838676.pdf

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

1/10

[ 238 ]

International Journal ofEducational Management11/ 6 [1997] 238247

MCB University Press[ISSN 0951-354X]

St rategic planning in higher education athlet icdepartments

Athanasios KriemadisMinistry of Education, Argos, Greece

The primary purposes of thisstudy were: to determine the

extent to which the strategicplanning process was beingused in NCAA Division I-A

athletic departments; toidentify the key factors that

discourage the above-mentioned departments fromengaging in strategic planning

activities; to develop andrecommend a generic strate-gic planning process model,

which could be implementedby the athletic departments;and to examine the relation-

ships between the extent ofstrategic planning used by the

athletic departments andthese selected variables: type

of the university (privateversus public), university size,and background of athleticdirectors. All 106 NCAA Divi-

sion I-A athletic departmentswere surveyed. The responserate was 72 per cent. Findings

of this study were as follows:33 (43.4 per cent) of the

athletic departments wereclassified as strategic plan-ners; insufficient financial

resources and time were thefactors that highly discour-aged the athletic departments

from engaging in strategicplanning; a strategic planningprocess model was developed

and an analysis of its severalcomponents was presented;the extent of strategic plan-

ning used by the athleticdepartments was not related

to the type of university,university size, and the back-ground of athletic directors.

Introduction

Throughout human history, people have been

engaged in some sort of planning in order to

accomplish designated goals and objectives.

Much of the planning li terature currently

being publi shed addresses the necessity ofplanning in the profit and non-profit sectors.

According to Buhler-Mi ko (1985), master

planning was the vogue in the sixties, long-

range planning in the seventies, and strategic

planning for the decades of the eighties and

nineties (p. 1).

The business sector of society has long rec-

ognized that continued profitabili ty requires

maintaining a strategic fit between the orga-

nizational goals and capabilities and the

changing societal and economic conditions.

As these environmental changes evolved,

businesses developed planning systems which

made possible co-ordinated and effectiveresponses to increasing unpredictabil ity,

novelty, and complexity (Ansoff, 1984).

According to Bryson (1988), strategic plan-

ning, which has developed in the private

sector, can help public and non-profit organi-

zations anti cipate and respond effectively to

their dramatically changing environments.

Most of the fundamental approaches and

methods of corporate management are appli c-

able to the public and non-profit management

area. However, public and non-profit planners

must be aware that corporate strategic plan-

ning embraces a range of approaches thatvary in their applicabil ity to the public and

non-profit sectors and in the conditions that

govern their successful use (p. 43). Strategic

thought and action have become increasingly

important and have been adopted by public

and non-profit planners to enable them to

successfully adapt to the future (Bank, 1992;

Bryson, 1988; Coolbaugh, 1993; Duncan, 1990;

Espy, 1988; Laycock, 1990; Medley, 1988; Nel-

son, 1990; Robinson, 1992; Streib and Poister,

1990; Wi lson, 1990).

The educational sector has begun to recog-

nize that planning is necessary in order to

maintain i ts own responsiveness to a rapidlychanging environment (Agwu, 1992; Busler,

1992; DeRose, 1986; Hall, 1994; Potgieter, 1992;

Schi lling, 1987; Schmeltzer, 1983; Smith et a l.,

1987; Spence, 1982; Walker, 1990; Williams,

1992). Cameron (1983) stated that the future

of colleges and universities as organizations

includes conditi ons of decline which require

a new set of administrative and organiza-

tional responses (p. 359). Todays colleges

and universities have experienced rapid

change. Educational administrators are con-

fronted with changes associated with ageing

facilities, changing technology, changing

demographics, increasing competition, rising

costs, funding cuts, etc. Educational adminis-

trators are challenged to anticipate changes

and to formulate proactive responses that

wi ll enhance the educational processes used

on college and university campuses. Some of

the major issues educational administrators

are facing include: the financing of higher

education; increasing levels of involvement

by public officials in the processes of higher

education; and the broadening of the basis for

knowledge within contemporary society(Ostar, 1989). Confronted with the unprece-

dented magnitude of changes a number of

colleges and universities have turned to

strategic planning which is designed to help

organizations respond effectively to their

new situations (Ballou, 1988; Cameron, 1983;

Kotler and Murphy, 1982; L ivesey, 1990; Man-

heimer, 1989; Mazur, 1991; Morgan, 1994;

Reichrath, 1990; Tol l, 1982).

Since athletic programmes are so much a

part of higher education institutions, athletic

departments face the same problems as do

institutions to which they belong. Athleticadministrators must now deal wi th periods of

decline, governmental mandates and guide-

li nes, and financial difficulties (Lewis, 1979).

Also, emphasis must be on placing the

athletic department in a competitive position

in changing environments because athletic

programmes have evolved to a point where

they compete for a segment of the entertain-

ment market. If athletic departments are to

respond, they must anticipate change and

adapt programmes and resources to meet

their mission and objectives (Bucher, 1987).

