Blog Post #6

1) How is strategic leadership different from strategy

• Strategic leaders are leaders who can display and promote a vision or strategy for their organization and bring it across to their followers in a way that they trust a leader. A strategy itself is very specific and not modifiable. A good strategic leader though, can take a strategy and make it work for a whole organization if he/she seizes opportunities AND "stay  on course" with a strategy (Ohmae, 1982). Strategic leaders have to be flexible whereas a strategy without a leader is very "A-type" and straight-forward.

 2) How does one think strategically in sport?

• A coach thinks strategically if he/she has a plan. Be it for a practice, a game, or when planning a season. There's a strategy of how to win a game and then there's execution. Without a strategy, there's no specific goals and it's very likely defeat/losing will come with it. Also, if the environment of the game changes (i.e. different players on opponent team, injured players, weather etc.) the strategy needs to be re-assessed and modified as need to secure a successful outcome.

 
     a) Why is performing a SWOT analysis critical to strategy development?

• It is critical because any organization, club, team or even just a regular business needs to know what they're good at (strengths), things they can improve on (weaknesses), they're goals (opportunities), and what they have to watch out for (threats). In sports, if you don't know anything about your opposing team (their strengths, their weaknesses) you might be more vulnerable and chances are you're more likely to lose.

 3) How is the creation of Collegiate Hockey Inc an example of strategic leadership?

• The CHI (Collegiate Hockey Inc.) is a good example of strategic leadership since it helps young hockey players (and their parents) to pursue their goal of playing pro hockey one day. With no draft in collegiate hockey and strict NCCA recruiting rules the CHI is a good board for young and talented players.

 4) What is an example of integrative thinking in the creation of Collegiate Hockey Inc? 

• One example of Integrative thinking is that with the formation of CHI there's a way that allows a organizations or teams & coaches to get access to data/information on players without violating any NCCA rules.

Blog Post #5

1) Do you support the selling of alcohol in general setting sections at college games? Why?

Yes, I do. The sale of alcohol is a big part of a college team's revenue. It should be limited to beer and wine, though. No liquor. The article by Huang and Dixon (2013, Journal of Sports Management) is a bit outdated, though as far as the current alcohol sales situation goes. More schools (i.e. Louisiana, Colorado State, UT Austin) are now allowing beer sales stadium wide. At UT Austin for example, alcohol sales have been done since 2-3 years now at Basketball and Baseball games. And since last year, they offer beer and wine before and during college football games. I feel that every adult (21 years and older) should be able to buy a beer at a sports event if he wishes to do so. You can drink alcohol at NFL Football games, at NHL hockey games and many other professional sports. Why stop at college games? The profit the school program can have additional besides ticket sales and regular concession sales (i.e. food) is tremendous and alcohol is only troublesome if misused or people don't know how to look after themselves. In my opinion the NCCA shouldn't be worrying about the intoxication of "fans" at football stadiums. It's not the NCCA's responsibility. If someone is breaking the law or gets a DWI it's between the individual and the law enforcement.

2) Why is the authors' decision not to support the selling of alcohol at college stadiums grounded in teleology?

The authors decision of not supporting the sale of alcohol is theological because they believe that it's best for the greater good and the majority of people that there be no alcohol at college games. The possible associated problems (as mentioned by me in above response to Question #1) is the "bad" outcome the authors fear.

3) What are the strengths and weaknesses of telelogy? (do not use my example)

• A strength is that teleological decisions be made based on the greater good and satisfaction for everyone.
• A weakness would be that it leaves out new strategies or thoughts and is too "old-school" when it comes to decision making

4) What are the strengths and weaknesses of deontology? (do not use my example)

• The strength of deontology is that it goes by pure principles and rules. Following strict rules and policies in place will ensure the correctness and safety for everyone.
• The downside, and therefore weakness of deontology is that it doesn't really take the specific situation in account.

Blog Post #4

1) What are the strengths and weaknesses of servant leadership?

• Strength: A good servant leader cares about his people, followers, or - in sports - his athletes. He is looking after them , making sure they're taken care of, are successful, and meet their goals or a team's goals.
• Weaknesses: Servant leadership can be troublesome when a leader cares about his/her followers too much and "loses track of his own leadership and meeting his own goals. Just "serving" to the followers won't make you a great leader. You have to make sure that the goal of an organization (i.e. an Athletic Department or Pro Ball Team) is met, too besides your followers or athletes being taken care of. The well-being of your followers is important but one has to be a "tough" leader sometimes to reach a bigger goal.

2) How do you think servant leadership looks in sport? In Business?

