The Culture of Athletics: Administration

I am going to begin a five-part series on how all populations found within the athletic dynamic (administrators, coaches, athletes, and parents) have a role/responsibility in making that culture functional and healthy.

Obviously, each level of the athletic experience has different variations on how they are structured and the role that a particular constituency plays in their day-to-day functions. For example, at the professional level, the role that parents play is essentially negligible - outside of an occasional, disgruntled family member taking offense as to how their kin are being used/misused/abused and the like. But by-in-large, all of the aforementioned groups wield a great deal of power and influence on how an athletic culture is designed, implemented, and administered.

For this week's discussion, I want to focus on Athletic Administrators

Regardless of the level of competition; athletic associations, organizations or teams have some form of leadership in place to serve the forward movement of their entity. And at each level, there are differences in how the "power structure" is constructed:

At the Professional Level, there are owners of teams who place a corporate template over the infrastructure. There is a President, and a General Manager, and a Board of Directors, and any other number of titled people who undertake various roles and responsibilities for the franchise. Even the governing bodies of the leagues that organize and operate the games have a corporate flavor to their structure.

At the Intercollegiate Level, the "Academic Bureaucratic Template" is utilized, which is where you have an Athletic Director who oversees the operations of the entire sports department of that college (Note: there may be a separate AD for women's sports at some institutions). But they ultimately answer to a President, who might answer to a Chancellor, who answers to the Board of Regents and/or the Board of Trustees. If one is cynical enough, the economic realities of modern collegiate athletics (especially at the Division I level) makes it imperative that there is some element of "corporate thought and structure" within the athletic department as a whole. I say "cynical" because I find it challenging that academic and corporate mantras can co-exist without varied forms of friction, rooted in differing objectives found in each philosophy...I will return to that thought later.

At the high school level, there is an Athletic Director (or Activities Director in recent years) who in responsible for all of the programs at the school. They too must answer to a Principal, who answers to a Superintendent, who answers to a School Board. It is for this very reason why you have a tendency to look at an Athletic Director in the current academic hierarchy as essentially a "Middle Manager" - an individual with a certain amount of power, but all in relative perspective. This too is a point for later.

Finally, at the youth level of athletic organizations, the leadership function can take on a variety of forms. You might have a "Leadership Council", or a "Board of Directors", or a "Competition Committee", or elected officers. There are many different forms that are in place. It doesn't necessarily matter how it looks, just be aware that the direction of the organization and its members is rooted in a "Leadership by Committee" Model - a philosophy that has its share of positives...as well as negatives.

When you examine the purpose or objectives of any of these athletic models, you assume that it is clear for everyone involved to witness. In my years of experience, this is what the vast majority of people would believe the goal is for each level:

At the professional....to win championships.

At the collegiate level....to provide an athletic program that promotes the university to the public in a favorable light; provides a source of enjoyment and entertainment for the student population, as well as the outside community; allows educational opportunities for some student-athletes who may not be able to attend a college in a standard context; and offers a training platform for individuals who may choose to pursue professional aspirations.

At the high school level....to provide an extra-curricular, educational platform that addresses the student's physical, intellectual and emotional growth.

At the youth level....to provide opportunities for athletes of all skill levels to compete and/or participate so as to assist them in growing as people, establishing relationships, and simply having fun.

I do not dispute that these general vision/mission statements are broad, and may be missing some specific elements; but by-in-large, these are the essential macro-based realities from which these organizations function. With that being said, here is where the problems occur...and they fall into three major categories:

1 - Not every constituency within the specific team, organization or association holds these principles as the purpose for their existence. Differing agendas from varied populations is the age-old prescription for conflict. And (unresolved) conflict brings any organization profound challenges in moving forward.

2 - The approach to address this conflict, chaos, and confusion is almost always in tweaking the rules, by-laws, systems and processes with "Band-Aid" solutions that essentially only seem to focus on micro issues.

3 - Lack of "cultural integrity"; based on words that profess that the organization represents one philosophy, but in truth, is defined more readily on the actions they take, which are often diametrically opposed to their community message.

This is where you hope that there would appear a "random act of leadership" by the administrators of these entities....but that is rare.

Now to be totally fair to administrators from all levels and abilities....often times, your hands are tied.....

At the professional level, there is more latitude to address issues since the power base is more acutely focused (although that doesn't mean professional franchises can't wander in mediocrity for decades without a clear hierarchy of authority, or making sound hires for those authority positions).

At the intercollegiate and interscholastic levels, the conflict and confusion that often seems to rule the day, is also rooted in rather ineffectual direction of purpose. A high school may have discussions within the highest levels of the district on how to address issues and move forward, but is this truly effective? A college or university can also have assessments and evaluations done on how they are dealing with the challenges they face, but are the solutions truly representative of what the real issues are? In both cases, the fly in the ointment is money.

To the high school, money shortages mean administrators find quicker and easier solutions to problems. The "why" an issue occurs, is passed over to instead find the "how" to control an issue.

To the colleges, athletics can be a huge economic windfall to the institution that benefits ALL - students, faculty, coaches, and administrators. Short-term resolution to problems is "safer" than long-term examination of their philosophy and practices. This may keep the money flowing in to the school, but it only serves as a temporary fix and moves the institution perilously close to ethical decay.

And at the youth level, while money does impact the challenges somewhat, the main problems stem from the make-up of the leadership councils. By nature, youth athletic boards are very transient - people come on and serve their time and move on when their child advances to the next level. This format lends itself to massive levels of disingenuous involvement by parents; who are more concerned with aiding their child's status/position as opposed to the advancing the greater good of all participants. People may be offended by that statement....but it is very, very real.

We can spend hours more defining the issues, but the bottom line is this:

Athletic organizations cannot continue to:

Assume that everyone knows what the purpose is, and what is the direction of the organization...

Assume that all people are in agreement with the purpose for existence and the direction they are moving...

Assume that regulatory structure can forever rein-in and address the conflict, chaos and confusion that exists...

The solutions to these issues are not quick-fix....they are going to take time and effort by all parties; but first and foremost, the initial push must come from the administrators. They must advocate the fight for clarity of purpose and inclusion by all populations of the athletic dynamic so as to create a sense of ownership. In doing so, people can support and uphold the systems and processes needed to drive a functional organization forward.

Money must not be viewed as the blessing or the curse to the organization. It must be utilized functionally so as to get efficient, lasting results....and it must not be worshiped - so much so that principles are compromised and ethical standards ignored.

Administrators can be gatekeepers...or they can be leaders.

And while they are but one part of this athletic culture, they are required to make a choice