Strategic planning may help athletic depart-

ments anticipate and respond effectively totheir new situations, and develop strategies

necessary to achieve the athletic departments

mission and objectives (Dysonet a l., 1989;

Smith, 1985; Sutton and Migliore, 1988).

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

2/10

[ 239 ]

Athanasios KriemadisStrategic planning in highereducation athletic

departmentsInternational J ournal ofEducational Management11/ 6 [1997] 238247

Purpose of the study

The primary purposes of this study were to

determine the extent to which the strategic

planning process is being used in National

Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Divi-

sion I-A athletic departments; identify the key

factors that discourage NCAA Division I-A

athletic departments from engaging in strate-

gic planning activities; to develop and recom-

mend a generic strategic planning process

model, which can be implemented by NCAA

Divi sion I -A athletic departments. The devel-

opment of this model was based on the review

of li terature and the recommendations from a

selected number of athletic departments

which had been identified as strategic plan-ners; and to examine the relationships

between the extent of strategic planning used

by NCAA Division I-A athletic departments

and these selected variables: type of the uni-

versi ty (public versus private); university

size; and background of athletic directors.

The study addressed the following research

questions and hypotheses.

Research quest ions

The research questions to be examined for the

descriptive part of the study were as follows:1 To what extent is the strategic planning

process being used in NCAA Division I-A

athletic departments?

2 What are the key factors that discourage

NCAA Division I-A athletic departments

from engaging in strategic planning activi-

ties?

3 Is it possible to develop a generic strategic

planning process model, which can be

implemented by NCA A Division I-A

athletic departments?

Hypotheses test ed

1 The extent of strategic planning used by

NCAA Division I-A athletic departments is

independent of the type of the university

(publi c versus private).



independent of university size.



independent of the background of athletic

directors.

Signifi cance of t he study

Leaders and managers of non-profit

organizations and communities face diffi cult

challenges in the years ahead. According to

Bryson (1988), some examples of the several

trends and events are the demographic

changes, value shifts, the privatization of thepublic services, shifts in federal and state

funding priori ties, a volatile economy, and the

increased importance of the non-profit sector.

This turbulence is aggravated by the

increased interconnectedness of the world, so

that changes anywhere typically result i n

changes elsewhere (Luke, 1988).

Athletic administrators, just as non-profit

leaders and academic administrators, must

deal with this turbulent environment. More-

over, intercollegiate athletic programmes have

evolved to a point where they compete for a

segment of the entertainment market. Thefuture of intercollegiate athletics will depend

on the abil ity of the athletic departments to

respond effectively to their new situations, and

to develop strategies necessary to achieve the

athletic departments mission and objectives.

A number of authors (Ansoff and McDon-

nell, 1990; Bar ry, 1986; Bryson et a l., 1986, 1987;

Roweet a l., 1989; Steiner, 1979) argue that

strategic planning can help organizations in

this turbulent environment to:

think strategically and develop effective

strategies;

clari fy future direction;

establish priorities;

develop a coherent and defensible basis for

decision making;

improve organizational performance;

deal effectively with rapidly changing

circumstances;

anticipate future problems and opportuni-

ties;

build teamwork and expertise; and

provide employees with clear objectives

and directions for the future of the organi-

zation and increase their motivation and

satisfaction.

Newman and Wallender (1987) suggested that

basic management concepts should be applied

to both profit and non-profit organizations.

This study is useful in extending the concept of

strategic planning to intercollegiate athletics.

The study will be useful in helping athletic

administrators to further their understanding

of the strategic planning process in their

respective athletic departments. More specifi-

cally, the present study of strategic planning

process in NCA A Division I-A athletic depart-

ments provided information about the extent

of the strategic planning process currently

being used in these athletic departments, andthe relationships between the extent of strate-

gic planning used by NCA A Division I-A ath-

letic departments and these selected variables:

type of university (public versus private);

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

3/10

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

4/10

[ 241 ]



written, long-range plans; assessed the exter-

nal and internal environments; and estab-

li shed strategies based on departments mis-

sion, objectives. Consequently, 43.4 per cent ofthe athletic departments may be identified as

strategic planners. The data in Table II also

reveal that 28 (36.8 per cent) of the athletic

departments uti li ze wri tten short-range oper-

ational plans of action and budgets for the

current fiscal period, whi le 13 (17.1 per cent)

of the athletic departments have no written

plans, but instead have developed short-range

informal, unwritten plans based on the intu-

ition and experience of the admini strative

team. A very low percentage of the athletic

departments (2.6 per cent) i ndicated that they

had no measurable structured planning.

Questionnaire item BThe data from the respondents (see Table II I)

indicate that the external factors considered

to a very great or great extent by 70 per

cent or more of the athletic departments when

formulating their plans were: spectators,

board of trustees, NCAA Division I-A trends,

university administrators, educational

trends,and economic/ tax considerations.

There were no factors considered to a very

li ttle or li ttle extent by 70 per cent or more

of the athletic departments when formulating

their plans. The factor considered to theleast extent by 60.6 per cent of the athletic

departments was religious groups.