•  I believe servant leadership looks great and works in most sport settings. Recent studies (Hammermeister et al., 2008) actually show that servant leadership and its "democratic approach" between athletes and coaches works well in the way that these athletes are tough, motivated and happy with their performances if a coach is clearly  showing that he wants his athletes to succeed. A coach who cares and puts his own interest below that of an athlete or it's organization is great in sport. On the other side, servant leadership in Business is not the go-to-approach more the majority of businesses. In the "real world" where money, efficiency, productivity and time plays a huge role a servant approach is probably not good for a business's success. Yes, a leader should care to a certain degree about his/her employee's but the need of profit and getting maximum gains pushes the servant leadership characteristics to the side. I could see some form of servant leadership in business, though. Tech companies like Apple, Google or Facebook really emphasize on the care and well-being of their employees and they offer a great working environment and benefits for their employees. People like Steve Jobs at Apple (past) or Mark Zuckerberg at Facebook (present) show some servant leadership characteristics in my opinion. 
  

3) Which leadership style (servant, transactional, transformational) would work best during times of change?

• Transformational would be best. It really sets a standard for either a new environment or a new/changed organization and aims to encourage and empower members/followers. Bass & Riggio (2006) report that transformational leaders have "high levels morals and ethical" and therefore create a big follower base since people look up to them.

4) Which of the 11 attributes of servant leadership (Russel & Stone article) is most helpful to coaches?

• That's a tough choice. I have to chose between Communication and Teaching....and would say Teaching. I think you have to be a good teacher first and foremost. Being able to tell and teach students/athletes about a sport, a game or anything else is the first step. If you can teach it and have your athletes or followers understand you then you already made a huge step into the direction of success. Obviously, the other 10 points are important, too. After teaching, I would chose communication as the 2nd most important helpful attribute. Simply because a coach who is super smart but can't "connect" with his/her athletes won't be much successful because athletes need feedback, encouragement etc. from their coach.

Blog Post #3

Blog #3 Management & Leadership (Chapter 2)

1      A) What are the strengths and weaknesses of management?

The strength of management is that it is based on very specific tasks or purposes, numbers and either material or business goals. Efficiency and the way of organizing people to reach that efficiency is one of the main building blocks of management (Chelladurai, 2009). Another strength would be that management has been defined by specific movements in the past (i.e The Industrial Revolution).

A weakness would be that management is lacking any personal or human aspects as some scholars in the early 20^th century formulated (Schenk, 1928). Furthermore there are a number of scholars who “discredit” the management itself when saying that “Management is done by average managers” whereas “leadership is done by excellent managers” (Rost, 1993, pg. 116). Basically, the weakness of management is that no matter how good you are managing tasks and achieving organizational goals one needs to have good leadership skills to make the management part an actual success.

B) Which do you prefer, management or leadership?  Why?
This is a tough one. Personally, I prefer management as I think management is based on what you have and what you do with it. It’s based on facts, numbers, data and what you can directly control and quantify. Whereas leadership is a more visionary approach where you have to rely not only on your own leadership qualities but also on others, their trust and your ability to convince them to change their view. With humans, there comes often error so a lot of things are unpredictable with leadership and there are a lot of question marks. Whereas management is simply organizing, directing, and controlling what you have and work with it and maximize its outcome every time.

2) Why do you think sport administrators in Canadian athletic departments placed more of an emphasis on management activities?

I believe it’s because the Canadian Athletic Directors (AD) have a more limited budget than what we know of and their job is more dependent on having the finances “dialed in” 100%.

b) Why do you think constraints (financial constraints, physical constraints) force sport administrators to be managers and not leaders?
As mentioned above, when you have to worry about “business” (finances, staying within budget, etc.) the leadership aspect is likely to get limited. We know that leaders are seeking opportunities for change (Zaleznik, 1978) and have high goals and wanting to do things different and new sometimes. Unfortunately, when you have constraints you can’t do that so well and have to focus more on the Admin part

3) How do you think the job of an athletic director of a big-time school in America (think Michigan, UT) differs from that of a Canadian athletic director?

I think the biggest difference is the cultural difference: Big US schools have a huge history when it comes to sports (think College Football, Basketball for example) and intercollegiate (athletic) competition is of very, very big importance when it comes to the prestige of a school. Being a AD at a big US School you have to be more a leader since the fan base, the community etc. are so dependent on the team’s well-doing. And very important to note, too we learned from Danylchuk, K.-E. & Chelladurai (1999) text that Canadian AD’s don’t share their workload as much/good as in the US for example. So a US School AD has more time to be a leader since his duties/responsibilities are spread out over more people (Assistant AD, Staff, etc.)

b) Do they manage more than they lead or vice versa?

