 33, 295–315.

Inglis, S., Alexander, T., & Weaver, L. (1999). Roles and responsibilities of community
nonprofit boards. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 10, 153–167.

Jurbala, P. (2006). Sport, the voluntary sector, and Canadian identity. Retrieved September
20, 2007, from http://www.sportmatters.ca/Groups/SMG%20Resources/SMG%20
2006-Sport,%20the%20voluntary%20sector%20and%20Cdn%20identity

Kemmis, S. (1980). The imagination of the case and the invention of the study. In H.
Simons (Ed.), Towards a science of the singular (pp. 93–142). Norwich, UK: Univer-
sity of East Anglia Publications.

Kim, M., Chelladurai, P., & Trail, G. (2007). A model of volunteer retention in youth sport.
Journal of Sport Management, 21, 151–171.

Kirby, S., Greaves, L., & Reid, C. (2006). Experience research social change: Methods
beyond the mainstream (2nd ed.). Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.

Kosygina, L.V. (2005). Doing gender in research: Reflection on experience from the field.
The Qualitative Report, 10, 87-95. Retrieved June 26, 2008, from http://www.nova.
edu/ssss/QR/QR10-1/kosygina

Leisure Industries Research Centre. (2003). Sports volunteering in England 2002. Shef-
field, UK: Author.

McKinsey & Company. (2001). Effective capacity building in nonprofit organizations.
Washington, DC: Venture Philanthropy Partners.

Misener, K., & Paraschak, V. (2006). Fundraising capacity in Canadian national sport orga-
nizations: Relationship-building and gender. Third Sector Review, 12(2), 41–61.

Morgan, P. (2006). Study on capacity, change and performance: The concept of capacity.
Retrieved August 25, 2007, from http://www.ecdpm.org/dcc/capacitystudy

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.

Putnam, R.D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of
Democracy, 6, 65–78.

Roos, J., Roos, G., Dragonetti, N., & Edvinsson, L. (1998). Intellectual capital: Navigating
in the new business landscape. New York: New York University Press.

Sawhill, J.C., & Williamson, D. (2001). Mission impossible? Measuring success in non-
profit organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 11, 371–386.

Schwandt, T.A. (2001). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Scott, K. (2003). Funding Matters: The impact of Canada’s new funding regime on non-

profit and voluntary organizations. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Council on Social Devel-
opment.

Seippel, O. (2006). Sport and social capital. Acta Sociologica, 49(2), 169–183.
Sharpe, E.K. (2006). Resources at the grassroots of recreation: Organizational capacity

and quality of experience in a community sport organization. Leisure Sciences, 28,
385–401.

Shibli, S., Taylor, P., Nichols, G., Gratton, C., & Kokolakakis, T. (1999). The character-
istics of volunteers in UK sports clubs. European Journal for Sport Management, 6,
10–27.

Sowa, J.E., Seldon, S.C., & Sandfort, J.R. (2004). No longer unmeasurable? A multidi-
mensional integrated model of nonprofit organizational effectiveness. Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33, 711–728.

482 Misener and Doherty

Sport and Recreation New Zealand. (2002). NZ Sport and Physical Activity Surveys: SPARC
Facts ’97-’01. Retrieved July 24, 2008, from http://www.sparc.org.nz/research-policy/
research-/sparc-facts-97-01

England, S. (2008). Sport England Strategy 2008-2011. London: Sport England.
Stake, R.E. (2003). Case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of quali-

tative inquiry (2nd ed., pp. 134–164). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stevens, J., & Slack, T. (1998). Integrating social action and structural constraints: Towards

a more holistic explanation of organizational change. International Review for the
Sociology of Sport, 33, 143–154.

Taylor, P. (2004). Driving up sport participation: Sport and volunteering. In S. England
(Ed.), Driving up participation: The challenge for sport (pp. 103–110). London: Sport
England.

Taylor, T., Doherty, A., & McGraw, P. (2008). Managing people in sport organizations.
Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

Thibault, L., Frisby, W., & Kikulis, L. (1999). Interorganizational linkages in the delivery
of local leisure services in Canada: Responding to economic, political and social pres-
sures. Managing Leisure, 4, 125–141.

Thibault, L., & Harvey, J. (1997). Fostering interorganizational linkages in the Canadian
sport delivery system. Journal of Sport Management, 11, 45–68.

Thibault, L., Slack, T., & Hinings, B. (1993). A framework for the analysis of strategy in
nonprofit sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 7, 25–43.

Vail, S. (2007). Community development and sport participation. Journal of Sport Man-
agement, 21, 571–596.

Wing, K.T. (2004). Assessing the effectiveness of capacity-building initiatives: Seven
issues for the field. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33, 153–160.

Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ writing assignment ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Hire a Writer

Client Reviews

4.9

Sitejabber

4.6

Trustpilot

4.8

Our Guarantees

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Money Back

If you're confident that a writer didn't follow your order details, ask for a refund.

New to Your Trusted Assignment Help Service? Sign up & Save

Calculate the price of your order

Type of paper needed:

Pages:

You will get a personal manager and a discount.

Academic level:

We'll send you the first draft for approval by at

Total price:

$0.00

Power up Your Academic Success with the
Team of Professionals. We’ve Got Your Back.

Power up Your Study Success with Experts We’ve Got Your Back.

Order Now Order Now