Questionnaire item CAs noted in Table IV, it was found that the

internal factors considered to a very great

or great extent by 70 per cent or more of the

athletic departments when formulating their

plans were: financial performance, adequacy

of facil ities, coaches opinion, athletes acade-

mic achievement, athletic performance,

coaches performance, and athletic depart-

ments staff performance.

There were no factors considered to a very


of the athletic departments when formulating

their plans.

Questionnaire item FThe data displayed in Table V reveal that the

items incorporated to a very great or

great extent by 70 per cent or more of the

athletic departments were: financial plan,

facilities master plan, and marketing plan.

There were no items incorporated to a very


of the athletic departments.Questionnaire item GThe responding athletic departments (see

Table VI), util ize short-range plans which

cover approximately two years, and long-

Table I I

Level of planning in NCAA division I-A athletic

departments

Plans Frequency Percent age

Structured long-range 33 43.4Operational 28 36.8Intuitive 13 17.1Unstructured 2 2.6

Table III

Extent to which external factors are considered in the planning process (indescending order of consideration)

Very l it t le Very great

Fact ors or lit t le Some or great M ean SD

Spectators 1 (1.3)a 10 (13.2) 65 (85.6) 4.30 0.75Trustees 1 (1.3) 10 (13.2) 65 (85.6) 4.30 0.75University administration 3 (3.9) 15 (19.7) 58 (76.4) 4.17 0.93NCCA trends 2 (2.6) 16 (21.1) 58 (76.3) 4.08 0.86Education trends 1 (1.3) 18 (23.7) 57 (75.0) 3.99 0.74Economic t ax 6 (7.9) 15 (19.7) 55 (72.4) 4.03 0.95Community 2 (2.6) 19 (25.0) 55 (72.4) 4.01 0.82State/ federal 9 (11.8) 16(21.1) 51 (67.1) 3.89 1.05Demographics 10 (13.2) 22 (28.9) 44 (57.9) 3.60 1.07Social trends 7 (9.2) 29 (38.2) 40 (52.7) 3.53 0.94Businesses 9 (11.8) 30 (39.5) 37 (48.7) 3.41 0.86Competitors 14 (18.4) 26 (34.2) 36 (47.4) 3.40 1.03Media 19 (25.0) 22 (28.9) 35 (46.1) 3.27 1.14

Suppliers 22 (28.9) 21 (27.6) 33 (43.4) 3.17 1.23Parents 15 (19.7) 30 (39.5) 31 (40.8) 3.37 1.06Technology 21 (27.7) 25 (32.9) 30 (39.5) 3.20 1.10Civic organization 27 (35.5) 34 (44.7) 15 (19.7) 2.80 0.94Political trends 27 (35.5) 35 (46.1) 14 (18.5) 2.71 1.07Religious groups 46 (60.6) 17 (22.4) 13 (17.1) 2.32 1.20

Notes:a Frequency (percentage)

Scaling: 1 =very little; 2 =little; 3 =some; 4 =great; 5=very great

Table IV

Extent to which internal factors are considered in the planning process (in

descending order of consideration)

Very l it t le Very great


Financial preference 1 (1.3)a 9 (11.8) 66 (86.8) 4.37 0.80Facilities 2 (2.6) 8 (10.5) 66 (86.9) 4.08 0.67Coaches opinion 1 (1.3) 11 (14.5) 64 (84.2) 4.03 0.63Athletic academics 13 (17.1) 63 (82.9) 4.26 0.74Athletic preference 1 (1.3) 14 (18.4) 61 (80.2) 4.08 0.73Coaches preference 3 (3.9) 12 (15.8) 61 (80.3) 4.01 0.76Staff preference 3 (3.9) 14 (18.4) 55 (72.3) 3.92 0.75Administration preference 5 (6.6) 18 (23.7) 53 (69.7) 3.90 0.92Athletes preference 4 (5.3) 26 (34.2) 46 (60.5) 3.75 0.83Athletes opinion 7 (9.2) 23 (30.3) 46 (60.6) 3.64 0.87

Advisory committ ees 9 (11.8) 34 (44.7) 33 (43.4) 3.42 0.84

Notes:a Frequency (percentage)

Scaling: 1 =very little; 2 =little; 3 =some; 4 =great; 5=very great

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

5/10

[ 242 ]


departmentsInternational Journal ofEducational Management11/ 6 [1997] 238247

range plans which cover approximately six

and a half years.

Questionnaire item HThe responding athletic departments haveengaged in long-range planning for about six

years.

Questionnaire item IOnly 29 (38.2 per cent) of the athletic depart-

ments have already established a formal

planning committee.

Questionnaire item JWhen athletic departments were asked

whether they plan to establish a formal plan-

ning committee within the next two years,

only eight (10.5 per cent) indicated that they

plan to establish such a committee.

Research quest ion 2What are the key factors that discourage

NCA A Division I-A athletic departments from

engaging in strategic planning activi ties?