A US School AD leads more whereas a Canadian AD’s leads more as mentioned above. The Canadian AD’s spends much more time with finances/budget.

Blog Post #2

Blogging Questions for Sport Leadership (Chapter 1)

1) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the following leadership theories?

a) Trait  > Since this leadership theory is still based largely on the "Great Man" theory (people are either born or are "made" with certain qualities that will make them great leaders) I think this is a weakness. It's solely based on the leader himself and not the situation. A strength is that it's one of the most researched theory of all of them.

b) Behavioral > The strength of this theory is that it's solely based on a person actions, how he/she can deal with situations. As a weakness I would mention that since it's based on a persons actions/behavior there's a chance that someone might "slip" through and not be a good leader because some of his/her behavior was falsely identified.

2) Do you believe that initiating structure and consideration are mutually exclusive properties? Explain why.

I think both initiating structure and consideration can go along with each other in the right environment. initiating structures are task & goal oriented  whereas the consideration is more people-oriented and how a leader must interact with others etc. I believe the initiating structure is the more important of the two but consideration is required, too to be successful as a leader.


3) How does Fiedler’s contingency model complement trait and behavioral theories?

Fiedler's contingency model from 1967 states that the leader's leadership quality is based on  the situation he or she is in. So I think that it really doesn't go along with the trait theory of specific traits/characteristics we're looking for. It goes much more / better along with behavioral theories, though.



4) How is the path-goal theory of leadership an extension of both the contingency model and the behavioral theory of leadership?   

It is an extension in the way that the path-goal theory is based on the change of behavior of one leader in a given environment. At the same time Fiedler's contingency model is built around the situation in which a leader finds him/herself so the path-goal is an extension of this, too given the fact that people around/below a leader are the ones who create situations.

5) According to Soucie, how do leaders in sport management use different kinds of power?

Leaders in Sports Management use a variety of different powes: One, they give subordinates specific roles/goals and also have to motivate members of a group (Yukl, 1989). Also, using more personal vs. position power is very important. Having a good loyal network, friendships is often a better way of power than just authority, punishments or awards as he outlines (Podsakoff & Schriesheim, 1985). Political power is important, too as it gives them the opportunity to gain influence within a structure, system or organization (Pfeffer, 1981).

6) In your opinion, which is more effective,  transactional leadership or transformational leadership? Explain why.

I believe that transformational leadership is more effective. Transactional is more just taking car eof you have and dealing with it whereas  transformational goes a step further and trying to imporve things and make a change for the better. As an example, a President like Obama would always want to chose transformational leadership style since he has to look forward and improve things rather than "just doing what's necessary".

Blog Post #1

Blogging Questions Week #1

1)      What are your expectations for the course?

• I'm hoping to learn about what it takes to be a successful professional in school/college athletics and professional sports. I've been involved in sports for a long time and I feel as I get more mature in my favorite sport (cycling) I am more comfortable taking on a leadership role.  But besides the experience I feel I need/want to learn more about the specific tasks & duties a person in charge at the school or Professional sports level is required to know.

2)      On a scale of 1-10, how would you rate your knowledge of sport? Why?

• I'd think I would rate my knowledge at a 8. I did participate in various sports for 25+years and studied sports science (ex phys and kinesiology) and took some grad level courses before. My lack of detailed knowledge about some American sports (NFL, MLB etc.) is something I need to work on since i didn't grow up with these sports.

3)      On a scale of 1-10, how would you rate your knowledge of sport administration? Why?

•  I'd rate it a 7 or 8. I'm involved with a semi-professional cycling team where I do some small Admin work and help with logistics (travel, sponsorships etc.). Besides that, I own a cycling coaching business which I've been running since almost 7 years. Yet, I haven't worked within a 'big' professional team or as part of a college/school or national governing body where business decisions (pro sports) and regulations/rules play a much more important role.

4)      What was your score for the “Are You Ready for Learning Online Quiz? Why do you think you earned the score you received

• 95 was my score. I think I scored that score mainly because I agreed with these statements. I am willing to learn and signed up (and paid!) for this course because I want to educate myself further and also reach my next goal of receiving a graduate degree.

5)      How do you think you can improve your readiness for online learning?

• I think scheduling your week/days and set aside specific times to study/do assignments will help. That way, I'd be avoiding to pile up a bunch of "homework" and having to try to get everything done in a rush.

6)      Do you believe that knowledge is created from experience?

•  Mainly, yes I think so.