Questionnaire item DAs mentioned above, 43.4 per cent of the ath-

letic departments were engaged in strategic

planning, while 56.6 per cent were not identi-

fied as strategic planners. The data displayed

in Table VI I reveal which factors discourage

those athletic departments not identified as

strategic planners (56.6 per cent) from engag-

ing in strategic planning activities. Table VII

indicates that 46.5 per cent of the athletic

departments not engaged in strategic plan-

ning identified insufficient financial

resources and time as factors that discouragethem to a very great or great extent from

engaging in strategic planning activi ties. On

the other hand, there were two factors (lack of

planning poli cy, and planning not valued by

athletic departments) that discourage 46 per

cent or more of the athletic departments not

engaged in strategic planning to a very li ttle

or little extent. Interestingly, 60.5 per cent of

the athletic departments indicated that insuf-

ficient experience and training was a factor

that discouraged them to some extent from

engaging in strategic planning activities.

Research quest ion 3Is it possible to develop a generic strategic

planning process model, which can be imple-

mented by NCA A Division I-A athletic

departments?

Figure 1 presents the strategic planning

process model as developed by the researcher.

A brief analysis of the several steps involved

in the strategic planning process follows.

Strat egic planning process modelStrategy formulation1 Whether developing a new organization or

reformulating the direction of an ongoingone the culture, poli cies, values, vision,

mission, and long-term objectives which

will shape an organizations strategic

posture must be determined.

2 The existence of social, politi cal, educa-

tional, demographic, legal, economic/ tax,

technological, and competitive changes

require athletic departments to perform

an effective external environmental

assessment of the existing opportunities

and threats, and in this way to anticipate

and respond effectively to changes.

3 Athletic departments should evaluate

their strengths and weaknesses whichcould influence the future of their survival

and growth.

4 Periodically, athletic departments should

reconsider/ revise their stated values,

Table V

Extent to which the athletic departments incorporate the following items (in


Very lit t le Very great


Financial plan 5 (6.6)a 70 (92.1) 4.53 0.62Facilities plan 4 (5.3) 13 (17.1) 58 (76.3) 3.97 0.80Marketing plan 7 (9.2) 12 (15.8) 56 (73.7) 3.97 0.80Human resource plan 10 (13.2) 25 (32.9) 40 (52.6) 3.50 0.84Contingency plan 18 (23.6) 34 (44.7) 21 (27.6) 3.08 0.95

Notes:a Frequency (percentage)Scaling: 1 =very little; 2 =little; 3 =some; 4 =great; 5=very great

Table VII

Factors that discourage strategic planning in athletic departments (in


Very lit t le Very great


Insufficient finance 12 (27.9)a 11 (25.6) 20 (46.5) 3.35 1.31Insufficient time 11 (25.6) 12 (27.9) 20 (46.5) 3.35 1.09Personnel resistance 18 (41.9) 15 (34.9) 10 (23.3) 2.67 0.99Communication 15 (34.9) 19 (44.2) 9 (21.0) 2.84 0.95Insufficient training 10 (23.3) 26 (60.5) 6 (13.9) 2.86 0.81Planning policy 20 (46.5) 17 (39.5) 6 (13.9) 2.49 1.03

Planning value 23 (53.5) 14 (32.6) 6 (13.9) 2.26 1.04

Notes:a Frequency (percentage)Scaling: 1 =very little; 2 =little; 3 =some; 4 =great; 5=very great

Table VI

Number of years short- and long-range plans

cover

Plans M ean

Short-range plans 1.75Long-range plans 6.50

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

6/10

[ 243 ]



vision, mission, and long-term objectives in

order to be responsive to changes occurr ing

in their external or internal environments.

5 After the athletic department has estab-

li shed its long-term objectives (taking intoconsideration external and internal envi-

ronmental assessments), the selection of

long-term strategies that meet the depart-

ments objectives should be undertaken.

Strategy implementationOnce selection of long-term strategies has

been made, the next step would be the estab-

li shment of short-term objectives and short-

term strategies to achieve long-term objec-

tives and strategies.

Strategy evaluationThe final component in the strategic planning

process is the strategy evaluation and isessential to ensure that stated objectives are

being achieved. Reviewing internal and

external factors, measuring performance,

and taking corrective actions are the activi -

ties associated with thi s component.

Hypotheses test ed



independent of the type of university (pub-

li c versus private).

Chi-square was performed to determinewhether there was a relationship between

the extent of strategic planning used by

NCAA Division I-A athletic departments

and type of the university (publi c versus

private). The data displayed in Table VIII

revealed no significant relationship

between the two variables.


NCA A Division I-A athletic departments isindependent of the university size.

The analysis indicated that there was no

significant relationship between the extent

of strategic planning and university size in

NCA A Division I-A athletic departments

(see Table IX).


NCA A Division I-A athletic departments is

independent of the background of athletic

directors.

The data were analysed by using Chi-

square. The results demonstrated that

there was no significant relationship

between the extent of strategic planningused by athletic departments and back-

ground of athletic directors (see Table X).

Figure 1

Strategic planning process model

Externalenvironmentassessment

OpportunitiesThreats

Reconsider/revise

Culture

Policies

Values

Vision

Mission

Long-termobjectives

Selection oflong-termstrategies

Establishshort-termobjectives

Performancemeasurement

andevaluaton

Culture

Policies

Values

Vision

Mission

Long-termobjectives

Internalenvironmentassessment

Strengths

Weaknesses

Developshort-termstrategies

Table VIII

Chi-square analysis of the extent of strategicplanning and type of university

Chi-square DF Significance

0.029 2 0.99

Table I X

Chi-square analysis of the extent of strategicplanning and type of university size


2.06 4 0.72

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

7/10

[ 244 ]



Discussion, implications andrecommendations

This study is an attempt to assist the manage-

ment of athletic departments by identifying

strategic planning activities util ized by

NCA A Division I-A athletic departments and

by introducing a strategic planning process

model which can be utilized in departmentalplanning. The strategic planning process

model may help athletic departments to think

strategically, clarify future direction, deal

effectively with rapidly changing environ-

ments, and anticipate and initiate change.

DiscussionMore than 80 per cent of the athletic depart-

ments indicated that they were involved in

strategic planning activi ties such as develop-

ing vision, mission, goals and objectives, long-

term and short-term strategies, and evalua-

tion procedures. However, only 43.4 per cent of

the athletic departments may be classified asstrategic planners since only that percentage

met the criteria of: having formalized written,

long-range plans; having assessed the exter-

nal and internal environments; and having

established strategies based on departmental

mission and objectives. A majority of athletic

departments (56.6 per cent) were identified as

non-strategic planners even though they took

into consideration some of the strategic plan-

ning process components. They were excluded

because their planning endeavours fell into

one of the following categories: they uti li zed

short-range, written plans of action and bud-gets for current fiscal period (short-range

planners); they util ized short-range, unwr it-

ten plans that are stored in the memories of

the athletic departments administrators

(intui tive planners); or they did not use any

measurable planning procedures.

According to Harvey (1982), the purpose of

the development of a strategic plan is to main-

tain or gain a position of advantage in rela-

tion to competitors. Once the strategic plan i s

made, the implementation stage of the plan i s

the critical step. The issue of implementation

was not ri gorously assessed in thi s study.

Consequently, it may be questioned whetherthe athletic departments that had been identi-

fied as strategic planners, actually implement

the strategic plan when making decisions

concerning the commitment of departments

resources towards the desired objectives.

This position is supported to some degree by

the following findings surfacing in this study:

1 A small percentage of the athletic depart-ments (38.2 per cent) have establi shed a

formal planning committee. In addition,

long-range planning experience is only

about six years old. Given the lack of expe-

rience and a formal planning committee,

it does not seem li kely that many of the

athletic departments systematically

adhere in the entire strategic planning

process, i.e. formulation, implementation,

and evaluation.

2 There seem to be differi ng opini ons con-

cerning the number of years the short- and

long-range plans should cover. With theexternal environment changing so rapidly,

athletic departments must realize that

they have to reduce the period of time the

short- and long-range plans cover.

3 Athletic departments do not seem to suffi-

ciently consider the human resources

factor and the development of contingency

plans in their planning activities. These

two support activities are time consuming.

Since time and expertise are two signifi-

cant factors that influence athletic depart-

ments not to plan, these two factors might

also be significant in athletic departments

not implementing the strategic plan. To

the contrary, the strategic planning li tera-

ture indicates that significant considera-

tion must be given to the development of a

human resources plan. David (1989) sug-

gested that even a well-designed strategic

plan can fail if insufficient attention is

given to the human resources dimension.

Regarding the importance of developing

contingency plans, Pearce and Robinson

(1985) stated that for organizations to improve

their abili ty to cope with change, they must

adopt a contingency approach to strategicplanning and must develop contingency

plans. The success of the strategy chosen is

contingent to varying degrees on future con-

ditions. Based on this important observation,

administrators should identify scenarios,

develop alternatives, and formulate contin-

gency strategies for the athletic department.

In this way, they wil l always anticipate and

respond to changes effectively.

A small percentage of Division I-A athletic

departments are financially self-supporting

(Atwell et a l., 1980; Raiborn, 1990). Athletic

directors, already under financial duress, have

not seen the value of uti li zing scarce resourcesfor engaging in strategic planning activities.

Since contradictory findings have been drawn

from studies concerning the relationship

between strategic planning and financial

Table X

Chi-square analysis of the extent of strategic

planning and background of athletic directors


6.75 4 0.15

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

8/10

[ 245 ]



performance, athletic directors may not wish

to expend resources on an unproven ven-

ture. Insufficient training in strategic plan-

ning practices may be another factor whi chdiscourages athletic directors from engaging

in strategic planning. The availability, cost,

and time for training does not readily lend

itself to the needs of athletic departments to

become proficient in the strategic planning

process.

The study provided evidence that the extent

of strategic planning used by NCAA Divi sion

I-A athletic departments does not seem to be

related to the type of university, university

size, and background of athletic directors.

According to Steiss (1985), the concept of

strategic planning first found application inthe private sector. The strategic planning

process was designed to provide direction to

the organization and guide all its operational

activi ties. However, most of the fundamental

approaches, methods, and procedures of

strategic planning are directly applicable to

the public or non-profit sector. Based on this

observation, this author is wondering why

athletic departments in private universi ties

have not taken greater advantage of this plan-

ning process when compared with public

universities.

David (1989) noted that strategic planning

in small fir ms is more informal than in largefirms. It was surprising to this author that

large universities have not adopted a strate-

gic planning approach to decision making to

a greater extent when compared with small

universities.

Whi le some athletic directors had work

experiences from the private sector, it would

seem that they either did not transfer their

knowledge and experiences in strategic plan-

ning or had not acquired the necessary ski lls

in strategic planning to be able to transfer

them to the athletic departments environ-

ment. This may be attributed to the fact thatthe athletic department decision makers may

lack the necessary human and financial

resources to undertake strategic planning

activities. Another possible reason could be

that university administration does not

encourage the formulation and implementa-

tion of the strategic planning process in ath-

letic department decision making.

ImplicationsThe findings presented and discussed above

have implications for the development and

use of the strategic planni ng process in ath-

letic departments:1 The proposed strategic planning process

model is a way of helping athletic adminis-

trators think and act strategically. By rec-

ognizing and analysing key variables in

the proposed model, athletic departments

will be better able to: establish and periodi-

cally review mission and objective state-

ments; identify external and internal vari -ables and their i nterrelationships; and

formulate, implement, and evaluate their

strategies. The identification of these vari -

ables wi ll contribute to the development of

realistic decisions in the light of their

future consequences.

2. Since the two most significant constraints to

strategic planning were insufficient finan-

cial resources and time, athletic depart-

ments need to recognize these constraints

and be willing to commit the financial

resources and time, if they are to support

the implementation of the strategic plan.3 If strategic planning is to be considered as

an important administrative responsibili ty

(as suggested by the li terature), and if

another significant constraint to strategic

planning is insufficient training and experi -

ence in planning procedures, then athletic

departments should provide necessary

planning skills through educational pro-

grammes. In this way, decision makers will

begin to consider strategic planning as one

of their primary responsibili ties rather

than an additional task. Educational pro-

grammes emphasizing such ski lls as human

relations, analytical thinking, time manage-ment, and participatory decision making

can greatly assist athletic departments in

carrying out the strategic planning process.

4. In developing the strategic planning

process model, those who were identified

as strategic planners indicated that they

relied heavily on the experti se of consul-

tants. It would, therefore, seem advisable

that outside consultation and facil itation

can help athletic administrators in the

application of the strategic planning

process for their respective departments.

Recommendations for further studyThe li terature in the area of strategic plan-

ning in intercollegiate athletics is very l im-

ited. There appears to be an ever increasing

interest in this area, and further studies

could prove to be beneficial. Based on the

findings of this study, the following recom-

mendations are offered for future research:

1 Follow-up studies should be done to the

same sample in three to five years to inves-

tigate possible changes in the util ization of

the strategic planning process.

2 Research needs to be done to the same

population (NCAA Division I-A athleticdepartments) to assess quali tatively the

extent of strategic planning.

Qualitative case studies rely on data

obtained from interviews, observations,

8/14/2019 838676.pdf

9/10

[ 246 ]



and the study of official documents. Some

of the intervi ew and observation issues

would address membership of the planning

committee, the type of data used in plan-ning, the methods used to obtain the data,

the type of leadership behaviour which

appears to be needed to ensure the success

of the planning effort, and the resistance

that is encountered in gaining commit-

ment to strategic planning. The study of

official documents would reveal the extent

to which these documents address them-

selves to strategic issues such as the exter-

nal or internal environmental assessment.

3 A comparative study of strategic planning

should be conducted among the NCAA

Divisions (I, II , and III ).4 A useful investigation might also be under-

taken to assess the relationship between the

extent of strategic planning activi ties used

by athletic departments and the financial

performance or productivi ty of these

departments. It would be necessary to estab-

li sh which measures of financial perfor-

mance or productivi ty would be appropri-

ate. A suggestion concerning a measure of

financial performance for athletic depart-

ments might be the percentage of self-gener-

ated revenue. Examples of self-generated

revenue are ticket sales, concessions, spon-

sorships, TV and radio, etc., as opposed to

university funding. Another suggestion

concerning a measure of productivi ty of

athletic departments might be the in-con-

ference and national performance of the

total athletic programme.

5 Fi nally, future research should be designed

to establish the validity and reliabili ty of a

strategic planning survey instrument

which could be used in any NCAA athletic

department to evaluate the quantity and

quality of strategic planning activi ties

which are occurring, and the effectiveness

of the implementation of those strategicplans that have been developed.

ReferencesAgwu, P. (1992), Strategic planni ng in higher

education: a study of application in Arkansas

senior colleges and universities,Dissertat ion

Abstracts In ter nat i onal, DAI-A 53/08, 0745

(University Microfilms No. A AC 9300582).

Ansoff, H.I . (1984), Im plan t in g Strategic M anage-

ment, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cli ffs, NJ .

Ansoff, H.I . and McDonnell, E . (1990), Imp l an t i ng

Strat egic M an agement(2nd ed.), Prentice-

Hall, Englewood Cli ffs, NJ .

Atwell, R.H., Gr imes, B. and Lopiano, D.A. (1980),

T he M oney Game, American Council of Edu-

cation, Washington, DC.

Bal lou, P. (1988), A model of strategic planning for

public schools,Disser tat ion Abstracts

In te rna t iona l, DAI-A 49/ 11, 0514 (University

Microfilms No. AAC 8825986).

Bank, B. (1992), Strategic management in non-

profit art organizations: an analysis of cur-rent practice,Disser tat ion Abstracts Inter na-

t iona l, MAI 32/ 01, 0454 (University M icrofilms

No. AAC 1353924).

Barry, B.W. (1986), Strategic Plann ing Workb ook

for N on-profit Organ izat ions, Amherst H.

Wilder Foundation, St Paul, MI .

Bryson, J .M. (1988),Strategic Plan nin g for Publ ic

and N on-profit Organ izat ions, J ossey-Bass,

San Francisco, CA.

Bryson, J.M., Freeman, R. E. and Roeri ng, W. D.

(1986), Strategic planning in the public sector:

approaches and directions, in Checkoway, B.

(Ed.),Strategic Perspectives on Pla nn in g Pr ac-

tice, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.Bryson, J .M., Van de Ven, A.H. and Roering, W.D.

(1987), Strategic planning and revitalization

of the public service, in Denhardt, R. and

J ennings, E. (Eds), Toward a N ew Pub l i c

Ser vice, Extension Publ icati on, University of

Missouri, Columbia, MO.

Bucher, C.A. (1987),M anagement of Physical Edu -

cat ion and A thl et ic Programs, C.V. Mosby

Company, St Louis, MI.

Buhler-Miko, M . (1985),A T r ustees Guid e to

Strategic Plan nin g, Hi gher Education Strate-

gic Planning Institute, Washington, DC.

Busler, B. (1992), The role of strategic planni ng

and its effect on decision making in Wiscon-sin public schools, Disser tat ion Abstracts



Cameron, K. (1983), Strategic responses to condi-

tions of decline in higher education and pri -

vate sector, Jour nal of Higher Educat ion,

Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 359-80.

Coolbaugh, J . (1993), An analysis of strategic

planning in Cali fornia cities,Dissertat ion

Abstracts In ter nat i onal, DA I-A 55/ 05, 0999

(University Microfilms No. AAC 9426151).

David, F. (1989), Strategic M anagement, Merri ll,

Columbus, OH.

DeRose, J .W. (1986), A compari son of district level

planning practices in selected Pennsylvania

school distri cts to the li terature of planni ng,

Disser tat ion A bstracts Internat i onal, 47/ 09-A.

Duncan, H. (1990), Strategic planning theory

today,Opt imum, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 63-74.

Dyson, D., Manning, M., Sutton, W. and Migliore,

H. (1989), T he effect and usage of strategic

planning in intercollegiate athletic depart-

ments in A merican colleges and universiti es,

paper presented at North American Society

for Sport Management, University of Calgary.

Espy, S. N. (1988), Creating a fir m foundation,

Non -pr ofit World, Vol. 6 No. 5, pp. 23-4.

Hall , G. (1994), Strategic planning: a case study of

behavioral i nfluences in the administrative

decisions of middle managers in small inde-

pendent col leges, Disser tat ion Abstracts



8/14/2019 838676.pdf

10/10

[ 247 ]



Harvey, D. (1982),Bu siness Policy and Str ategic

M anagement, Bell and Howell, Columbus, OH.

Kotler, P. and Murphy, P.E. (1982), Strategic plan-

ning for higher education, Journ a l o f H igherEducat ion, Vol. 52 No. 5, pp. 470-90.

Laycock, D.K. (1990), Are you ready for strategic

planning?, Non -pr ofit World, Vol. 8 No. 5,

pp. 25-7.

Lewis, T.D. (1979), Analysis of financial and man-

ageri al procedures and methodologies uti-

li zed by intercollegiate athletics, unpub-

li shed doctoral dissertation, University of

Nebraska, p. 374.

L ivesey, J .W. (1990), A description of strategic

planning practices among selected California

public school districts,Dissertat ion


(University Microfilms No. AAC 9120333).Luke, J . (1988), Managing interconnectedness:

the challenge of shared power, in Bryson,

J .M. and Einsweiler, R.C. (Eds) ,Shared

Power: Wh at I s It? How Does It Work ? How Can

We M ak e It Work Better ?, University Press of

Ameri ca, Lanham, MD.

Manheimer, R. (1989), Initiating strategic plan-

ning in a selected school distri ct,Disserta-

t ion Abstracts In ter nat i onal, DAI -A 50/ 08,

0514, (University M icrofilms No A AC 9002565).

Mazur, D. (1991), A study of the strategic manage-

ment process at a private college,Disserta-

t ion Abstracts In ter nat i onal, DAI-A 52/05, 0514

(University Microfilms No. AAC 9129480).Medley, G.I. (1988), Strategic planning for the

World Wildlife Fund, Long Range Plann i ng,

Vol . 21 No. 1, pp. 46-54.

Morgan, T. (1994), A study of the use of strategic

planning in A labama publi c schools,Disser-

tat ion Abstracts In ter nat i onal, DAI -A 55/ 07,

0514 (University M icrofilms No. A AC 9430124).

Nelson, R.S. (1990), Planning by a non-profit

should be businesslike,Non -pr ofit World,

Vol . 8 No. 6, pp. 24-7.

Newman, W.H. and Wallender, H.W. (1987), M an-

aging not-for-profit enterprises,Academy of

M ana gement Review, Vol. 3, pp. 24-31.

Nummally, J .C. (1967),Psychometri c T heor y,McGraw-Hi ll, New York, NY.

Ostar, A .W. (1989), What the future holds for

American colleges and universities: the qual-

ity of undergraduate education, V i t a l

Speeches, Vol. 55 No. 18, pp. 558-62.

Pearce, J .A. and Robinson, R.B. (1985),Strategic

M anagement : Strategy, For mu lat i on and

Implementat ion(2nd ed.), Richard I rwi n,

Homewood, IL .

Potgieter, M. (1992), Strategic management i n

schools,Disser tat ion A bstracts Internat ional,

MAI 32/ 01, 0514 (not available from UMI).

Raiborn, M.H. (1990),Revenues and Ex penses of

In tercol l egiate Athl et ic Pr ograms, NCAA ,Overland Park, K S.

Reichrath, M. (1990), A study of strategic

planning readiness in Georgia publi c school

systems,Disser tat ion Abstracts



Robinson, J . (1992), Strategic planning processesused by not-for-profit community social ser-

vice organizations and a recommended strate-

gic planning approach,Dissertat ion


(University Microfilms No. AAC 9302958).

Rowe, A.J ., Mason, R.O., Dickel, K .E. and Snyder,

N.H. (1989),Strat egic M ana gement, Addison-

Wesley, New York, NY.

Schil li ng, J .S. (1987), Long-range planning in

small community colleges,Dissertat ion

Abstracts In ter nat i onal, 48/ 06-A (University

Microfilms No. AAD 87-19322).

Schmeltzer, I.S. (1983), The uti li zation of inter-

mediate/ long-range planning processes in

selected school distr icts in Iowa,Dissertat ion

Abstracts In ter nat i onal, 44/ 12A, 3567 (Univer-

sity Microfilms No. AA D84-07781).

Smith, C.A. (1985), Strategic planning util ized in

Atlantic Coast Conference intercollegiate

athletics, Disser tat ion Abstracts Inter na-

t iona l, Vol. 42, 4370A-4371A.

Smith, T.R., Drabenstott, M. and Gibson, L. (1987),

The role of universities in economic develop-

ment, Economi c Revi ew, Vol. 72 No. 9, pp. 3-21.

Spence, H.B. (1982), An analysis of the state-

mandated long-range planni ng process in

selected Pennsylvania school distri cts,Dis-

ser t at ion A bstracts Inter nat i onal, 43/ 01-A, 42

(University Microfilms AAD82-13347).

Steiner, G.A . (1979),Strategic Planni ng: What Ever y

M anager M ust Know, Free Press, New York, NY.

Steiss, A . W. (1985),Strategic Mana gement and

Organ iza t iona l D ecis ion M ak ing, D.C. Heath

and Company, Lexington, MA .

Streib, G. and Poister, T. (1990), Strategic plan-

ning in US citi es: patterns of use, perceptions

of effectiveness, and an assessment of strate-

gic capacity, Am er ican Review of Publ ic

Admin is t ra t ion, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 29-44.

Sutton, W.A. and Migliore, H. (1988), Strategic

long-range planning for i ntercollegiate ath-

letic programs, Jour nal of Appl ied Resear ch

in Coachin g and A thl et ics, Vol. 3, pp. 233-61.

Toll , J .S. (1982), Strategic planning: an increas-

ing pri ori ty for colleges and universities,

Change, Vol. 14, pp. 36-7.

Walker, A. (1990), Strategic planni ng appli cations

in post-secondary institutions wi th accredited

physical therapy educational programs,Dis-

ser tat ion A bstracts In ter nati onal, DAI-B 51/ 10,

0745 (University M icrofilms No. AAC 9105058).

Will iams, D. (1992), Perspectives on strategic

planning in Durham county schools, Di sser -

tat ion Abstracts In ter nat i onal, DAI-A 53/ 07,

051 (University M icrofilms No. AAC 9234929).Wilson, P. (1990), Strategic planning in the public

sector,Pract is ing Ma nager, Vol. 10 No. 2,

pp. 23-4.

838676.pdf

Documents

Transcript of 838676.pdf